Why doesn't the US attack China now? Or attack Russia in 2022? Could really turn this into a 1 month war instead of the 3+ years it is now.
The reason is casus belli. Another is deterrent. Both are nuclear nations, and Iran had a significant conventional capability before October 7th 2023, pointed at Israel from 7 directions, including ground invasion from 2-3 of those.
You cannot just attack a nation without a casus belli. It is important not only for gathering international support, but also for domestic support which for some nations is about as crucial, if not more, than the military aspect.
Russia had to build up for years the "nazi Ukraine" narrative.
China had been talking about a unified China for decades.
Israel achieved its casus belli properly only after October 7th 2023.
Otherwise it would risk entering the deadliest war in its history with no foreign support.
Well you answered your own questions regarding Russia and China, ground invasion? With what, paragliders? How did the Israel achieve casus belli on Iran, did Iran attack Israel on October 7th when nobody was looking, and if the support for Hamas is enough does that mean Russia has casus belli on the entire western world and can attack any of them legally.
I used an example that I thought you would find familiar. I guess it wasn't.
Another example would be a Russian invasion into Ukraine in 2014 instead of 2022. Would have been so much easier. But one could wonder why not do it back in 1991.
You can see that even after so much waiting, Israel was able to crush every forecast and emerge from this war with very little homefront damage, while crushing Iran's conventional and nuclear capabilities, and its proxies.
In one of the IDF's early briefings about the campaign in Iran, they said Iran planned a massive expansion of missile production capability, to quickly multiply its missile stocks within a few years.
You used fiction not an example, so Iran didn't have significant conventional capabilities to seriously endanger Israel. You have to choose one of these, both cannot go together.
This should be Israeli's battle slogan.
Then I can confirm you don't remember.
Possible.
So you once again shifted the argument to historical revisionism?
What exactly didn't happen the way I described it? Didn't Israel start ground invasion? Didn't it only managed a shallow penetration, didn't reports of heavy resistance started flooding in, what did I get wrong?
I'm sure you can figure it out.
So your argument is a legal one now?
Israel and Iran have been in a state of armed conflict for decades through proxies, which has been an accepted norm for even longer than that.
Every confrontation between Israel and Hezbollah is also one with Iran, via proxy.
Every confrontation with the Houthis and Iraqi PMF and Assad's Syria, were also that.
Again either Iran is this major force threatening Israel or it isn't, pick one. Apparently according to you Iran was so weak that Israel eliminated it as a threat in ten days but also at the same time was fighting proxy wars with Israel for decades sponsoring multiple foreign militias and even governments.
But if it is direct confrontation that you seek then look no further than April 2024, when Iran fired >350 missiles and drones at Israel, from Iran proper.
Not in response to an Israeli attack on Iran, but against an Iranian proxy in Syria.
No, Israel bombed Iranian embassy which is a sovereign territory of Iran so Israel was again an aggressor
Of its own initiative? 0.
Really 0? Not counting anything else, didn't Israel just attack Iran
And in Israel "only" 28 were killed by Iran.
Solid ratio and big L for Iran.
I cant believe it, you are actually cheering for death of innocent people, whatever propaganda you are listening to has completely dehumanized your perceived enemies, it is actually frightening.
Clearing the facility of hostiles is a major show of competence for both the ground team and aerial team providing CAS.
Again nobody was defending those facilities, but a nice training exercise all the same.
It achieved its goals. Between non-peer adversaries, there is usually a point where returns are diminishing. Yet expenses grow or remain unchanged.
At that point it's usually best to stop.
Yes similar to Americans or Soviets in Afghanistan at some point it's best just to stop.
Leaving nothing of Iran is not a war objective. To the contrary. Many economical assets were left intact to avoid antagonizing the general Iranian population should they choose to initiate an uprising in the future. Israel's relationship with a post-revolution Iran are strategically important.
So regime change is one of the goals but it just wasn't the goal now? You think Iranian population is not "antagonized" by Israel?
To the contrary. Every claim or argument you challenged, I responded to with facts, numbers, statistics, or footage.
You have yet to present any shred of evidence to any of your claims.
You showed me a graph whose source explains everything that is needed to know about it. I'm not sure if you know this but Israel came up with an
exact number of missiles your graph shows 631. Funny how the media managed to get every single launch on tape, I mean I get some of them maybe even most of them but every single one? I'm starting to think that the people who "independently" gathered this information are sitting in Mossad offices.
What restrictions on oil exports were lifted?
Here, around 6 minute 40 second mark
You said Israel entered a predetermined, lost war, that all its military objectives were impossible to achieve, and that Iran inflicted serious damage upon Israel.
You do realize that what I have written can be read, I said that Israel has not achieved its goals and I stand by it, again never have I compared nor quantified the damages either side was taking.
If you wanna be offended, go ahead. I can't make your decisions for you.
No, not offended, just nice having a conversation without personal insults.
www.bbc.co.uk
13tv.co.il