I don’t see Iran going so hard that’s on the table. The last strike was beautifully calibrated to re-establish deterrence while doing little politically useful damage, for example.
The real goal here for Israel is to bolster Netanyahu’s hold on power. Iran would just have to hit back hard enough it makes his situation worse, not better, and they could safely do that without the US umbrella. Of course, it all depends on what “won’t support” means. Time for me to read the article.
I have seen nothing to suggest we will cut aid or weapons. Just we won’t directly attack Iran.
I’m pro-Israel but the best way to end the escalation is to stop sending weapons at this point. I don’t see Iran attacking again unless Israel counter attacks.
We need to say stop it and make it clear, you counter attack and we cut aid.
Iran cannot invade Israel. Israel cannot invade Iran. Israel attacked a consulate. They started this and we can stop it
Allergies. It’s possible there are some typos. My eyes are on fire.
Pro-Israel doesn’t mean pro-escalation when they act poorly. We have rules to how the world works and they violated those by attacking the consulate.
Now they are trying to escalate a conflict with Iran.
We don’t need a war in the Middle East right now. We can reduce that by reducing aid.
American has become so partisan. You can support something but still have a redline.
Provided Israel doesn’t say fuck it, we’re going nuclear.
I don’t see Iran going so hard that’s on the table. The last strike was beautifully calibrated to re-establish deterrence while doing little politically useful damage, for example.
The real goal here for Israel is to bolster Netanyahu’s hold on power. Iran would just have to hit back hard enough it makes his situation worse, not better, and they could safely do that without the US umbrella. Of course, it all depends on what “won’t support” means. Time for me to read the article.
Edit: Still not clear.
Other articles I’ve seen were worded differently. They were clear we won’t attack Iran
Who are “they” and “we” in this context?
We - Americans. They Israel
Yeah, that’s what I worry about. Usually when it comes to the US on Israel “wouldn’t support” means “would silently disapprove”.I have seen nothing to suggest we will cut aid or weapons. Just we won’t directly attack Iran.
I’m pro-Israel but the best way to end the escalation is to stop sending weapons at this point. I don’t see Iran attacking again unless Israel counter attacks.
We need to say stop it and make it clear, you counter attack and we cut aid.
Iran cannot invade Israel. Israel cannot invade Iran. Israel attacked a consulate. They started this and we can stop it
I thought that said “weren’t” for whatever reason. Yeah, that’s good then.
I’m not sure other pro-Israel people would call that pro-Israel, but I agree.
Allergies. It’s possible there are some typos. My eyes are on fire. Pro-Israel doesn’t mean pro-escalation when they act poorly. We have rules to how the world works and they violated those by attacking the consulate. Now they are trying to escalate a conflict with Iran.
We don’t need a war in the Middle East right now. We can reduce that by reducing aid.
American has become so partisan. You can support something but still have a redline.
Give us the facts then and skip the journos opinions