Because escalating would probably turn out worse for them than backing down. And it seems like they’re attempting to do just that.
Looks to me like the Iranians were able to fire missiles, control where they went without any real opposition. Where was the US missile defense system? Was this just a show put on by both Iran and the US?
That would be amazingly stupid. So, you might very well be right.
No reason to believe it was just a show. No reason to assume the US has sophisticated anti-missile defenses for every asset in Iraq either. (If it did I don’t doubt it would have shot down most of those Elmer Fudd looking Iranian missiles).
I’ve heard reporting on BBC that Iran gave Iraq a heads up on the incoming. Iraq passed on the message to the US troops. They all took cover out of the way. It’s a face saving action for Iran’s leadership, nothing more. The real retaliation will continue to be done by proxy warfare.
I think cp was saying Democrats are the good guys, not Americans as a whole.
Pictures. Clearly ballistic missiles. Did they even have an explosive payload?
I’m no fan of those religious zealots but to me the US lost a lot of prestige with this attack. I’m ashamed my country only condemned the Iranian retaliation to an act of war.
Right. What we need now is an actual hot war with thousands of casualties in order to ensure you save face. Can we count on you to join in the fighting on the front line and risk your own life for the cause?
What? I save face? 
I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
On reread by “this attack” I meant the assassination of Soleimani, in case that wasn’t clear.
Right, this gave them the opportunity to appease the hot-headed yokels. In my opinion, the appropriate response would be no response by the Americans. Major off-ramp opportunity.
Ah. Thanks for clearing that up. I retract my ealier statement.
Yeah, sorry, that was totally confusing on my part.
It is clear the Iranians are doing what they can to avoid a hot conflict.
I think Trump will claim mission accomplished and that IF IT HAPPENS AGAIN hell and fury will rain down on Tehran.
The danger with him is that he is prone to posturing without thinking of the consequences (his figment of a master deal maker) and surrounded by war hawks.
It really is ridiculous how one moment he threatens to destroy Iran’s cultural heritage and the next he tweets “all is well” before the dust has settled.
Despite Hussein Obama’s financial support for Iran’s terrorism and nuclear weapon program, McConnell has not scheduled a vote for his impeachment. Really, no one knows how these internet rumors get started.
That’s what I’m hoping for too. From what I’ve read, it’s fairly clear the Iranian missiles were not fired at a time for maximum casualties (not many people out and about in the wee hours of the morning), and nor did they actually hit all that close to actual targets- nearby, but not that nearby, if that makes sense.
So they fired at our bases and hit our bases, but didn’t actually kill anyone or destroy much, giving them an opportunity to look like they did something, but without provoking an angry US response.
Trump says the Iranians are “standing down.” Of course, Trump lies almost as often as he draws breath, but so far, I’m not seeing that Iran is denying that statement. Why would Iran quit after such a (thankfully) wimpy response? It’s like someone kills your beloved grandmother, and you retaliate by leaving a flaming bag of feces on their porch.
I know about proxies and in fact suggested earlier that there would be two levels of retaliation: an immediate, official one and a later one by proxy. The immediate one, I thought, would prove to Iranians that their government was strong and would avenge the death of an adored military leader. Yet the attack yesterday (again, thankfully) did not cost any American lives, didn’t do much destruction, and in fact, looked pretty weak. They did not “show” us.
Are Iranians satisfied with their government’s response? If they are, why?
Some Iranians in the US say that the revolution and religiosity were supported by “the great unwashed”; uneducated red necks. The USA struck at Iran, and Iran blew up some US stuff.
Earlier reports said that on Iranian State TV, they reported 8 US casualties due to the missile strike on the airbase in Iraq.
Now, do Iranians believe it and for how long?.. who knows.
But I know who doesn’t believe it, and that’s the IRGC and proxies. They, I’m sure, have other things in mind.
I read that Iranian news was reporting 80 U.S. casualties, whereas our President reported zero.
Mr. Trump doesn’t have a great record on getting the facts straight but I’m still taking his word over Iranian state propaganda, especially on something as grave as a casualty count.
Cite: “Iran claims 80 American troops killed in missile barrage; US says no casualties”. (2020, Jan 8). Times of Israel. Retrieved January 8, 2020 from https://www.timesofisrael.com/iranian-state-media-claims-more-than-80-us-soldiers-killed-in-missile-barrage
~Max
It was a wimpy response because a strong response that actually killed Americans would escalate the conflict. As much as the US doesn’t need war with Iran, Iran needs a war with the US even less. The Iranian regime can run back to their people and tell them Trump stood down. Their symbolic non attack was simultaneously chicken shit and a well crafted way out for both sides.
Not “wimpy,” and not “chickenshit.”
A very, very smart way of both 1) satisfying the calls for revenge, 2) de-escalating the conflict, and 3) showcasing some extremely impressive missile accuracy.
Now on to the far bigger goal of pushing the Americans out of Iraq: