Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

US/Israel conduct airstrikes on Iran again

1288289291293294424

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 5,785 ✭✭✭dmcdona


    Israel told Trump they were going to attack Iran, almost certainly with or without him. After all the bluff and bluster from Trump in the previous week, plus manoeuvring all the military assets (ships, planes, ordnance, personnel), he had to put his money where his mouth was and join in.

    Israel played him like a fiddle.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,523 ✭✭✭✭smurfjed


    IMG_9935.jpeg

    The red ones are generally tankers, Yanbu Saudi Arabia is at the end of a 7-7.5 million barrel per day pipeline, which is actually more than Saudi exports daily. So it will be interesting to see how much actual oil is available to the markets next week.

    The bigger problem is LPG, a huge amount of the worlds supply comes from Qatar and that can’t avoid the Strait of Hormuz.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,354 ✭✭✭aidanodr


    Well there is some truth in that I suppose :D

    trump afg iran.jpg


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,523 ✭✭✭✭smurfjed


    So does Qatar have that US Military presence to bully Iran or to protect their own country from getting taken over by the Saudi’s or similar? Look at how the present leadership came to power.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,617 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    Many analysts are warning that Israel is rapidly becoming a liability to the US, even in the Middle East. For decades, the belief was that it was a huge asset and ally in the region, but the wheels are quickly coming off. If it can't do anything to limit Iran after two surprise attacks and wars in the space of nine months, what purpose does it serve in the region?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,691 ✭✭✭yagan


    Would it be more accurate to call most of the Gulf states "interests" rather than countries?

    Some of them have more guest workers with non residency rights than they have citizens.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 255 ✭✭Tacitus Kilgore DCLXVI


    It doesn't matter why they have they have the presense, you can't say they are a neutral country because of it which posters here persist on doing. No more so than people trying to claim that Ireland is neutral when we literally let American military planes stop here, which have included people "renditioned".



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,128 ✭✭✭Homelander


    The part I have a bit of a struggle with is the amount of people who say that it's understandable, or justified, that Iran is striking out at all these surrounding countries because they either host US military bases, or accommodate the US to some degree that makes them de-facto complicit.

    As before, if that's someone's opinion, I'm not taking issue with it or debating it.

    But why is there near universal condemnation on this same thread for Israel attacking Lebanon, when the entire south of Lebanon is occupied by Hezbollah paramilitary forces, which launches rocket attacks on Israel from said territory.

    Even the Lebanese Government has come out in recent days condemning Israel in the first instance understandably, but also condemning Hezbollah, denouncing their objectives as "Iranian aligned interests" that are severely damaging Lebanon over the past 20 years, and pleading for international support in disarming Hezbollah and restoring a border with Israel.

    If it's justified or understandable for Iran to strike all of its surrounding neighbors that accommodate the US in some way, why is that same standard not applied to Israel striking Lebanon in response to regular rocket attacks from Hezbollah controlled territory.

    This isn't some "gotcha" attempt, I genuinely just can't find the consistency in it and I've not seen any actual proper discussion on it because people seem to assume that even broaching the topic is displaying massive bias towards Israel.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 255 ✭✭Tacitus Kilgore DCLXVI


    Maybe stop thinking in simplistic, binary, American thought processes. A lot of the time there are just 'bad guys' all around. The innocent people just suffer as a result.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,203 ✭✭✭Ardillaun


    There’s a big difference between understandable and justified. Predictable might be a clearer word than understandable. America should have foreseen that Iran would do anything in its power to retaliate and weaken the attack on its country. Anybody dealing with America in the future will remember both how this war started and how it proceeded. On the proceedings front, 1973 is increasingly coming to mind:



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 862 ✭✭✭Fuascailteoir


    Iraq looks like it is sliding into chaos again. This is spiraling out of control on a regional basis. Syria could easily be next as is hardly stable



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,603 ✭✭✭Large bottle small glass


    Ok with no fossil fuels or nuclear tell me what the energy make up looks like in mid winter?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,181 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    I tend not to believe anything until I find it believable.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,653 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    Outside of maybe two posters in the entire thread, the vast majority aren't mourning the death of the Ayatollah. Most are simply pissed off by what a poorly planned attack this is that will have far reaching negative impacts. It's failed to achieve regime change and it's likely to have created a global disaster to some degree.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,128 ✭✭✭Homelander


    Surely you can debate the actual topic and not dismiss it as "simplistic, binary, American thought processes".

    Do we want a discussion or an echo chamber? I've made it quite clear in my postings throughout the thread that it's perfectly fine to think there's no binary element to the conflict, it's just a serious of bad actors….or zeroes.

    But even at that there is always nuance in a broader sense, in some cases it's far more valid to say Israel is the party at major fault, and then in others that's true of Iran.

