Response to GeoPolitiQ's "Israel humiliated as Iran foils Israeli attacks"
"and save Netanyahu face. "
Well, it won't do that. This was a very "lame" attack, much like the one Israel did last April. I predicted that Israel would have to "go big or go home" after the last Iranian attack, but for some reason - assuming that the Israeli retaliation actually has ended - Israel decided it couldn't do "big".
We've all known that for Israel to attack Iran without using Jericho missiles requires massive planning and effort to get its jets that far in sufficient numbers with refueling to actually do any significant damage to Iran. Apparently this has now been proven - twice.
I expected that Israel would use either a missile strike - with or without nuclear warheads - on Iranian nuclear sites and oil facilities. Attacking air defenses and missile building sites is a pointless attack for two reasons: 1) Without the ability to overwhelm the air defenses - which requires a large-scale attack by cruise missiles - the attack will fail, and 2) if you can't hit the missile launch sites, hitting the production plants is not going to help immediately in the event of a conflict.
Secondly, the entire thrust of the Israeli and US campaign against Iran is over its nuclear energy facilities. Without its nuclear energy production, weapons production of any kind - nuclear or missile - would be severely restricted. Not to mention the entire so-called "justification" is Iran's alleged (and non-existent) "nuclear weapons program." So not hitting that target out of the gate is just stupid from the US and Israeli viewpoint.
Also if you want to provoke Iran to start a war - as both the US and Israel want - not hitting such facilities as the nuclear energy and oil facilities isn't going to be much of a motivator.
So why Israel did not use its missiles or submarines to attack Iran, and why it picked such lame targets as some radars and missile production plants (if they even were missile production plants) is a mystery to me. It makes no rational sense. This implies that someone or something constrained Israel from its proper military response. Whether that was the US or Russia or Israel's own fear of the Iranian response - without the US to bail it out, so far - or simply the constraints on Israel's military capability in some unknown aspect is not clear to me.
The other possibility is that this attack was a "cover" for a more covert Israeli attack to be executed later. As some have suggested, Israel may be planning more assassinations or other provocations against Iran closer to home - similar to the Israeli attack on the Iranian Consulate in Syria in March. This would provide Israel with the ability to further provoke Iran to justify a US intervention against Iran while minimizing the difficulty of directly attacking Iran on its own.
The issue for Israel is always how to get the US to do the heavy lifting against Iran while enabling Israel to escape the brunt of Iran's long-range missile capability (as well as Hezbollah's) so that Israel can mostly escape intact and continue the genocide of the Palestinians.
Whether Netanyahu and his team have the smarts to accomplish that goal is unclear, even with US neocon support for it. Both the neocons and Netanyahu may have miscalculated by starting the Lebanon war too soon while the Iran war and US involvement in that war is still hanging fire.
What the neocons and Israel can do to rectify that is also unclear. Whether this current state of affairs will derail the entire neocon and Israeli project is also unclear.
My theory, which I hinted at the end of this article, without a full development, because it was already getting quite long, is that US and Israel agreed on such a lame attack so that they could settle the score with Iran (for now!) and the Democrats could focus on the presidential elections, without having to worry about further escalations in the Middle East. Once the US presidential elections are out of their way, they can restart the full-scale war in the Middle East, if they do not have enough problems at home (i.e. civil war with the Republicans).
Also, let's not forget the leaks, which I did not touch upon in this article: the intelligence may have been leaked on purpose to restrain Israel and/or it may have allowed Iran to prepare for this attack.
The election theory is plausible, although I've argued elsewhere that the neocons don't care about the elections because they'll be around under Trump or Biden and the Israelis don't care because they know Trump will continue to support them.
My theory about the leak was that it was intended to fool the Iranians as to both the method of the Israeli attack and the supposed targets. However, it appears - so far - from this lame attack that both the method and targets were as indicated in the leaks. That, however, begs the question of why the leak if in fact the information in it was exactly what Israel intended to do anyway. Iran was already prepared for exactly this kind of attack (as far as we know from the limited info so far available.) I expected Israel to do something different - it's what I would have done if I were them.
