Middle East Defence & Security

[Big_Zucchini]

In my opinion, the US/Europe has prevented Israel from more decisive measures up until now in all its conflicts. With the US moving away from the middle east and Russia invading a pro western country, contrary to the article, I think Israel would be more empowered and less restrained to respond decisively to attacks.

In the same regards, Hezbollah/Hamas/Houthi=Iran=Russia. Ukraine will be lost and Europe will be looking for a victory and less US focus on the middle east will mean a more fearful Israel, which means a more aggressive Israel.

Yes, Israel will be more fearful of developments, more politically empowered to take matters to its own hands. But unfortunately, the IDF is already punching so far high above its weight, that flexing even higher will overstretch it. It's a small country that is forced to do most of its trade with very distant countries, and it outspends I think the entire western world on defense.
Its ability to fill up the equipment gaps for an Iran strike and other necessary operations I won't name, is now somewhat reduced, and it does not have the resources to spend its way into full preparedness.

 

[STURM]

In my opinion, the US/Europe has prevented Israel from more decisive measures up until now in all its conflicts

In my opinion the U.S. and Europe is worried about Israel undertaking some actions which may in the short term suit Israel's interests but in the much longer term would be highly destabilsing to U.$. and European interests as,well as that of the wider region.

I also think that whilst it's common to hear from some that the U S. and Europe are not doing enough to help Israel, both have also done a lot for Israel.

1000 Israeli's died from Gaza missile attacks, subsequently, Gaza would be leveled and occupied

Which would not solve anything in the long run. In the short term it would add to more death and suffering in Gaza and would play into the Hamas narrative.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

In my opinion the U.S. and Europe is worried about Israel undertaking some actions which may in the short term suit Israel's interests but in the much longer term would be highly destabilsing to U.$. and European interests as,well as that of the wider region.

What actions can we anticipate from Israel's side, that would be against the interests of the US and Europe, and destabilize the whole region?

And more importantly, why would Israel go through the effort of working towards American interests over its own, when the US has always placed its own interests above Israel's? That's an equal approach to regional matters.

I also think that whilst it's common to hear from some that the U S. and Europe are not doing enough to help Israel, both have also done a lot for Israel.

The US, yes. Europe though? It's there as a trading partner and nothing else. Which says absolutely nothing because the European nations would trade with the worst tyrannies if it means profit. Even when it comes to Iran, China, and Russia, they are reluctant to cut any economical ties and need to be pressured to do that.

 

[STURM]

What actions can we anticipate from Israel's side, that would be against the interests of the US and Europe, and destabilize the whole region?

You answered your own question.

''Israel may be forced to act militarily against Iran when a deal is still active, taking a political blow vs the US''

I can also give you examples of certain things Israel wanted done which would have been against U.S. interests. No doubt you'll ask what those so we'll wait till the next post.

when the US has always placed its own interests above Israel's?

Your opinion but is it an accurate statement?

If I recall correctly you previously said that the U.S. wasn't doing enough for Israel [or something to that effect] and disagreed with me saying for decades [from 1967 onwards] that it was U.S. policy to.provide Israel with near unconditional support.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

This little maneuver is certainly PR but a welcome one.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1497916319567695876

 

[mrrosenthal]

Actually, this is the only week where Israel has NOT been in the news.
However, Zelensky has been asking Israel to host negotiations and Bennett just had a call with Putin regarding this. It seems Israel couldn't help itself of NOT being in the news for one week.

 

[STURM]

I have no idea as to who first asked who to do what but reports which surfaced about 48 hours ago indicated that It was Israel which offered to act as a mediator.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

I have no idea as to who first asked who to do what but reports which surfaced about 48 hours ago indicated that It was Israel which offered to act as a mediator.

Irrelevant who asked first. Clearly both are on the same page, just can't really act on it if Russia refuses talks.

 

[STURM]

Irrelevant items be, I was merely pointing this out in response to mrrosenthal's comments...

 

[Feanor]

Irrelevant who asked first. Clearly both are on the same page, just can't really act on it if Russia refuses talks.

The problem isn't Russia's refusal to talk. Russia is willing to talk. It's the conditions Russia wants as part of any settlement that are the problem. What Russia asked for requires pretty much a total Ukrainian defeat, or giving up hope. Not sure Israel can help with this.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

EDIT: Deleted and moved to appropriate thread.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

It started: The calls from 2021 are now echoing harder, to expand the IDF. More needed to be done to meet the threats on multiple fronts. For reference, the IDF may meet challenges in Lebanon, Syria, Gaza, and West Bank simultaneously in varying levels of intensity. And on top of that it may face a struggle against local Arabs in its movements between fronts, as seen in the last operation in Gaza in 2021.

