Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Do you think that Israel bit more than they chew with the Iran situation? I doubt they have the logistics for sustained campaign and it is far from sure that they will be able to destabilize the regime or plunge it in a civil war enough for the time that they have.
Possibly, but if they see a nuclear-armed Iran as an existential threat, then their actions are borne of a desperate need that obviates any consideration of other consequences. A fight that needs to be fought, no matter the odds or outcome, because the alternative is certain destruction.
Whether that is actually the case and the way Israeli leadership sees things, I don't know. Maybe deescalation would have been possible but was seen as too risky, or undesirable for reasons that elude me, or perhaps it is as many tinfoils claim and war is the best distraction from internal problems.
As far as Iran itself goes, I don't see the regime as particularly unstable. Compared to Israel, both have their internal tensions and and external pressures, and I'd argue Iran actually comes out slightly ahead in a direct comparison of stability. But that's from my very limited understanding. Take it with handfuls of salt.
The reason is simple - all indicators point to Iran being committed to reaching nuclear strike capability, and considers all the talks and agreements as a sideshow, while remaining strategically committed to this goal no matter what. Iranian government also confirmed multiple times that their strategic aim is to destroy the state of Israel. For Israel, with it's tiny territory and high population density, even a single nuclear strike - even via a smuggled small-scale device, for example, let alone a ballistic missile hitting practically anywhere - would be absolutely devastating, extinction-level threat. Israel does not see any situation in which Iran could be convinced to genuinely desist from reaching this capability, so the choice is simple - either strike, or place the very existence of the country into the hands of Iranian regime and hope the ayatollas are kind and gentle. I don't see how any de-escalation is possible until one of these factors change - either Iran changes its thinking or it becomes incapable of achieving its goal of nuking Israel, at least in the near term.
Well, yeah - that's what my first paragraph above was about. This seems like a parsimonious explanation.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link