Shadihassan28
Registered Member
Well I think if iran actually chose to do it I think it would be a matter of weeks if they see an armada of ships heading their way
Iran launches Operation True Promise - massive missile/drone strikes across Israel, Israel allegedly responds with quadcopters
- Thread starter Mehdipersian
- Start date
- Status
Foinikas
Elite Member
When they see they can annex anything without any serious reactions from the big countries,they'll just keep doing whatever they want.
Harbyharb
Registered Member
I disagree on the argument that "Netanyahu knows this" as Netanyahu authorized the IDF actions taken following April 1st. In fact, I believe the timing of these incidents, including the attacks on World Central Kitchen, is specifically designed to occur during Netanyahu's absence during his medical operation when he was under full anaesthesia on March 31st.
The trick pulled by the IDF to go on unauthorized missions to deliberately escalate and create scandals has been a time honoured tradition, where when the military senses that the government might show weakness and make concessions, then shifting the blame on the inept military to avoid the backlash, IDF would intentionally pull stunts like shelling UN observatories, assassinate foreign personnel, attack refugee camps, create humanitarian crisis, etc. The government, which must not admit that they are fundamentally unable to control its military, thus have to double down on making a strong appeal.
The attack resulted in what I think is the largest amount of high-rank IRGC casualties in a single incident for decades. Though this incident is certainly jarring, it is not unexpected. Iran has always known that Syria is a high-risk front, highly saturated by foreign intelligence, as many IRGC and proxy leaders have faced assassinations in Syria. While the IRGC have always had the assumption and culture that encourages officers to put themselves in the line of fire and even self-sacrifice for the larger picture, I do think that this incident will eventually result in Iranian retaliation unlike previous cases, not because of the outstanding casualties, but because of the manner and context of the attack - a direct attack on Iranian embassy/consulate.
For IRGC, embassies/consulates are key facilities where Iranian influence radiates from, often acting as impromptu bases of operation and liaison offices connecting Iranian proxies with IRGC. Iran needs to ensure that it can protect their consulates, and thus their connection with their proxies, not necessarily through direct methods such as air defence and security, but with the possibility of adequate retaliation.
Persian Gulf
INT'L MOD
lol
they have said this for many years. lets see if they try to intercept Israeli jets flying over their territory like they intercept Houthi missiles and drones headed to Israel before we give them any praise for unverified reports of neutrality
mulj
Trusted Member
Good point, if denied airspace by gcc for such attack Iran could mount better defence for sure.
Persian Gulf
INT'L MOD
Marco Rubio has been tweeting about Iran non stop in recent days
A1Kaid
THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Iran’s fear is Israel successfully blocking their missile attack. Iranians know if they attack and fail, it will put Iran in clear danger for everyone to see. Israel will have a quick response with Iran in a compromised position. I think this is one main reason why Iran hasn’t attacked yet.
If Iran is going to hit, it must not miss the target.
If Iran is going to hit, it must not miss the target.
Hitting Israeli embassies in other countries would be the safest bet and seen as a tit for tat reaction. With the ball then in Israeli court on whether they want to escalate..
Attacking Israel directly would be an unnecessary escalation, let them be in heightened alert for months.. and suffer fatigue..
Attacking Israel directly would be an unnecessary escalation, let them be in heightened alert for months.. and suffer fatigue..
UKBengali
Elite Member
I don’t think the Iranians fear the entity could severely blunt a mass attack on 1 or more targets as they would have decoys attached to each warhead.
Entity cannot send up or even has enough interceptors to severely dent such an attack - even if on only one target, as Iran would likely use many many missiles after one another so that a sufficient quantity get through to totally obliterate it.
It could also fire missiles from wildly different areas in Irán and so radically changing trajectories and complicating further any interceptions
More likely as the attack was not on actual Iranian soil, then hitting within the regime’s 1967 occupied territory may draw the US/West into the conflict.
With Turks and GCC Arabs having a history of collaboration with the entity, Iran may fear that it may start something that it cannot control.
One on one, Iran would pummel the entity in a shooting match due to its far more numerous missile and drone force. However it may end up as Iran against the entity and its collaborators together.
Indos
INT'L MOD
This is dumb suggestion. Which country do you mean ? It will be seen as an attack to that country as well
Dont compare it to the attack to Syria by Israel. Due to stubborn Assad regime that prefer killing many of their own people rather than setting up free and fair election, Syria is now just a punching bag for Israel for years...
Mehdipersian
Trusted Member
- Thread starter
- #1,048
The Syrian government is the only Arab country opposed to Israel in the region
Persian Gulf
INT'L MOD
this is a factor but in reality 1) iran will not use its best missiles in the first round since it doesn't want total escalation and 2) iran can resort to saturation strikes which will remain effective deterrence since iran has much more MRBMs than Israel has ABMs
Indos
INT'L MOD
Assad has big debt to Iran due to civil war he choses by destroying his own nation and dividing their people. Syria is not a respected country it used to be......
- Status
