What does it mean if Iran doesn't attack Israel?

New reports suggest Iran may back out of retaliating against Israel for the assassination--in Tehran--of a major Hamas leader. They may just let Hezbollah do it.

Many military analysts have been saying Iran almost has to launch a retaliatory strike. From a practical standpoint, letting any nation get away with an attack in your capital city would be a major strategic mistake. So why would Iran refrain? Hezbollah is basically Iran doing it anyway, but it's an important distinction. What would be their motivation?

In this thread about the Russian hostage deal, I pointed out that the timing was interesting. Why would Putin hand Biden this foreign policy "win" now?

With Biden looking like he was sunk after the debate, there was speculation that our enemies might kick their plans into high gear the remaining months of the Biden administration to take whatever ground they could while we still had a weak president.

Now, with Harris looking good in the polls, I speculated our enemies may have changed strategies. After the hostage deal with Russia, Democrat media was playing up Harris's role. Giving Biden-Harris some foreign policy wins may be our enemies' way of trying to boost Harris to win the election.

A Harris administration would unarguably be much friendlier to Iran than a Trump one. If Iran doesn't attack Israel, Democrat media will go fawn all over Biden and Harris for their diplomatic skills. They'll play up Harris's supposed role in the administration talking Iran out of the attack, despite everything they've done actually encouraging Iran to attack.

The administration has been telegraphing that, while they'll help defend Israel during the attack, Israel will be on their own if they want to hit back. If you're Iran, that's a very obvious green light. They know Israel is unlikely to do anything substantial with the US openly saying we'll bitch out and won't support our ally if it leads to war.

If Iran decides not to attack, given a historic opportunity when the US is openly saying we won't stand with our ally in a war, it seems pretty likely to me that the "coincidence" of Putin giving up hostages at this lame-duck stage of Biden's presidency becomes a pattern of our enemies trying to help Harris win the election because that's what would be best for them.

a reply to: YourFaceAgain

They may not fire missiles, but surely they will find a way to kill people without aerial weapons. Their regime keeps its word one way or another.

originally posted by: YourFaceAgain
New reports suggest Iran may back out of retaliating against Israel for the assassination--in Tehran--of a major Hamas leader. They may just let Hezbollah do it.

Many military analysts have been saying Iran almost has to launch a retaliatory strike. From a practical standpoint, letting any nation get away with an attack in your capital city would be a major strategic mistake. So why would Iran refrain? Hezbollah is basically Iran doing it anyway, but it's an important distinction. What would be their motivation?

In this thread about the Russian hostage deal, I pointed out that the timing was interesting. Why would Putin hand Biden this foreign policy "win" now?

With Biden looking like he was sunk after the debate, there was speculation that our enemies might kick their plans into high gear the remaining months of the Biden administration to take whatever ground they could while we still had a weak president.

Now, with Harris looking good in the polls, I speculated our enemies may have changed strategies. After the hostage deal with Russia, Democrat media was playing up Harris's role. Giving Biden-Harris some foreign policy wins may be our enemies' way of trying to boost Harris to win the election.

A Harris administration would unarguably be much friendlier to Iran than a Trump one. If Iran doesn't attack Israel, Democrat media will go fawn all over Biden and Harris for their diplomatic skills. They'll play up Harris's supposed role in the administration talking Iran out of the attack, despite everything they've done actually encouraging Iran to attack.

The administration has been telegraphing that, while they'll help defend Israel during the attack, Israel will be on their own if they want to hit back. If you're Iran, that's a very obvious green light. They know Israel is unlikely to do anything substantial with the US openly saying we'll bitch out and won't support our ally if it leads to war.

If Iran decides not to attack, given a historic opportunity when the US is openly saying we won't stand with our ally in a war, it seems pretty likely to me that the "coincidence" of Putin giving up hostages at this lame-duck stage of Biden's presidency becomes a pattern of our enemies trying to help Harris win the election because that's what would be best for them.

I believe you're overthinking this. A few days ago Netanyahu supposedly told Iran that if they (Iran) attack Israel directly and cause civilian casualties then they (Israel) will respond by destroying Iran's entire nuclear research infrastructure.

Back in April, Israel conducted an unopposed airstrike in the Isfahan region of Iran and took out one of the anti-aircraft sites that guards Iran's nuclear facilities. That was a symbolic action on the part of Israel that didn't cause all that much physical damage, but notified Iran that they (Israel) know exactly what to strike and how to get in and out in order to take out Iran's nuclear program.

I think Iran believes that Netanyahu meant what he said.

originally posted by: YourFaceAgain
New reports suggest Iran may back out of retaliating against Israel for the assassination--in Tehran--of a major Hamas leader. They may just let Hezbollah do it.

If Hezbollah is doing it then that means Iran is doing it by proxy and they haven't really backed out.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: YourFaceAgain
New reports suggest Iran may back out of retaliating against Israel for the assassination--in Tehran--of a major Hamas leader. They may just let Hezbollah do it.

If Hezbollah is doing it then that means Iran is doing it by proxy and they haven't really backed out.

Yeah I said the same thing further along in the OP. And, as I said, there is nevertheless an important distinction. Israel doesn't usually strike Iran when Hamas or Hezbollah or one of Iran's other proxies attack. And the Biden-Harris administration will still claim it as a foreign policy win and Democrat media will back them up, so it doesn't really change the substance of the OP.

It means Iran has far more military restraint than Israel. Iran has already shown far more respect for international law than Israel and I expect to see that continue. Iran actually cares about their global image, unlike Israel who apparently only cares about what American politicians think.


Iran has shown they can strike Israel anywhere they choose at anytime. So it's not like they can't. They just don't seem as hell bent on WWIII as much as the extremists running Israel and America.

Interesting how everyone my government tells me to be afraid of seems to have more respect for life than the us. A million dead in Ukraine and one hundred thousand dead in Gaza and the only people that seem to care are the leaders of Iran and Russia.

American Chad patriots after Israel blows up another hospital.

a reply to: JAY1980

'one hundred thousand dead" in Gaza? Where do you get that from?

sana.sy...

" Iran has already shown far more respect for international law than Israel and I expect to see that continue. Iran actually cares about their global image..."

Respect? Like, by funding terrorists and attacks on merchant shipping?

And beating young women to death for not dressing correctly? Etc...

Are you sure?

originally posted by: JAY1980
It means Iran has far more military restraint than Israel.

Funny guy. You crack me up.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
'one hundred thousand dead" in Gaza? Where do you get that from?

Just like everything else that guy says, he pulled it out of his butt.
He took the nonsense number of dead from Gaza that Hamas puts
out and he tripled it for his own amusement.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: JAY1980
It means Iran has far more military restraint than Israel.

Funny guy. You crack me up.

The admiration some in the West have for our enemies is disturbing, though not new. Same ilk that were rooting for the Vietcong in the 60s and 70s.

a reply to: YourFaceAgain

Self loathing?

a reply to: JAY1980

the name Iran is modern 'Nomenclature' .... the People are culturally, historically Persians'

Sufi connection ? Supreme Leader is a factor ! Civilized versus Beastly neighborhood of nations

Israeli military has been placed on high alert following intelligence from Western Iran that an attack is imminent.