So something is off about this attack. Something or someone constrained Israel from conducting an effective attack. Most likely it was a sheer inability to prosecute such an attack over such a distance. But if not, then something else is involved.
One theory is that Israel decided to conduct a "show attack" with its air force - but conduct a future covert or overt attack in another manner closer to home, similar to the Iran Consulate attack in Syria.
We know Israel wants a US-Iran war. This lame attack doesn't get that. So the question is: why was it done this way?
Or they intended to go big and their initial salvo to disable the AD systems failed so they had to launch weapons at standoff distance instead of going all the way to Iran and bombing directly. If this is what happened, and many in the know are now saying this, Israel is in serious trouble.
They had to launch weapons at standoff distance anyway, because all of the Arab Gulf states denied their airspace to the Israeli Air Force, which however flew over Syria (that's why the bombing there at around the same time: to destroy some sparse air defense in the country) and Iraq, as confirmed now by Al Mayadeen (see link below), reporting that Kata'ib Hezbollah will retaliate against US bases in Iraq for allowing the use of Iraqi air space.
Plausible. My problem is why Israel didn't use Jerichos or cruise missiles from subs which would have avoided any such problems (depending on whether either weapons system could have avoided the Iranian AD, which is unknown.) Those systems could also have been used in coordination with aircraft.
Someone at MOA and another person at Martyanov's blog claim Israel drones were used as well as air launched missiles. Neither provided links. I can't find a decent assessment from anyone with military credibility.
I did find a link which discussed the Israeli air missiles used based on publicly available information from before the strike. But nothing about any drones actually being used. That would be interesting as it might indicate Israel's subs were used (although it could also have been land-launched drones.)
I think the failure of Israel attack can probably have a very simples explanation:
Mid-flight the F-35 got radar locked and it was decided to abort the attack and send the missiles anyway.
The US and Israel have put all their air coins on the supposed advantage of stealth aircraft supressing air-defenses before the main attack. If stealth is not working anymore as it should, they could not continue their original attack plan.
Good report!! The attack appears weak, but it may be that it was a probing attack for Recon purposes and assessment of capabilities--neither Satan has such info, now they have some. A more complete assessment of the raid needs to be performed and leaked so we can make further assessment.
As for Iranian retaliation, it ***publicly announced*** that such action would be taken. Perhaps several hypersonics will target a very high value infrastructure target like a thermal power plant or Haifa dock facilities or both. As always, time will tell.
Western media are now reporting about Israeli strikes on Iraniani missile production sites and "Iranian air defences that were guarding oil, gas and petrochemical facilities as well as a major port". See for instance:
...but I would be quite cautious over these reports, since they come from well-known liars!
Regarding Iranian retaliation, I have not seen such a clear announcement. Instead, Iran, as usual and abiding by international law, stated that it "reserves inherent right to respond to Israeli aggression" and it has called on the UNSC "to condemn the Zionist regime’s attacks on Iran", which most likely will not happen, due to the US veto, which then will give Iran the right to retaliate, if they deem necessary. See these two article from the official Iranian state agency (IRNA):
about the details - we will never know... this is one big ongoing propaganda exercise from both sides.. the reality is israel did knock off the iranian high command in damascus back in april 2024 which started this whole back and forth... so it is irans move here as i see it.. that is not to say israel couldn't do something else more stupid, as they have proven time and time again...
Response to GeoPolitiQ's "Israel humiliated as Iran foils Israeli attacks"
"and save Netanyahu face. "
Well, it won't do that. This was a very "lame" attack, much like the one Israel did last April. I predicted that Israel would have to "go big or go home" after the last Iranian attack, but for some reason - assuming that the Israeli retaliation actually has ended - Israel decided it couldn't do "big".
We've all known that for Israel to attack Iran without using Jericho missiles requires massive planning and effort to get its jets that far in sufficient numbers with refueling to actually do any significant damage to Iran. Apparently this has now been proven - twice.
