Iran launches drone attack on Israel

I watched some of this live.
The Russian presentation ~45min in has a nice summary in it of the sec general pointing out 2 wrongs. The sec general is just concerned with the rules not politics.

The story goes that if the security council had stated that Israel's attack on the embassy was illegal Iran would not have attacked. That action was vetoed by the US,UK and France and supported by some eg Switzerland who in this presentation stated that they condemned the embassy attack.

What your watching is a disfunctional system thanks to the veto power. The Russian's general comments are essentially correct and of course they make use of their own as will China when it suits. All that have it do.
 
Sponsored Links
Here is an Iranian woman’s perspective on this.

As much as I dislike Mahyar Tousi this piece by Erica Le Bon is very interesting (worth a listen just to see a very articulate attractive woman )

Basically her message is the people of Iran want peace with Israel, the hatred against Israel by Iran is driven by the Islamic Republic regime in power, who are together with their proxies Hamas and Hezbollah are driving the conflict.

NB: I don’t know her background or bias, she could be an Israeli shill.







Here she is being interviewed by a US channel
 
Last edited:
Here is an Iranian woman’s perspective on this.

As much as I dislike Mahyar Tousi this piece by Erica Le Bon is very interesting (worth a listen just to see a very articulate attractive woman )

Basically her message is the people of Iran want peace with Israel, the hatred against Israel by Iran is driven by the Islamic Republic regime in power, who are together with their proxies Hamas and Hezbollah are driving the conflict.
An Iranian-American It-girl?
I'm sure she isn't biased.
 
Writing in Ma’ariv newspaper in the aftermath of the Iranian strikes, the commentator Ben Caspit summed up the mood of many of Netanyahu’s domestic critics – who have cited the undermining of Israeli deterrence as proof of the prime minister’s unsuitability for office. “Israel’s deterrence, which had prevented Iran from attacking it directly, collapsed,” Caspit wrote. “How did Netanyahu once put it?” he added, referring to the same quote as Lapid: “When terror smells weakness, it strikes. “The Iranians have lost their sense of fear. No more proxies, undercover agents and covert terror attacks. From now on, it is Iran against Israel, out in the open. Israeli deterrence, which got Iran to swallow its pride every time anew and not to attack Israel directly, has now been shattered.”

Posting on the blog of the Institute for National Security Studies, Tamir Heyman, a former head of intelligence for the Israel Defense Forces, described a new and difficult strategic reality for Israel. “Israel and the United States failed to deter Iran from attacking,” he wrote. “Iran managed to harm Israel without obliging the United States to attack in response with Israel’s cooperation.

Beyond that, Milshtein said, the picture of Israeli deterrence was more relative. “With Iran and Hezbollah the question becomes more tricky. Deterred from what? Iran could have attacked various embassies. Hezbollah is not deterred from an ongoing conflict of attrition in the north but is deterred from an escalation, but largely because of the context within Lebanon itself.”

HA Hellyer, a senior associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute thinktank, also said he saw a complicated picture. “When Iran did attack, it was massively choreographed,” he said, referring to the fact the strike had not only been flagged up in advance but that the US and neighbours had been warned. “If it had not been so well choreographed, if it had been a complete surprise, I think fewer missiles would have been taken out and others would have got through. And I think while it is definitely a cliche to say Israel is completely indebted and dependent on the US, it is also true that if the US and other allies had not stood alongside Israel we would have seen a different outcome. I don’t think people have grasped that properly before. That without American support there is really no way for Israel to maintain its security paradigm in way that it has.
 
Sponsored Links
completely indebted and dependent on the US
Actually they have an aim to be self sufficient.

Some reports have pointed out that Benjamin is being extremely quiet on the subject of retaliation and the attack. Rather unusual. Instead a whole series of war cabinet meetings. A US senior politician was asked about retaliation and replied that is up to Israel. So the US might be saying no just as they have concerning Rafar. Fact is both events may happen. They are not saying no to Rafar really anyway.

The US is also saying the PA will run both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip when it's all over. This would effectively be a roll back to how it used to be. Neither area were "keen" on that set up. It resulted in a 2nd state that Israel effectively controlled. This started in the 90's with rather odd negotiations with the PLO. Official peace talks getting no where but a separate secret one did. As secret there is no official documentation on the route to it.

Iran's attack. Even Filly has an idea of numbers needed to confuse the iron dome, simple rockets. The attack was way short of that. The ballistic stuff is entirely different. Taking one of those out needs a very expensive missile. Iran's weakness really is a complete lack of aircraft but no one has much of an idea how good their air defences are. Iran may now have a better idea of the number of various missile needed to be effective. As a crazy video posted mentions they may have better.

Benjamin early on - attack enemies what ever country they are in. Hence the embassy hit and others. Iran may now attack immediately if they do similar again. This is what they seem to be suggesting. Israel - maybe they need more ballistic missile take out units. There has been muttering about it's calibration.

Oh - yet another war cabinet meeting today.
 
BBC news reports...Israel’s foreign minister said he had written to 32 countries calling for further sanctions on Iran. This includes, he said, sanctions on Iran’s missile programme. A series of UN sanctions on Iran’s missile programme expired last October because they had been linked to a wider deal on Iran’s Nuclear Programme. Countries including the US, UK and EU have already maintained sanctions though and added new ones.

Israel’s Foreign Minister also called for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to be declared a terrorist organisation. The US has already done so but the UK has not.

Lord Cameron of Bre*itannia isn't in favour of declaring the IRGC a terrorist organisation on the grounds of maintaining a diplomatic channel with the Islamic regime. As shocking as that may sound, i actually agree with him. (I don't think my medication is working.) :cautious:
 
That's odd does Lord Cameron not have access to a phone rather than rely on a terrorist organisation working covertly in the UK?
 
Basically her message is the people of Iran want peace with Israel, the hatred against Israel by Iran is driven by the Islamic Republic regime in power, who are together with their proxies Hamas and Hezbollah are driving the conflict.
I read something in the paper recently that most Iranians want democracy, secularism, civil and political freedom, economic opportunity etc. No doubt they do, but it struck me as stating the obvious, that's what anybody living under a dictatorship would prefer. Whether it will hasten the end of the theocratic Iranian regime is much more uncertain.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top