Here comes Iran

[Alli]

The scope of Iran’s attack is a bit of a surprise. But Iran just said that their response won’t escalate further. If that’s true, depending on how much damage Iran causes in Israel when its assets arrive, it remains to be seen whether Israel will respond directly.

Of course, it was easy for Iran to say it’s over before their drones/missiles ever arrived or were shot down, and before any retaliation.

 

[Citysnaps]

The scope of Iran’s attack is a bit of a surprise. But Iran just said that their response won’t escalate further. If that’s true, depending on how much damage Iran causes in Israel when its assets arrive, it remains to be seen whether Israel will respond directly.

I was surprised too. I guess my view is since Iran attacked Israel directly, a direct response on Iran is required. That could be done quietly (remembering Israel's response to the 1972 Munich Summer Olympics attacks - though it being more risky in Iran), or, kinetically from afar. There are pros and cons to both.

 

[GermanSuplex]

Some talking heads are thinking there’s negotiations going on and this is muscle flexing. They remain optimistic since there have not yet been fatalities.

 

[Eric]

Some talking heads are thinking there’s negotiations going on and this is muscle flexing. They remain optimistic since there have not yet been fatalities.

Let's hope this is the case.

 

[AG_PhamD]

I think this “retaliatory attack” by Iran was never intended to cause much damage and was probably more about appeasing the domestic population and testing their capabilities. They gave notice to Israel weeks ago, they know Israel and it’s partners (US, UK, France) have extensive air defenses, and their drones are very, very slow, giving plenty of notice.

This is much like their strike on the US base in Saudi Arabia a couple years ago where the missiles appear to have avoided actually targeting areas likely to cause fatalities.

Reportedly, all drones and cruise missiles were shot down. A small number of ballistic missiles evaded defenses (or perhaps some were deemed not worth interception). Only one injury was reported, a 10 year old girl injured by shrapnel. A reminder that just because projectiles can be intercepted doesn’t mean they can’t hurt people.

It’s also important to think about the amount of damage and loss of life that could occur without adequately stocked air defense resources, if Israel is caught off guard, cyber attacks inhibit functionality, new weapons are developed that evade existing radar, etc.

Israel has pledged retaliation for these attacks. If Israel says they are going retaliate, you can take their word for it. I think this is a very slippery slope. Fortunately Netanyahu opposed immediate retaliation as soon as they were alerted to the incoming attack. I think escalating in the heat of an attack could have easily made the situation rapidly deteriorate into something far worse. Clearly the risk of a full scale conflict between Israel and Iran is worse than ever, but at least it didn’t start last night.

The US is committed to protecting Israel, I believe the right thing for the US and the west to do. It’s hard not to think Netanyahu wants a war with Iran and with the US directly involved- which potentially feels like taking advantage of our relationship. But Iran attacking Israel just made Netanyahu a lot more popular in Israel though.

One thing Americans/the west does not understand about Israelis is how seriously threats are taken. Israel is lucky to exist today given its history with its neighbors. Existential risks are real and regarded as such. Keep in mind Israel is the size of New Jersey geographically and in population. We in the US, Canada, Western Europe, etc have had the luxury of not living with constant threats of war and terrorism (at least in recent history).

There was a YouGov poll recently that said nearly 70% of Americans believe a world war is imminent but only 16% would volunteer to defend the country if the U.S. to be imminently invaded. Only 25% would volunteer for non-combat roles. The fact most Americans don’t realize how good they have it and that what we have isn't worth defending is beyond shameful. It’s so disrespectful to those who fought and sacrificed for our rights and freedoms, whether it be our soldiers in war, civil rights leaders, etc.

So I’m not sure many Americans understand the first thing about why people might fight to defend their country.

 

[Cmaier]

I think this “retaliatory attack” by Iran was never intended to cause much damage and was probably more about appeasing the domestic population and testing their capabilities.

70+ ballistic missiles with large payloads and 12-minute flight times launched all at once, and your theory is ”eh, it’s just a love tap.”

The reason you launch all those missile simultaneously at just a couple targets is because you intend to overwhelm defenses and cause devastation.

You keep doing you, big guy.

 

[Citysnaps]

Reportedly, all drones and cruise missiles were shot down. A small number of ballistic missiles evaded defenses (or perhaps some were deemed not worth interception).

One good thing that came out of that episode, is Israeli and US defenses were actually battle tested with live fire (Iranian ballistic and cruise missiles, and drones), rather than relying on simulations and projections. No doubt Israeli and US military and intelligence agencies learned a lot in how Iran operates offensively, and will be even better prepared for future situations.

Big hat tip also goes to the UK, France, and Jordan for helping intercept drones and missiles. Air controllers coordinating all of the above played a big role. Saudi Arabia deserves a hat-tip, hosting western air defense systems, along with surveillance and refueling aircraft.

 

[Herdfan]

Pro-Palestinian protestors have blocked the Golden Gate Bridge and the road into O'Hare airport.

They are risking pissing off people who just want to go to work or the airport.

 

[Buntschwalbe]

70+ ballistic missiles with large payloads and 12-minute flight times launched all at once, and your theory is ”eh, it’s just a love tap.”

