I think you missed the point where i said it could be this "iranian mathematics". But if it is, this strategy failed.
The math I meant was of de-escalation, not of playing the long game. It's too early to say that the strategy has failed. These things take time, as seen from the previous deal. The US wants the table as well.
Because Us/israel ceasefire for 2 weeks, work on their assets and re-attack. And we have no way of knowing how many missiles and TELs iran had before war and how many TELs were destroyed during initial waves (which alot of them were) and how many missiles and TELs are left. We dont know.
We don't but it's important to note that taking these TELs out with air strikes alone is near impossible, despite repeated US and Israeli lies about it. You don't know where they are until they launch and by the time you get to them, they are gone. There's a video of an Iranian TEL disguised as a roltite trailer. Simple and brilliant. It's reasonable to then assume that Iranian launch capabilities are fairly intact and aren't going anywhere. They would've had hundreds if not thousands before this began and would have continued manufacturing them since.
But we can only speculate from response of iran. It had been attacl severely last night. But all it could respond with is 5 missiles on Jordan which all of them were intercepted by French aircrafts and Jordanian assets.
This "mathematics" is not working. Storing missiles for months means giving US/Israel months to keep attacking your country and your infrastructure.
Barring a localized decision, given Iran's non-centralized command structure, those were most probably symbolic launches, akin to the Al Udeid attack in 2025.
We have heard alot about Iranian intelligence and influence in other countries. Specially ME countries. Still it is not able to locate HIMARS in a small neighboring country of Kuwait, and Bahrain. Dont you think it is a failure ? Dont you think Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait being 50-100 km away from iran and still possessing attack capabilities despite being on receiving end for mo ths is a failure ? I dont have any fantasies about this war. But o do have common sense.
You've heard a lot of hot air, in the same vein of capturing Kuwait tomorrow and nuking the US the day after. Israel launched truck loads of weapons from deep within Iranian territory, that's Iranian intelligence capabilities. Iranian influence in
these countries, including Pakistan, is predominantly unstructured and grassroots, riding on various personal allegiances of regular people. It's not the 90s.
That said, just from what we've seen, and that is by no means all of it, Iran has exacted a fair amount of destruction. But missile strikes, just as air strikes, are limited in what they can achieve. As I mentioned before, the US has been unable to affect Iran's ability to shut down the Strait. Unfair to then expect that Iran could neutralize an entire country just with missile strikes. Iran's strategy is wisely centered around economic costs instead of direct damage even when direct attacks are being used.
All that because violence is 'normalized' in the Middle East. Add to your list, the Israeli folly of attacking Qatar, which was a strategic blunder.
No blunder Sir, they just underestimated the spinelessness of the Qataris. Israel's aim was to coax a response, as opposed to the others who foolishly fail to factor in the response when acting. Israel wants all out war across the Middle East with failed and failing states around it. Regime change, nuclear threat, missile disarmament, and "freeing" Iranians are all bs pills that it fed the American morons to rope them in.
"You had an off ramp and a pretty sweet deal. YOU DIDN'T TAKE IT and are now complaining that others are implementing measures to protect their own interests which you have been hurting throughout this time?"
Iran did take the deal. Israel didn't.
You and I can argue about what is sensible and what isn't until the cows come home and you will undoubtedly find a spectrum of opinions on this very thread regarding that.
I simply pointed out the events that brought us all to this juncture. Israel made a choice, which, ipso facto, was a material breach of terms and conditions of a ratified agreement.
The fundamental premise of your case is flawed.
Well, now that you've repeated the same frivolous statements a fifth time, supporting a self-mollifying stance that holds no baring on anything and sheepishly sidestepping the actual arguments fit for a toddler to understand, I feel myself inexplicably obligated to acquiesce. Schedule me in for the next circle please.
Of course, I do understand why you have made the claim, as it is far easier to roundly condemn Iran if it can be demonstrated that she herself chose to be in this position. The facts of the matter continue to contradict your premise.
Find it easy to condemn and criticize whoever however I see fit. Unfortunate liability of not being beholden to feeble sensibilities or childish fealties.