I expected that Israel would use either a missile strike - with or without nuclear warheads - on Iranian nuclear sites and oil facilities. Attacking air defenses and missile building sites is a pointless attack for two reasons: 1) Without the ability to overwhelm the air defenses - which requires a large-scale attack by cruise missiles - the attack will fail, and 2) if you can't hit the missile launch sites, hitting the production plants is not going to help immediately in the event of a conflict.
Secondly, the entire thrust of the Israeli and US campaign against Iran is over its nuclear energy facilities. Without its nuclear energy production, weapons production of any kind - nuclear or missile - would be severely restricted. Not to mention the entire so-called "justification" is Iran's alleged (and non-existent) "nuclear weapons program." So not hitting that target out of the gate is just stupid from the US and Israeli viewpoint.
Also if you want to provoke Iran to start a war - as both the US and Israel want - not hitting such facilities as the nuclear energy and oil facilities isn't going to be much of a motivator.
So why Israel did not use its missiles or submarines to attack Iran, and why it picked such lame targets as some radars and missile production plants (if they even were missile production plants) is a mystery to me. It makes no rational sense. This implies that someone or something constrained Israel from its proper military response. Whether that was the US or Russia or Israel's own fear of the Iranian response - without the US to bail it out, so far - or simply the constraints on Israel's military capability in some unknown aspect is not clear to me.
The other possibility is that this attack was a "cover" for a more covert Israeli attack to be executed later. As some have suggested, Israel may be planning more assassinations or other provocations against Iran closer to home - similar to the Israeli attack on the Iranian Consulate in Syria in March. This would provide Israel with the ability to further provoke Iran to justify a US intervention against Iran while minimizing the difficulty of directly attacking Iran on its own.
The issue for Israel is always how to get the US to do the heavy lifting against Iran while enabling Israel to escape the brunt of Iran's long-range missile capability (as well as Hezbollah's) so that Israel can mostly escape intact and continue the genocide of the Palestinians.
Whether Netanyahu and his team have the smarts to accomplish that goal is unclear, even with US neocon support for it. Both the neocons and Netanyahu may have miscalculated by starting the Lebanon war too soon while the Iran war and US involvement in that war is still hanging fire.
What the neocons and Israel can do to rectify that is also unclear. Whether this current state of affairs will derail the entire neocon and Israeli project is also unclear.
My theory, which I hinted at the end of this article, without a full development, because it was already getting quite long, is that US and Israel agreed on such a lame attack so that they could settle the score with Iran (for now!) and the Democrats could focus on the presidential elections, without having to worry about further escalations in the Middle East. Once the US presidential elections are out of their way, they can restart the full-scale war in the Middle East, if they do not have enough problems at home (i.e. civil war with the Republicans).
Also, let's not forget the leaks, which I did not touch upon in this article: the intelligence may have been leaked on purpose to restrain Israel and/or it may have allowed Iran to prepare for this attack.
The election theory is plausible, although I've argued elsewhere that the neocons don't care about the elections because they'll be around under Trump or Biden and the Israelis don't care because they know Trump will continue to support them.
My theory about the leak was that it was intended to fool the Iranians as to both the method of the Israeli attack and the supposed targets. However, it appears - so far - from this lame attack that both the method and targets were as indicated in the leaks. That, however, begs the question of why the leak if in fact the information in it was exactly what Israel intended to do anyway. Iran was already prepared for exactly this kind of attack (as far as we know from the limited info so far available.) I expected Israel to do something different - it's what I would have done if I were them.
So something is off about this attack. Something or someone constrained Israel from conducting an effective attack. Most likely it was a sheer inability to prosecute such an attack over such a distance. But if not, then something else is involved.
One theory is that Israel decided to conduct a "show attack" with its air force - but conduct a future covert or overt attack in another manner closer to home, similar to the Iran Consulate attack in Syria.
We know Israel wants a US-Iran war. This lame attack doesn't get that. So the question is: why was it done this way?
Agree totally: all is deception, but how do you put Evil, on hold, once it’s out of the ziobottle.
Or they intended to go big and their initial salvo to disable the AD systems failed so they had to launch weapons at standoff distance instead of going all the way to Iran and bombing directly. If this is what happened, and many in the know are now saying this, Israel is in serious trouble.