The reason you launch all those missile simultaneously at just a couple targets is because you intend to overwhelm defenses and cause devastation.

You keep doing you, big guy.

No it's not a love tab. According to irans statements, their diplomatic entity was attacked so they had to play with their muscles and draw a red line (right of self defence). I think the timed attack did overwhelm the Israeli air defences. Iran just used the "lighter" equipment for this attack, so i expect the IDF&IASF to be really cautious and avoid any escalation. One dangerous thing in this situation are Politicians like Bibi, etc who need wars to distract from their own political failures.

 

[MEJHarrison]

Pro-Palestinian protestors have blocked the Golden Gate Bridge and the road into O'Hare airport.

They are risking pissing off people who just want to go to work or the airport.

I've NEVER been a fan of a protest blocking the general public. If you want to protest, that's fine. If you want to make life hard on those not involved, then you're just a selfish prick. It would be great if some Mormons showed up at their homes, let themselves in, then just parked their butts at the kitchen table until their message is heard.

 

[Buntschwalbe]

I've NEVER been a fan of a protest blocking the general public. If you want to protest, that's fine. If you want to make life hard on those not involved, then you're just a selfish prick. It would be great if some Mormons showed up at their homes, let themselves in, then just parked their butts at the kitchen table until their message is heard.

Yeah, let's ban protest from public space to some noman's land or desert so nobody gets confronted or even offended by a reality different from their own.

 

[Cmaier]

Yeah, let's ban protest from public space to some noman's land or desert so nobody gets confronted or even offended by a reality different from their own.

The middle of the roadway on the Golden Gate Bridge is not “public space.”

 

[MEJHarrison]

Yeah, let's ban protest from public space to some noman's land or desert so nobody gets confronted or even offended by a reality different from their own.

That's a dumb idea. What's wrong with a public protest where the protesters don't impede the flow of traffic? You make it sound like the only two options are to disrupt everyone's day or go somewhere completely out of sight. I say there's a valid option in the middle. In fact, I've both seen and participated in protests that were done publicly without blocking traffic.

 

[Cmaier]

That's a dumb idea. What's wrong with a public protest where the protesters don't impede the flow of traffic? You make it sound like the only two options are to disrupt everyone's day or go somewhere completely out of sight. I say there's a valid option in the middle. In fact, I've both seen and participated in protests that were done publicly without blocking traffic.

Some people are confused about “free speech,” and think it means you have the right to force other people to listen to you.

 

[Buntschwalbe]

Some people are confused about "freedom" and think it means you have the right to drive the golden Bridge at any given time.

back to the topic:
no, but i think that it's a part of living in a open, democratic society that your daily routine can get once in a while interrupted by people protesting. let's be honest, how often are you getting stopped by some street protest every year? i cannot agree to this degree of outrage, only because some streets or bridges are temporarily blocked .

 

[Cmaier]

Some people are confused about "freedom" and think it means you have the right to drive the golden Bridge at any given time.

You actually do have the privilege (not the right) to drive the Golden Gate Bridge at any given time, so long as you are properly licensed and the bridge is not closed by the authorities.

You do not have the right or privilege to block traffic on the bridge at any time, unless you are authorized to do so by the proper government authorities, and the first amendment does not afford anyone with any such right or authorization.

 

[MEJHarrison]

Some people are confused about "freedom" and think it means you have the right to drive the golden Bridge at any given time.

That's not a freedom or a right. It's more the societal norm of not being a dick to those who need to live in the same space that you occupy.

Also, what's being done for emergency vehicles? What if people die because paramedics can't get somewhere in time?

That's a pretty weak argument for poor behavior.

 

[Buntschwalbe]

You actually do have the privilege (not the right) to drive the Golden Gate Bridge at any given time, so long as you are properly licensed and the bridge is not closed by the authorities.

You do not have the right or privilege to block traffic on the bridge at any time, unless you are authorized to do so by the proper government authorities, and the first amendment does not afford anyone with any such right or authorization.

you talk about law, i talk about social movements and forms of protest. i assume you're aware these are two pair of shoes.?

Also, what's being done for emergency vehicles? What if people die because paramedics can't get somewhere in time?

If you can't find an argument; just try to disparage the protest with something that did not happen? Please do better.
Did people die? Couldn't the emergency vehicles pass?

I think it is sad how individuals in our societies see street protest, as it would be directed against them, when it is meant as a sign of disagreement on policies...
I repeat:

... it's a part of living in a open, democratic society that your daily routine can get once in a while interrupted by people protesting. let's be honest, how often are you getting stopped by some street protest every year? i cannot agree to this degree of outrage, only because some streets or bridges are temporarily blocked .

 

[Citysnaps]

Selfishness.

 

[Cmaier]

you talk about law, i talk about social movements and forms of protest. i assume you're aware these are two pair of shoes.?

That is a meaningless statement. I still haven’t heard any reason that people SHOULD be inconvenienced by this nonsense, other than ”it forces people to pay attention.” And the right to be heard is not a right, nor should it be a right.

Say whatever the hell you want, but when you do it on my front lawn I reserve the right to unleash the hounds on you, and both the law and general principles of morality are on my side.