3 ms·

>But this was also a unique situation where Israel held back. In a typical case a firing would receive an immediate deadly response. E.g. planes and missiles fr

by aprilthird2021 3y ago

>But this was also a unique situation where Israel held back. In a typical case a firing would receive an immediate deadly response. E.g. planes and missiles from Israel returning the favor. Thus the cost for Iran would have been much higher. I feel like we are observing separate conflicts altogether. Israel whose conscript army is nearing its end in terms of endurance, who has been bogged down in urban guerilla warfare for 6 months, while responding to Houthi and Hezbollah strikes, who has also lost much of the goodwill and support it had from its international partners, who needed those partners that are starting to get sick of them to defend from a very early telegraphed missile strike. You think that Israel would even consider an immediate deadly response to open a fourth front in a war they can't afford, a war the public is getting sick of, and a war that the very disliked leader of the nation is cynically prolonging to maintain his waning grip on power? One thing I appreciate about HN the variety of perspectives I'd never be exposed to otherwise

invalidname 3y ago
FYI I probably won't be able to answer much since dang limited my account after I took offense at people who think my country shouldn't exist. But I'll bite. Israel isn't remotely close to stretching its forces. The army is actually pushing hard for retaliation and most forces from Gaza are already at home by now. There's an importance of "perceived power" in this region. It's crucial to Israeli survival that it appears powerful. This is also a much "easier" war for Israel as it can fight against a "normal" army. The Hezbolla and Hamas are problematic as they aren't official armies (although they do have battalions and structures), they hide in civilian populations and make combat difficult. Hamas never brought the army remotely close to its limits; during the entire campaign in Gaza many of the people drafted were actually up north waiting for Hezbolla. Houthi missiles are just stupid, Yemen is too far away. The problem is the costs of far east goods that results from the blockade. But that's mostly an annoyance. All three of these fronts (and Syrian sourced attacks) are really from one source: Iran. They have been pulling the strings as part of an ongoing shadow war. Some believe it would be best to attack the head of the snake. All of the problems Israel is experiencing with its allies are the main reason it didn't retaliate (at least not yet).
- aprilthird2021 3y ago
  Well, everything you say is quite surprising to me. But thanks for sharing your perspective. I've certainly never heard most of these points before. It's pretty clear that Israel is stretching the extent it can take its conscripts to. Otherwise they wouldn't be debating drafting haredis (at great political risk). They wouldn't be pulling out of Gaza. Allies and the upper brass themselves wouldn't be saying the conscript army needs rest. And you wouldn't be seeing the big, news-making mistakes the conscript army is making after 6 months of urban warfare. The idea that a war against Iran would be easy is, quite frankly bonkers. It sounds like something Netanyahu would say to everyone's groans and disappointment. It sounds like Putin's hubris before he invaded Ukraine... >Some believe it would be best to attack the head of the snake. This reads like it's not serious about the practicalities of war. It honestly reads like Hamas propaganda talking about how they're going to directly kill Netanyahu when such a move is realistically impossible for them.
  - invalidname 3y ago