They had to launch weapons at standoff distance anyway, because all of the Arab Gulf states denied their airspace to the Israeli Air Force, which however flew over Syria (that's why the bombing there at around the same time: to destroy some sparse air defense in the country) and Iraq, as confirmed now by Al Mayadeen (see link below), reporting that Kata'ib Hezbollah will retaliate against US bases in Iraq for allowing the use of Iraqi air space.
https://english.almayadeen.net/news/politics/iraqi-hezbollah--us-to-pay-price-for-using-iraqi-space-to-at
Retaliation may have already happened overnight, by the way: https://english.almayadeen.net/news/politics/drone-targets-us-base-in-al-tanf-on-syira-jordan-iraq-tribor
Plausible. My problem is why Israel didn't use Jerichos or cruise missiles from subs which would have avoided any such problems (depending on whether either weapons system could have avoided the Iranian AD, which is unknown.) Those systems could also have been used in coordination with aircraft.
Someone at MOA and another person at Martyanov's blog claim Israel drones were used as well as air launched missiles. Neither provided links. I can't find a decent assessment from anyone with military credibility.
I did find a link which discussed the Israeli air missiles used based on publicly available information from before the strike. But nothing about any drones actually being used. That would be interesting as it might indicate Israel's subs were used (although it could also have been land-launched drones.)
I think the failure of Israel attack can probably have a very simples explanation:
Mid-flight the F-35 got radar locked and it was decided to abort the attack and send the missiles anyway.
The US and Israel have put all their air coins on the supposed advantage of stealth aircraft supressing air-defenses before the main attack. If stealth is not working anymore as it should, they could not continue their original attack plan.
Yes, I have read this theory here: https://karlof1.substack.com/p/zionists-aborted-attack-on-iran
Very interesting article.
Good report!! The attack appears weak, but it may be that it was a probing attack for Recon purposes and assessment of capabilities--neither Satan has such info, now they have some. A more complete assessment of the raid needs to be performed and leaked so we can make further assessment.
As for Iranian retaliation, it ***publicly announced*** that such action would be taken. Perhaps several hypersonics will target a very high value infrastructure target like a thermal power plant or Haifa dock facilities or both. As always, time will tell.
Western media are now reporting about Israeli strikes on Iraniani missile production sites and "Iranian air defences that were guarding oil, gas and petrochemical facilities as well as a major port". See for instance:
- https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/oct/26/middle-east-crisis-live-israel-airstrikes-iran-lebanon-gaza-hamas-hezbollah-latest-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-671d58b68f08d3f94c2ba9b4#block-671d58b68f08d3f94c2ba9b4
- https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/oct/26/middle-east-crisis-live-israel-airstrikes-iran-lebanon-gaza-hamas-hezbollah-latest-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-671d5ed48f08d3f94c2ba9cb#block-671d5ed48f08d3f94c2ba9cb
- https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/oct/26/middle-east-crisis-live-israel-airstrikes-iran-lebanon-gaza-hamas-hezbollah-latest-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-671d7e468f085a58218134ca#block-671d7e468f085a58218134ca
...but I would be quite cautious over these reports, since they come from well-known liars!
Regarding Iranian retaliation, I have not seen such a clear announcement. Instead, Iran, as usual and abiding by international law, stated that it "reserves inherent right to respond to Israeli aggression" and it has called on the UNSC "to condemn the Zionist regime’s attacks on Iran", which most likely will not happen, due to the US veto, which then will give Iran the right to retaliate, if they deem necessary. See these two article from the official Iranian state agency (IRNA):
- https://en.irna.ir/news/85639666/Iran-entitled-to-defend-itself-against-Zionist-regime-s-acts
- https://en.irna.ir/news/85640330/Araghchi-to-UN-Iran-reserves-inherent-right-to-respond-to-Israeli
about the details - we will never know... this is one big ongoing propaganda exercise from both sides.. the reality is israel did knock off the iranian high command in damascus back in april 2024 which started this whole back and forth... so it is irans move here as i see it.. that is not to say israel couldn't do something else more stupid, as they have proven time and time again...
Splendid article