I can't see what positive outcome they envisioned from this.

Saving face at home will lose it's effect when sanctions or bombs hit.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

Who attacked first? Surely you're not so dense as to be saying Israel attacked first

Yes, I am. My understanding, is Israel attacked a Consulate of Iran's. Which was the first direct attack by or on Iran with Israel. No proxy's a straight up hit on Iran. Iran had to retaliate at some level. This was a minor attack, cost Israel a lot in Iron Dome defenses but no real damage. What I think most of the world will view as a measured response, that needs no retaliation from Israel, and this can be left as is. But do the Israel's agree, and they have enough on their platter, that they probably don't want to enter a direct war with Iran.

That said, I avoid the politics of this whole region, cause you can literally go back 1000's of years if you want on who attacked whom first. And which party is in the right etc... Now its possible, I have this wrong, but from literally every article and story I have read, this is the origin of this attack and "justified" retaliation. But I am sure the Pro-Israel crowd has a different take.

And no I don't want to get involved, in a discussion on the politics / History / wars / sides / proxies / enemies of the varies countries / tribes / factions / etc.. in the middle east.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

You're wrong.

Also Israel did not attack the consulate. But claiming they did justifies Iran's attack for the antisemites.

Okay well then most media have it wrong, not sure what sources you thing are legit, but here is one of probably 1000's of articles I could find on it.

From; https://www.theguardian.com/...-was-a-gamechanger#:


Decided to 2nd link in qoute..

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

It's non-productive to try to get into a tit-for-tat on "but he started it..."

Within the context of this specific attack, this is a trade-off of actions. Israel chose to attack the consulate compound in Damascus. They knew that the attack would generate a retaliatory response. This is Iran's response.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

see slowguy thinks it's useless to go tit for tat about who started it.

He then follows immediately defining the context of this attack as "Israel started it" while completely ignoring Iran's involvement in the events of the last 7 months (let alone the last 4 decades).

This is how you have a serious conversation here in the LR. Trail will be thrilled.

This unfolded perfectly.... iran sent the drones knowing they would all be shot down. Matter is concluded and israel has nothing to complain about. Both sides got what they wanted... Israel took out the Iranians they wanted to, and iran gets to scare Israel a bit in return. Case should be closed at this point. If Iran wanted to do anything serious they wouldn't have done this.

I keep hoping you’ll stop posting but then I read and cant believe how easy you make it for everyone to realize how far out of your weight class you’re punching.

I also can’t help but get a little excited for you to be schooled by forum members on foreign policy and military. Unless of course you feel that what you bring to the table exceeds the collective experts here in the LR with distinguished careers.

So…have fun.

They chose to attack the building adjacent to the consulate out of the blue?

The families of Ardeshir Hosseinpour, Masoud Ali-Mohammadi, Majid Shahriari, Fereydoon Abbasi, Darioush Rezaeinejad, Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, and Mohsen Fakhrizadeh are disappointed that you already forgot about them.

Of course not, but within the context of any war or conflict, you can break things down into engagements or skirmishes or however makes sense. My point on going ti-for-tat on who started it is that the discussion just degenerates into decades or centuries of finger pointing.

In this case, Israel chose to break with typical norms and strike a consulate compound. Despite a campaign of strikes within Syria, Iranian leadership thought this compound would be safe, because countries typically don't attack diplomatic compounds. The attack was swiftly condemned by the UE and UN, who are generally speaking on Israel's side against Iran, and plenty of experts have commented on how unusual the decision to strike a diplomatic compound was.

Of course, as I said, you can go back and forth trying to count who threw the first stone ad infinitum in the history of this conflict. I don't think anyone here is trying to play off Iran as the innocent victim. However, as you break down this larger conflict, these two events constitute a pretty distinguishable set. Strike and response. Israel made an informed decision to strike, knowing full well the retaliation that had to follow. They surely felt that the value of the targets was worth the breaking of international norms (they aren't shy about that generally), and felt that they could handle a response to whatever retaliation came. Iran fulfills its role by conducting that retaliation. Put brackets around it and set it aside and continue with the rest of the war in Gaza.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Well said Slowguy. This merits repeating.

" In this case, Israel chose to break with typical norms and strike a consulate compound. Despite a campaign of strikes within Syria, Iranian leadership thought this compound would be safe, because countries typically don't attack diplomatic compounds. The attack was swiftly condemned by the UE and UN, who are generally speaking on Israel's side against Iran, and plenty of experts have commented on how unusual the decision to strike a diplomatic compound was.