    We're talking about this point in time. Not theory. Right now people who were drafted for military reserves in October are mostly home now. At this point Israel has manpower. The drafting of Hasidim is a different issue altogether that's been going on for decades. It's reached a boiling point mostly due to unrelated circumstances. A supreme court ruling came in that effectively invalidated the current legal hack as discriminatory. Since Netnyahu's coalition relies on the Hasidic vote he is trying to find a solution. They demand complete, permanent immunity from the draft which is a red flag here. Especially at this point in time. Right now numbers are reasonable but if the war develops into an all front war then yes, Israel will be stretched. Regardless, a war against Iran would employ mostly pilots and missile defenses. Those are different forces from the ones engaged in combat in other fronts. So saturation isn't linear. > The idea that a war against Iran would be easy is, quite frankly bonkers. I didn't say it would be easy. I said "easier" with quotes trying to convey nuance. War sucks. But a war against a "normal army" is something that is simpler and clear. Urban warfare is just terrible for any army. In the case of a war with Iran Israel can rely much heavier on air superiority which is probably its strongest suit. > >Some believe it would be best to attack the head of the snake. > > This reads like it's not serious about the practicalities of war. It honestly reads like Hamas propaganda talking about how they're going to directly kill Netanyahu when such a move is realistically impossible for them. Notice this isn't my opinion but I understand where they're coming from. Proxy wars suck. I do think that if Israel could destroy the Iranian reactor it would be a huge accomplishment and would ultimately be a good thing. Israel did that in Iraq and effectively blocked Saddam from having Nuclear weapons. It did it in Syria and stopped Assad from a similar accomplishment.
edanm 3y ago
> You think that Israel would even consider an immediate deadly response to open a fourth front in a war they can't afford, a war the public is getting sick of, and a war that the very disliked leader of the nation is cynically prolonging to maintain his waning grip on power? It's worth keeping in mind a few things. The world's public might be "getting sick of" the war, but most Israelis are united around wanting to see the end of Hamas. They'd like things done faster, obviously, but aren't "sick of the war". Also, almost everyone understands that the real enemy behind everything is Iran, and that the real threat to Israel is a nuclear Iran. There is a definite strain of thought that wants to take the Iran attack as an opportunity to do the one thing that is actually important for Israel's survival - try and stop Iran from getting a nuke. As for the leader of the nation "cynically prolonging" the war, I'm personally conflicted on this. I definitely oppose Netanyahu and think he would do anything to cling to power... but it's not clear in what way the war could be "shortened", short of Israel just deciding to leave Hamas in power, which most Israelis oppose. (That's not to say I agree with anything else he is doing, or with other aspects of the war.)
- aprilthird2021 3y ago
  > The world's public might be "getting sick of" the war, but most Israelis are united around wanting to see the end of Hamas. They'd like things done faster, obviously, but aren't "sick of the war". The Israeli public is getting sick of the war, mass protests against Netanyahu and against prolonging the war and not bringing back hostages are growing from 0 right after the attack to quite populated right now in front of our eyes. Getting sick is a process. It doesn't mean over 50% think the war should end right now. But the part of Israel which can vote is getting sicker of the war than they were at the beginning. As for Iran gaining nukes. They will likely gain them if they haven't already gained them. Same as Israel. Israel cannot extrajudicially assassinate Iranians forever. What they should avoid, instead of Iran getting nukes, is losing so many world allies that nuclear armed countries abandon them or begin to oppose them. Lastly, Hamas will not be "eradicated" or "eliminated" the same way no amount of American might and force could "eradicate" or "eliminate" the Taliban. Hamas is unlike ISIS or other defeated jihadist groups and far more like the Taliban in that they have a liberation struggle other jihadist groups don't have. That is going to sustain them beyond any kind of prolongedilitary conflict Israel or especially its allies can stomach. None of this is what I want to happen, it's just the facts on the ground. You can't eliminate people's desire to be free or to secure their homeland. Israelis understand this when it comes to their own land, but fail to comprehend it when it comes to other people's land.

