Please keep related news in this thread rather than making separate posts. Remember to include sources and avoid spreading rumours.
Please keep related news in this thread rather than making separate posts. Remember to include sources and avoid spreading rumours.
I’m not sure about that. I mean, I guess I wouldn’t condemn Iran for doing so and it’d be understandable, but i feel like attacking hospitals and schools crosses a line. Not to mention that this would probably harden the Israeli population rather than demoralize them. Otherwise there are better targets to hit with missiles
It’s a form of limited non-nuclear MAD. If you show your opponent that you will respond to their actions in kind, it forces them to consider equal or great retaliation when calculating the benefit of any given action. If they attack air defense, their air defense will be attacked. If they attack civilians, their civilians will be attacked. We’d all be better off if the agressor stopped attacking altogether, but in the absence of that, proportionate response seems a valid strategy, particularly with the West and its proxies.
This implies that Bibi and the rest of the Israeli government cares about that sort of thing, or worse yet would want Iran to start attack schools and hospitals (which would be another reason why they attack schools and hospitals in the first place). Maybe it’d expend resources in recovery and reconstruction, but how many resources compared to military, logistical, and infrastructural targets? If they did something similar to what Russia is doing in the Ukraine where they attack electrical generators then i could see it, but I think direct strikes would probably be wasteful with Iran’s resources at best if not actively detrimental at worst
Exactly. It would be at best militarily pointless or even counter-productive to the military effort by wasting munitions. And moreover it would play right into the hands of the Zionist-imperialist propaganda.
Look at all of the terror shelling and drone attacks against civilians that Ukraine constantly engages in. Has that helped them militarily in any way, or has it only hardened Russian resolve?
Why is it that Russia has been so insistent to not retaliate in kind against civilians - even though they could inflict much more damage than Ukraine can - and instead responded only with strikes on military targets and dual-use infrastructure?
Because that is how you win wars. You remain disciplined and stick to the plan, especially when it is clear that the plan is working and the enemy is desperately lashing out to try to provoke you into making mistakes.
And also, the importance of the “moral high ground” should not be underestimated. Not in a liberal idealist sense but in considering the real geopolitical implications it has when you can credibly portray yourself as engaging in legitimate and legal self-defense.
The West will try to portray you as the “bad guys” no matter what, but there is a big rest of the world outside of the West and they are not stupid, they can see who the hypocrites are. And finally it is also important for your own population and your soldiers to feel like they are on the side that is acting morally.
I agree with this. Like I’m not willing to kill kids, I’m not surprised if Iranian soldiers feel the same
That line was already crossed by the “israelis”, when a line is crossed there are usually consequences, not just words denouncing
Consequences doesn’t have to mean doing the exact same thing back, especially if it’d be strategically unsound. Germans faced consequences for ww2, which did not mean the soviets started putting Germans in concentration camps and gassing them.
Edit: also last time I checked people here didn’t like the Dresden bombings despite the fact that’s exactly what the Germans had been doing to other countries for years
Strategically unsound is the stretch here. The “israelis” and americans obviously do it for a reason, I know we call them the great satan and that they do things for pure evil, but they are also competent.
To insinuate that there is no advantage to bombing a hospital and healthcare workers is something I don’t agree with.
What Iran is doing right now if they don’t retaliate with equal or greater force is letting “israel” demolish their entire healthcare system.
Are we saying that demolishing healthcare systems doesn’t have a strategic advantage here?
To my knowledge, historically, not really.
Just because the US and Israel are doing it doesn’t make it strategically sound. Did bombing aid workers in Afghanistan or carpet bombing Vietnam and North Korea win them those wars? Did the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki defeat japan or did the threat of soviet invasion do that? Did causing a mass famine in an open air concentration camp defeat Hamas?
Let’s put it like this. What advantages can be gained from bombing hospitals and schools? For schools, in my opinion, there is none. None of those people are either in active fighting nor are really going to contribute to fighting in the short term nor long term. If the Israeli military uses schools as bases that’s another thing, but otherwise youre wasting munitions that should be striking radar, government offices, etc.
Hospitals might be a different thing, but youre attacking people who are effectively already incapacitated. There’s also not really a definite goal in attacking either of these institutions. Terror? Terror is an incapacitator, it’s swift and ruthless. But it doesn’t work when you’re not already in control. The Bourgeoisie in China are subjected to a terror because they know any infraction will get them thrown in jail or worse. But terror on a military scale doesn’t really work, as the terror of the state outweighs the terror of the aircraft.
Economically it’d be better to attack infrastructure, rail, ports, roadways,etc. When you attack a hospital or a school, beyond complete destruction that place is still somewhat functional as long as the people are still alive. Attacking other places like bases, rail, etc. Can effectively disable certain important things without complete destruction.
The only thing I can think of thatd help is that Israel would have to spread their forces to protect these targets too. Assuming they do want to protect them of course. However in any case it’s not a decisions to take lightly or throw your hands up and say “eh whatever.”
Lastly, i do want to point out that, so far to my knowledge, Iran isn’t intentionally attacking these locations despite all of this. If I’m wrong please let me know but if I’m not then I feel this is a bit of a moot conversation