The call is not to expand at the expense of modernization, but rather to have both. We could potentially see a permanent boost in the budget.
The budget already fluctuates at around 5%-6%.

צה"ל קטן מדי למלחמה הבאה

המלחמה באוקראינה הדגישה כמה שגויה התפישה שניתן לצמצם צבאות בעידן שאחרי מלחמות העולם, וגם סגן הרמטכ"ל לשעבר התריע על כך. חיזוק הצבא בחימושים ומערכות הגנה הוא חשוב - אך לא מספיק. פרשנות

m.ynet.co.il

More expenditure will hurt Israelis, but we cannot be picky about our insurance policy when we only have one.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Russia says won’t back Iran nuke deal without US guarantees over Ukraine sanctions

Lavrov says 'avalanche of aggressive sanctions' mustn't impact Moscow's rights under agreement, shortly after Tehran, IAEA announce 'pragmatic approach' to resolve remaining issues

www.timesofisrael.com

Russia won't back Iran nuke deal without US guarantees over Ukraine sanctions.

Personally, I don't know whether it's a good thing or a bad thing.
The good - connecting this to the Russia-Ukraine issue may give the US a pause over whether to keep rushing with a potentially disastrous deal.
The bad - It at least opens up a non-zero chance of a bad deal AND easing some sanctions on Russia.

Don't forget to hit that like button and let me know what you think in the comments below!

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Iran attacked US base in Erbil, Iraq, amid talks about returning to JCPOA.
Cause unknown, but some speculate this is retaliation vs Israel.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1502781155493429252

 

[ngatimozart]

Iran attacked US base in Erbil, Iraq, amid talks about returning to JCPOA.
Cause unknown, but some speculate this is retaliation vs Israel.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1502781155493429252

But are they Iranian? That is the question. They are alleged to be an Iranian attack so until it is known for certain it would be safer to say "an alleged Iranian attack." The Iranians know what the American response would be if they made a direct attack upon a US military target. They would have a pile of hurt coming their way.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

But are they Iranian? That is the question. They are alleged to be an Iranian attack so until it is known for certain it would be safer to say "an alleged Iranian attack." The Iranians know what the American response would be if they made a direct attack upon a US military target. They would have a pile of hurt coming their way.

It seems so:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1502787804463607810

Iran even confirmed.

Iran launches ballistic missiles at Israeli 'strategic centers' in Iraq, warns of 'harsher response'

***

www.haaretz.com

I think Iran pretty much unveiled its intentions a few days ago when they stated they'll retaliate against Israel after 2 of its officers were killed in Syria.

Iran vows revenge for 2 IRGC operatives killed in Syria strike attributed to Israel

Israel 'will pay for this crime,' Revolutionary Guard says, following airstrike near Damascus that reportedly targeted a weapons and ammunition depot operated by Iran

www.timesofisrael.com

 

[STURM]

The Iranians know what the American response would be if they made a direct attack upon a US military target. They would have a pile of hurt coming their wa

Indeed. They know how far they can push things; in line with their objectives. They wouldn't have survived this long if they didn't - more than 4 decades after the fall of the Shah. Everything they do is well calculated and thought of in advance. They also know that there's a limit as to what the Americans will do as nobody [at least not the Americans, Iranians or the Gulf Arabs] desire a full fledged war.

The question is why were the attacks carried out and was it actually a message send to the Americans or to the Gulf Arabs? Was it about Yemen? Or something else?

 

[STURM]

An interesting video from an Iranian perspective. The problem is that most of the neew/analysis we get is from a Western perspective which gives a one sided picture. The speaker is an academic, was invited to the U.S. for talks years ago and is not pro government.

He talks about how Yemen and Lebanon provide Iran with strategic depth; how certain actions by outsiders straightens the hardliners in Tehran; the nuclear issue, etc.

 

[Jaykaro]

Were there any air defence units? Or why there were no reaction to Iranian TBM

 

[ngatimozart]

Were there any air defence units? Or why there were no reaction to Iranian TBM

G'day @Jaykaro Welcome to the Forum. We have a set of rules that you should read and one of them is no one line posts. Can you please increase the length of your posts to two lines in future. Yes there are others here who post single line posts but they've earnt the privilege of the Moderators turning a blind eye. That comes with time and posting behaviour.