Israel are going to start WWIII

It seems unlikely there will be a response from Iran. This was reported yesterday by Haaretz (before today's Israel action in Tehran):

Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has told the country's armed forces to be prepared to retaliate against a possible Israeli response to Iran's ballistic missile attack earlier this month, the New York Times reported, citing four Iranian officials it interviewed by telephone, who said that Iran may not respond "if Israel limits its attack to a few military bases and warehouses storing missiles and drones."

The officials added that "if Israel inflicted major harm, the responses under consideration included a barrage of up to 1,000 ballistic missiles; escalated attacks by Iranian proxy militant groups in the region; and disrupting the flow of global energy supplies and shipping moving through the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz."

A rogues' gallery

Yes it would be hypocritical, but that doesn't excuse Bibi committing genocide. You can keep sticking your fingers in your ear and insists it's not, but as per the legal definition it is. The Sean W interpretation of Genocide and international law doesn't matter. A state is entitled to self defense, but not to engage in repeated war crimes while doing so. If you are fine with Israel doing so then you must accept it is a pariah state that in the end is indivisble to its enemies which it claims to be morally superior too. We even have one senior ex Israeli officials telling IDF soliders they should reject orders which amount to war crimes.

Nah, lets face it - israel was supposed to hit oil facilities, nuclear power plants, Iranian leaders this time. israel was going to do this and do that. It was going to be biblical, apparently.

But they wimped out. Iran has a right to defend itself from israeli aggression, so if they strike with another 200 missiles in response, israel will possibly get the message and will just stop attacking Iran.

its more likely iran will get the message from russia - they dont want anymore of their missile and drone factories destroyed as they need them for their front of the russia/iran war on the west

So are you saying America has demonstrated it can influence the Israelis when it really wants to irrespective of it being an election year. However, if Bibi really wants Trump to be elected wouldn't it have been in his interest to have gone further to make it harder for the Democrats to get elected . A potential oil crisis just before the election would not have been good for the Democrats . What card did Joe pull out to make Bibi listen this time? Perhaps the cutting off of aid?

with a pop. of 7 million and hundreds of millions of fanatic neighbours hardly

Footage from Tehran last night

Sweeping generalisation much?

Its interesting alright. There could be a number of reasons. First is that the Iranian air defence systems did their job (looking at some video footage, there seemed to be a lot of intercepts) and/or the US bent their ear and/or Israel and Iran have an "understanding".

Whatever happened, it was a damp squib and a lot less than the hyperbole Gallant was spouting just over a month ago:

“Our strike will be lethal, precise and above all, surprising. They won’t understand what happened and how. They will see the results,” Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said during a speech to troops

Not sure what is next - Iran was saying even just yesterday that a strike from Israel, if it were minor, would not result in a retaliatory strike. Of course, the assumption is that Israel are finished, for now.

Yeah, there will be different arguments.

If the strike is minor, Iran can de-escalate. Perhaps not strike israel directly, but instead provide new weapons to Yemen and Hezbollah so they can better target israeli leaders. The pro with de-escalation is Iran doesn't need a conflict with israel. Its developing and growing, and the growing multipolarity of the world allows it over the next 10-20 years to break out of the box israel and the US have placed it in. A war now would de-rail that progress. The con is that israel will just continue striking Iran. Ignoring a minor strike might lead israel to think that so long as they cut here and there, they can continue striking indefinitely. It undermines Iran's credibility if it warns israel against further strikes.

Alternatively, the Iranians could choose to escalate to de-escalate, if that makes sense. Even if the strike is minor, retaliate with direct, and disproportionately powerful strikes on israel. A target like the airbase the strike originated from hit with hundreds of missiles and drones, with the aim of knocking it out. The pro is it communicates to israel that they cant strike Iran, that the response from Iran will be excessive and disproportionate. It would do a lot to boost Iranian prestige in the region if they're seen as punishing the israelis. And it could destabilise the israeli regime - a lot of regimes legitimacy comes from being seen to be a tough protector of israel. If israelis see their country being repeatedly hit by Iranian missiles that the fabled "iron dome" cant stop, its going to undermine that macho image and perhaps lead to regime change.

The con of course is it distracts Iran from what it really wants to do, which is continue its economic development. But part of being a sovereign state is having the ability to defend your borders and your people. Its already assumed that israel has some right to have the final word, that it can choose when to start a conflict and when to end it. That it can freely violate the borders and embassies of states. That is an extremely dangerous idea which will cause israel to keep attacking Iran until it is stopped.

Personally I think Iran is less likely to show restraint than before because even the Iranian president - whose described as being open to diplomacy with the west - publicly said he was wrong to argue for restraint previously, that he was lied to by the US and that diplomacy was impossible. He lost a lot of prestige by pushing for restraint last time. I don't think he'll be pushing for it now.

Seems the took out lots of radar and some planes flew around for an hour after dropping off their load.

Making the point that they can do as they like.

It certainly is a damp squib, makes the point to Iranian vulnerabilities but its just a deferral of what needs to be done

Can you explain to us Danzy why, given the existential threat of the great evil Iran to the poor Israelis, why the zionists didn't inflict more damage on their enemy? Especially seeing they leisurely cruised around for an hour?

Because they sure as hell are well able to bomb the sh1t out of defenceless women and children in refugee tents and hospitals in Gaza and Lebanon. Would it not seem a bit strange that they'd priortise the Gazan kids elimination rather than their mortal enemies? Perhaps they needed to conserve some ammo in case any more 11 year olds throw a stone in the West Bank?

It's almost as if the zionist bullsh1t stories and excuses don't add up!!!!!

In decades reading about Israel and it's military capabilities I have never read about them appearing so impotent previously. I wonder has the realisation dawned on them that despite their ability to nuke Iran that they themselves are vulnerable to being annihilated. One outcome of this conflict is an acceptance by western powers that Iran now posseses enough military capability to fo enormous damage. Serious efforts will made by the next US administration to make deal with Iran in my opinion.

It just means that the threat remains but with a bit of a show of deterrence.

That threat will have to be faced eventually because like Hamas unless it is destroyed it will keep coming for them.