Continuing the discussion from Breaking news. Iran launches missile attack against Israel: 2024-10-01:
Blowing stuff up = not escalation, pretty much expected now(?)
Destroying an operational nuclear power plant = escalation
is what I meant. Clearly the response would be to hit (for reals this time) a bunch of Israeli strategic targets.
And if it turns out that the Iranians were trying to hit an Israeli nuclear facility? Does Israel have the right to try to do the same thing in return without escalating the conflict?
Does it have the right to do so? Sure, it’s a sovereign nation. Would it escalate the conflict of it succeeded? Yes, i expect it would.
Regrettably, sometimes tit-for-tat doesn’t end with “tit”.
If Israel bombs a nuclear facility, what exactly will the Iranians do? Launch hundreds of missiles at Israel? Fund and train a massive Lebanese-based terrorist organization? Guess what! They’ve already done that.
Everybody’s talking about “preventing a regional war”. Well, too late: it’s already begun. What happened three hours ago - that’s what a regional war looks like. No point in locking the barn door. The horse has already bolted.
I interpreted Alessan as being sarcastic,. I think he was pointing out the hipocracy in [DPRK’s post, which implies that when Iran attacks Israel’s nuclear plant it’s okay, but if Israel dares to respond by attacking Iran’s nukes, that’s unacceptable escalation.
Wars can be bigger or smaller. But yeah, this sure looks like full-out war. Honestly, at this point, I’m mostly hoping the US doesn’t get involved.
And best wishes. I mean that in all sincerity. War is hell, and i like you, and hope you weather this successfully.
Yep. Iran is already trying its hardest to destroy Israel. It’s not even a secret, they openly say so all of the time.
A way they could actually escalate is by developing and using nuclear weapons. Which is why it is so crucial to prevent them from accomplishing such a thing. And if that means blowing their nuclear facilities to bits…
I mean, unacceptable to whom? Israel is a sovereign nation. If the Israelis think it’s an appropriate response, that’s up to them. It’s not as if the US or Russia or ??? has any authority to stop Israel from defending itself. I guess the US could stop selling weapons to Israel, but that’s kinda a slow response. And the major escalation was Hezbollah lobbing a lot of bombs at Israel and Israel attacking Hezbollah in Lebanon; this not really unexpected, given what’s happened recently.
Well, I was going to say, in this mutually-assured-destruction type of scenario, it is wise to have an idea of what your opponent is militarily capable of; I am not privy to that information.
But if everyone is willing, for whatever reason, to continue escalating instead of accepting a cease-fire, tit-for-tat would imply taking out an Israeli nuclear reactor, or if that’s not possible some other important industrial facilities. Maybe Tel-Aviv gets blacked out? Lots of not-so-quickly repaired damage, etc. Point is, it does not take much imagination to see that unbridled escalation can easily lead to a place where nobody wants to go. (From the point of view of civilians that point has already been breached…)
Maybe there is a misunderstanding here. I pointed out that Iran did not actually destroy a nuclear facility, and probably did not intend to. Unless something changed and somebody over there changed their mind and decided they did want the full-on war right now, possible U.S. involvement, etc.
The news is reporting that, publically at least, the US is nixing the possibility and “will be discussing with the Israelis what they’re gonna do”.
A propos, in the 1940s and even into the 1950s you had people like von Neumann who thought a surprise preemptive strike against the Soviet Union was the rational move. First assume there going to be a full-blown war, not like there is any other possible scenario. Then, if you have nukes and the other side still won’t for maybe a year or two, or even if they do but not that many or that hardened and no second-strike/doomsday capabilities, better nuke 'em first.
Thank you, @puzzlegal. Really.
According to the New York Times, Israel plans to attack military bases, intelligence sites, and possibly other targets but still not nuclear sites.
Of course, if Iran decides tomorrow to turn out weapons-grade material that would be a serious escalation and no one would be surprised if those sites were hit.
That was considered; but totally aside from the moral element of it amounting to the premeditated murder of tens of millions of Soviet civilians guilty of nothing but living in a country whose government they had no control over, it was decided that notwithstanding that it would “solve” the Soviet Union problem, it would open up other intractable political problems.
I think the unspoken threat is that Israel would decide it has nothing to lose if Iran attacked those facilities and would escalate to nuclear retaliation.
On the other hand that wouldn’t accomplish much since the Iranians have from the beginning presumed there would be military strikes on their nuclear program and dispersed/hardened it with that in mind.