Of course, as I said, you can go back and forth trying to count who threw the first stone ad infinitum in the history of this conflict. I don't think anyone here is trying to play off Iran as the innocent victim. However, as you break down this larger conflict, these two events constitute a pretty distinguishable set. Strike and response. Israel made an informed decision to strike, knowing full well the retaliation that had to follow. They surely felt that the value of the targets was worth the breaking of international norms (they aren't shy about that generally), and felt that they could handle a response to whatever retaliation came. Iran fulfills its role by conducting that retaliation. Put brackets around it and set it aside and continue with the rest of the war in Gaza. "

so now its a change from they didn't do anything, to well they did in response.. Yeah here we go.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

Ignore them, if you can't just block them and you wont see their posts anymore, unless someone qoutes them. If no one replies they go away.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

It would be helpful of you pretended to be able to understand the written word

There’s a certain degree of flirtation with the fine line between classical conditioning and calling people out in public.

I don’t block people. Plus, In my experience, I don’t think they go away when we ignore them. At least not on the internet.

TylerTri is the only poster I've blocked on ST. And because the block function is so anemic, it's essentially pointless. I agree with you to a point. But TT's posts degrade from the conversation and TT has made it abundantly clear they are a bad person (at least virtually, and who knows why - I don't really care).

---

*****
"In case of flood climb to safety"

The two countries were allies until the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran, which brought in a regime that has used opposing Israel as a key part of its ideology.
Iran does not recognise Israel's right to exist and seeks its eradication.
The country's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has previously called Israel a "cancerous tumour" that "will undoubtedly be uprooted and destroyed"
They fund and arm Hamas and Hezbolah, Hezbollah in Lebanon is the most powerful of the armed groups Iran backs. It has been trading cross-border fire with Israel on an almost daily basis since war erupted between Israel and Hamas.
Iran backs several Shia militia in Iraq which have attacked US bases in Iraq, Syria and Jordan with rocket fire.
In Yemen, Iran provides support to the Houthi movement, which controls the most populated areas of the country. To show support for Hamas in Gaza, the Houthis have fired missiles and drones at Israel and have also been attacking commercial shipping near its shores, sinking at least one vessel.
Iran also provides weapons and training to Palestinian armed groups including Hamas, which attacked Israel on 7 October last year, sparking the current war in Gaza and the confrontations drawing in Iran, its proxies and Israel's allies in the wider Middle East.
(BBC News)
It's a bit more complicated that tit for tat

Speaking of anemic...... Iran's stunt was weak and mostly for domestic consumption. The state media made a big deal about it, spinning it as a massive victory. The reality is it was little more than a fireworks show and a waste of money. Israel, the U.S., Jordan, and the UK had a good training exercise.

Unfortunately I doubt the Iranian people will ever raise up against the criminals who run the country so this will only motive them to double down on their effort to become a nuclear power.

Who are those the collective experts here in the LR with distinguished careers?

I blocked someone else a while back, and actually can't find the block now, for tyler, I just ignore he/she.

On this forum, ignoring these type of poster usually get them to leave.

She only posts on political threads, and then in some attacking style to a poster, not really contributing anything.. Kind of like a certain former president.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

It was a measured response.

it cost Israel a lot of $$ in missiles and made their point. I think it was an appropriate response.

Also give's israel a bit more to think about, as it's pretty expected at this point, Iran knew they would all be shot done, but made a good visual. Israel has to rethink what a real attack might look like. Hopefully they leave Iran behind and focus on their other war.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

Are you under the impression we don’t have career military and law enforcement etc on the forum?

I’m not sure how to take your question but I do find it somewhat funny given the fact that Tyler was commenting on Slowguy’s post. I’d wager that Slowguy has infinitely more knowledge on military operations and history than Tyler.

Are you under the impression we don’t have career military and law enforcement etc on the forum?

I’m not sure how to take your question but I do find it somewhat funny given the fact that Tyler was commenting on Slowguy’s post. I’d wager that Slowguy has infinitely more knowledge on military operations and history than Tyler

Who are those the collective experts here in the LR with distinguished careers?
Could have answered Slow Guy.

Now sure Slow Guy is measured and sensible and his stuff is generally pretty good. I am not suggesting Tyler is knowledgable about MIlitary matters, but he is allowed to have a view and don't recall him often disputing Slow Guy, though it probably has occured.