invalidname 3y ago

FYI I probably won't be able to answer much since dang limited my account after I took offense at people who think my country shouldn't exist. But I'll bite. Israel isn't remotely close to stretching its forces. The army is actually pushing hard for retaliation and most forces from Gaza are already at home by now. There's an importance of "perceived power" in this region. It's crucial to Israeli survival that it appears powerful. This is also a much "easier" war for Israel as it can fight against a "normal" army. The Hezbolla and Hamas are problematic as they aren't official armies (although they do have battalions and structures), they hide in civilian populations and make combat difficult. Hamas never brought the army remotely close to its limits; during the entire campaign in Gaza many of the people drafted were actually up north waiting for Hezbolla. Houthi missiles are just stupid, Yemen is too far away. The problem is the costs of far east goods that results from the blockade. But that's mostly an annoyance. All three of these fronts (and Syrian sourced attacks) are really from one source: Iran. They have been pulling the strings as part of an ongoing shadow war. Some believe it would be best to attack the head of the snake. All of the problems Israel is experiencing with its allies are the main reason it didn't retaliate (at least not yet).

aprilthird2021 3y ago
Well, everything you say is quite surprising to me. But thanks for sharing your perspective. I've certainly never heard most of these points before. It's pretty clear that Israel is stretching the extent it can take its conscripts to. Otherwise they wouldn't be debating drafting haredis (at great political risk). They wouldn't be pulling out of Gaza. Allies and the upper brass themselves wouldn't be saying the conscript army needs rest. And you wouldn't be seeing the big, news-making mistakes the conscript army is making after 6 months of urban warfare. The idea that a war against Iran would be easy is, quite frankly bonkers. It sounds like something Netanyahu would say to everyone's groans and disappointment. It sounds like Putin's hubris before he invaded Ukraine... >Some believe it would be best to attack the head of the snake. This reads like it's not serious about the practicalities of war. It honestly reads like Hamas propaganda talking about how they're going to directly kill Netanyahu when such a move is realistically impossible for them.
- invalidname 3y ago
  We're talking about this point in time. Not theory. Right now people who were drafted for military reserves in October are mostly home now. At this point Israel has manpower. The drafting of Hasidim is a different issue altogether that's been going on for decades. It's reached a boiling point mostly due to unrelated circumstances. A supreme court ruling came in that effectively invalidated the current legal hack as discriminatory. Since Netnyahu's coalition relies on the Hasidic vote he is trying to find a solution. They demand complete, permanent immunity from the draft which is a red flag here. Especially at this point in time. Right now numbers are reasonable but if the war develops into an all front war then yes, Israel will be stretched. Regardless, a war against Iran would employ mostly pilots and missile defenses. Those are different forces from the ones engaged in combat in other fronts. So saturation isn't linear. > The idea that a war against Iran would be easy is, quite frankly bonkers. I didn't say it would be easy. I said "easier" with quotes trying to convey nuance. War sucks. But a war against a "normal army" is something that is simpler and clear. Urban warfare is just terrible for any army. In the case of a war with Iran Israel can rely much heavier on air superiority which is probably its strongest suit. > >Some believe it would be best to attack the head of the snake. > > This reads like it's not serious about the practicalities of war. It honestly reads like Hamas propaganda talking about how they're going to directly kill Netanyahu when such a move is realistically impossible for them. Notice this isn't my opinion but I understand where they're coming from. Proxy wars suck. I do think that if Israel could destroy the Iranian reactor it would be a huge accomplishment and would ultimately be a good thing. Israel did that in Iraq and effectively blocked Saddam from having Nuclear weapons. It did it in Syria and stopped Assad from a similar accomplishment.

edanm 3y ago

> You think that Israel would even consider an immediate deadly response to open a fourth front in a war they can't afford, a war the public is getting sick of, and a war that the very disliked leader of the nation is cynically prolonging to maintain his waning grip on power? It's worth keeping in mind a few things. The world's public might be "getting sick of" the war, but most Israelis are united around wanting to see the end of Hamas. They'd like things done faster, obviously, but aren't "sick of the war". Also, almost everyone understands that the real enemy behind everything is Iran, and that the real threat to Israel is a nuclear Iran. There is a definite strain of thought that wants to take the Iran attack as an opportunity to do the one thing that is actually important for Israel's survival - try and stop Iran from getting a nuke. As for the leader of the nation "cynically prolonging" the war, I'm personally conflicted on this. I definitely oppose Netanyahu and think he would do anything to cling to power... but it's not clear in what way the war could be "shortened", short of Israel just deciding to leave Hamas in power, which most Israelis oppose. (That's not to say I agree with anything else he is doing, or with other aspects of the war.)

aprilthird2021 3y ago
> The world's public might be "getting sick of" the war, but most Israelis are united around wanting to see the end of Hamas. They'd like things done faster, obviously, but aren't "sick of the war". The Israeli public is getting sick of the war, mass protests against Netanyahu and against prolonging the war and not bringing back hostages are growing from 0 right after the attack to quite populated right now in front of our eyes. Getting sick is a process. It doesn't mean over 50% think the war should end right now. But the part of Israel which can vote is getting sicker of the war than they were at the beginning. As for Iran gaining nukes. They will likely gain them if they haven't already gained them. Same as Israel. Israel cannot extrajudicially assassinate Iranians forever. What they should avoid, instead of Iran getting nukes, is losing so many world allies that nuclear armed countries abandon them or begin to oppose them. Lastly, Hamas will not be "eradicated" or "eliminated" the same way no amount of American might and force could "eradicate" or "eliminate" the Taliban. Hamas is unlike ISIS or other defeated jihadist groups and far more like the Taliban in that they have a liberation struggle other jihadist groups don't have. That is going to sustain them beyond any kind of prolongedilitary conflict Israel or especially its allies can stomach. None of this is what I want to happen, it's just the facts on the ground. You can't eliminate people's desire to be free or to secure their homeland. Israelis understand this when it comes to their own land, but fail to comprehend it when it comes to other people's land.