    Israel certainly has a lot to answer for with regards Palestine. Iran has a lot to answer for with regards it's endless meddling in the goal of destablising Israel towards the unattainable goal of destroying Israel.

    Both things can be true at once.

    But that doesn't get away from the often displayed inconsistency with regards Iranian attacks on its neighbors and perception of the logic or validity behind said attacks, and then the logic and validity behind Israeli attacks on Lebanon.

    I'm not American, Israeli, or Iranian. I look at the conflict pretty factually though I can say I believe Iran is entirely lying in a bed of its own making, and it's contextually very different to what's happening in Palestine.

    I agree with these points completely but it still doesn't get to the bones of why so many people think it's understandable or justfied for Iran to be striking all of its neighbors (even if it's an obvious strategic pursuit of survival as you say) but the same is not given to Israel striking Lebanon, where rockets are being fired by the occupying force.

    There are a lot of people on this thread saying Iran hitting all around it are valid pursuits given their accommodation of the US to various degrees, ranging from barely anything to US military bases and direct attacks launched from same.

    If we accept that - and I've no problem accepting that as an opinion - how do many of the same people simultaneously point to strikes on Lebanon as unjustified, unacceptable, even though the context is not so different to attacks being launched from the territory of US bases.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 5,785 ✭✭✭dmcdona


    I made the point recently that Lebanon has tried hard to neutralise Hezbollah. That they have, albeit recently, been at pains to forcibly call the terrorists out is very positive. Equally notable that their success rate is limited - but progress was being made.

    I have no issue at all with Israel targeting Hezbollah - they are attacking Israel. I do have concerns about the broad brush approach Israel is taking - displacing hundreds of thousands of civilians and bombing Beirut (a city).

    The point I made is why is Israel mounting such a campaign when the Lebanese Govt. is crying out for help. Why doesn't Israel engage with Lebanon, who undoubtedly have intelligence, and root out Hezbollah entirely? I thinkthe effect would be much greater than simply carpet bombing southern Lebanon and Beirut.

    I think the outrage regarding Israel and Lebanon is that it looks suspiciously like Israel's campaign could very much be Gaza II. Including the land-grab bit. Israel certainly has a well developed MO on that score.

    Bear in mind, there was a ceasefire in place between Israel and Lebanon up until a week or so ago.

    And of course, and of no surprise, Israel has targeted UNIFIL troops yet again.

    Certainly, if we see any body bags of Irish peacekeepers coming into Baldonnel any time soon, any and all sympathy for Israel will evaporate.

    I'm not sure if any of the above furthers your discussion point(s) but I agree that the principle of Israel engaging Hezbollah is not an issue for me.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,036 ✭✭✭rogber


    Absolute nonsense.

    How many people do you think have wanted to hit the US with a big terror attack since 9/11?

    How many have succeeded?

    This is not going to change.

    Even if Iran has sleeper cells somewhere you can be sure Israel knows all about them and will intervene first.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 255 ✭✭Tacitus Kilgore DCLXVI


    I can debate the topic with someone who actually wants discussion but honestly this is just a lot of words to say nothing, and I think I'm just wasting my time engaging with you any further.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 5,785 ✭✭✭dmcdona


    a follow up to my previous post - this time regrading Iran.


    In principle, I see no issue with anyone targeting and eliminating an imminent threat.

    The Israeli attack on Iran with the US wading in behind, was premature in my opinion. Talks were underway and there was no nuclear weapon. Yes, ballistic and other missiles plus drones were heavily stocked but there was no threat of them being used. The catalyst appears to be Iran killing many thousands of innocent protesters - an act that was at least manifest. So one of the key goals was/is regime change.

    Once the Israeli/US attack started, which may not have been in compliance with law, Iran was entitled to tespond in defence. That extends only to verified military targets - not civilians. Where those targets are is irrelevent. But that then provides plausible justification for the US/Israel to further target Iran and its missile launchers etc.

    Any neighbour who has been unjustifiably attacked (civilians and non military targets) are also provided with plausible justification for retaliation.

    As much as I abhor war because innocent civilians will suffer, if it complies with the law of war, then I cannot deny the right for it to be waged. I'd prefer negotiated settlements of course but as we've seen in recent years with Ukraine, sometimes that's just not going to happen.

    In the case of Iran, negotiations were ongoing but there was a mortal enemy of Iran in the wings on one side and a blithering idiot on the other. The mortal enemy lit the blue touch paper and here we are.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 4,228 ✭✭✭Enduro


    Leading the Lebanese government is definitely far from an easy undertaking.

    I totally agree, it would be better for both of them if they worked together. The Lebanese have the legitimacy, the Israelis have the military heft. I do wonder how much back-channel communication is going on between them both. There must be something!

    Lebanon and Israel becoming peaceful co-existing neighbours should, on paper, be easier to achieve than the already existing peace between Israel and Egypt + Jordon. Although a change in the Israeli government to a less lunatic right-wing government would help a lot.

