Tylertri wrote:
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.
I see you have generated some animus with your criticism of both Nutella's and Slowguy's analysis of the situation here. But then you have not offered a dissenting view.
you refer to "last seven months and decades" of Iran wearing the black hat ( my interpretation) and now this significant counter attack. Windy also offered up the seizure of a Portuguese flagged vessel as an act of war. You and windy both leave open for interpretation support for further direct confrontation by western powers and regional neighbors against Iran with the end pursuit being regime change. A case could be made that the time is ripe just now for widening the war with both Bibi and Joe both getting to wag the tail with war.
Or, the other case is that Iran has been shown to not have a full Monty armed force be it in the air or on the ground. Hamas Hezbollah Houthi support may be all that that they can muster up. The region's players could be quite content with that realization and have no appetite for further escalation.
A debate can be had with easily supported positions by both the hawks and the doves. Feel free to contribute.