    UNIFIL's purpose in being there seems to be long expired. I'm glad the operation is being wound down soon. They're just caught in the middle between Hezbollah and the IDF without being able to do much to prevent either of them from doing whatever they feel like. A classic UN deployment (Not doing much useful, if anything at all, through no fault of the people on the ground, but rather because of the inherent feebleness of their mandate and operational limitations).

    Lebanon seems to have incredible resilience, given the carnage of its recent history. If Hezbollah can be ejected or depowered it is likely to thrive again.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 277 ✭✭goldsparkle


    Maybe they are eating their pets and cats and dogs too. How he hasn't been overturned and tossed out of government I will never know.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,203 ✭✭✭Ardillaun


    America should have completely terminated negotiations with Iran, formally declared war and started from there. As it is we are increasingly in a world ‘order’ that Pablo Escobar would have approved of. This will not serve America well as it tries to maintain a global coalition against a rising China.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 451 ✭✭tarvis


    But blowing the guts out of Lebanese cities as is happening tonight and clearing its southern countryside of people will do nothing to achieve peace and co existence -

    it will just kill an unimaginable number of innocent people and create another generation of terrorists -

    Israel just cannot learn and the US is incapable of joined up thinking -
    between them they have made a bad situation many times worse for many more countries.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,778 ✭✭✭.Donegal.


    According to this article Irans accuracy has increased

    https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2026/3/11/could-iran-be-using-chinas-highly-accurate-beidou-navigation-system

    I wonder will the dotard keep blaming Iran for his mass slaughter of kids

    U.S. at Fault in Strike on School in Iran, Preliminary Inquiry Says

    https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/11/us/politics/iran-school-missile-strike.html



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 5,785 ✭✭✭dmcdona


    I can see the difficulties for the Lebanese - Hezbollah have been there for years - woven into the fabric. I'd say its a fine line for some to walk with the fear of being "neutralised" by the terrorists.

    I don't understand how a joint operation isn't talked about. I get that there are frictions because of the past but as you point out and I agree, Lebanon with the legitimacy to rid themselves of the scourge of terrorism and Israel with the military knowledge - I can only see a win win win. Israelis in the North getting peace, Lebanese in the South getting peace - both being free to go out and tend their land and animals without fear. the third win is the UN peacekeepers going home to their loved ones. OK, they may grumble a bit about the fall in pay/expenses but a small price to pay for their partners and children knowing they're coming home tonight.

    UN is in danger of collapse for a myriad of reasons - politics and money mostly. UNIFIL - agree, they're just piggy in the middle and at the whims of Hezbollah and the IDF - both of whom have killed Irish (and other) peacekeepers.

    Lebanon has had a very troubled history. Is economy is in tatters and its a political mess. With Hezbollah gone, perhaps they could recover and thrive - I hope so.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 4,228 ✭✭✭Enduro


    Please don't take me as me saying I approve or support any of this. I'm attempting to look at the thinking and rationale behind what they are all doing, and what all the actors are attempting to achieve.

    I think the Israelis are doing what they think it will take to route Hizbollah, and at a minimum eject them completely from south of the Litani. The end goal being to remove Hezbollah's ability to easily toss weapons into Northern Israel,or ideally nullify them completely as a military force (that goal being one the Lebanese government shares). And if causing massive destruction in Beirut, and having to physically advance to the Litani (again!) is what they think is required, then they'll do that.

    As other posters have said as well, this is neither cheap nor easy for Israel. And occupying Lebanon south of the Litani in the long term is not viable from a cost or military resource point of view. From an Israeli POV, there are bigger fish to fry elsewhere.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 277 ✭✭goldsparkle


    God, the news tonight is so depressing with Iran coming out and saying to get ready for a long war and rising oil prices.

    F*cking hell.....

    Then Trump saying he's not ready in Iran yet. Can someone make him stop and making it worse?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,181 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    Israel has invaded Lebanon many times. Has bombed the country every day during a “ceasefire”. Started this war and the last. Has killed 700 people including many women and children just in the past couple of days. Has displaced hundreds of thousands of people. Will be singing at the Eurovision and still enjoy special trading status with the EU.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 795 ✭✭✭JohnDoe2025


    You make some very excellent points.

    Furthermore, Iran's recent war crimes in attacking non-belligerents have the capacity to transform the American and Israel actions into fully justifiable ones. The threats and action on the Straits are nothing more than an attack on civilian transport.

    You make a very strong point about the reaction to Iran's attacks on its neighbours vis-a-vis Israel's actions in Lebanon, but Ireland has been extremely hypocritical on the Middle East for a long time now.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,181 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    Was the Israeli attack on non belligerent Qatar a war crime?

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



Advertisement
Advertisement