Biden Green Lit Iran, "Within Certain Limits"

[Kathianne]

Wouldn't this be impeachable?

https://www.dailywire.com/news/iran-...limits-reports

Iran Targeted ‘Major Civilian Areas’; Biden Admin Told Iran Attack Had To Be ‘Within Certain Limits’: ReportsBy Ryan Saavedra
•
Apr 14, 2024 DailyWire.com
•
FacebookXMail


TOPSHOT - A picture taken on August 16, 2008 shows an Iranian flag fluttering in front of Iran's Safir Omid rocket, which is capable of carrying a satellite into orbit, before it's launch in a space station at an undisclosed location in the Islamic republic. Iran said on August 17 it had successfully launched the rocket, a move that could further exacerbate tensions with the West over its nuclear drive.
Photo by -/AFP via Getty Images
Iran intended to kill large numbers of people with the unprecedented attack that it launched against Israel over the weekend, according to a new U.S. intelligence assessment.


Reuters reported that the Biden administration communicated to Iran, through the Turkish government, that it’s attack on Israel had to be “within certain limits”.


Senior U.S. officials told Semafor that that the attack — which included hundreds of one-way suicide drones and missiles — was “designed to cause mass casualties and infrastructure damage,” the report said.


Israeli officials said that Iran crossed a major red line with its attack, the first time the Islamic Republic has ever directly attacked Israel, and would pay a steep price for the terror inflicted against the Jewish state.


They said that despite Iran’s claims that it was only targeting military infrastructure, Iran also targeted “major civilian areas” and that a direct military response would be required.


Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett slammed President Joe Biden on Sunday for telling Israel that it got a “win” and that they should take the win. The “win,” according to the Biden administration, was the fact that 99% of the projectiles were shot down by Israel and its allies in the region.


“No, it’s NOT a victory,” Bennett wrote. “When a bully tries to hit you 350 times and only succeeds seven time, you’ve NOT won. You don’t win wars just by intercepting your enemy’s hits, nor do you deter it. Your enemy will just try harder with more and better weapons and methods next time.”


He said that the only way to deter further aggression was by “exacting a deeply painful price.”


Bennett said that the attack was a “big mistake” by Iran — which he referred to as “a terror-octopus whose head is Tehran, and its tentacles are in Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq, Syria and Gaza.”


“Israel’s strategic mistake for the past 30 years was to play along this strategy,” he said. “We always fought the Octopus’ arms, but hardly exacted a price from its Iranian head.”

Another:

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/ar...turkish-source

[Gunny]

Wouldn't this be impeachable?

https://www.dailywire.com/news/iran-...limits-reports



Another:

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/ar...turkish-source

I don't necessarily agree with the assessment. Just my opinion. Iran put on a fireworks show at tremendous cost that resulted in one injury. All the firebreathers need to be wondering about that rather than not getting past the part that Iran attacked Israel and knee-jerk reacting. Had they aimed every single weapon simultaneously at Tel Aviv they would have overwhelmed any defensive capability and there would be mass casualties. As it is, they telegraphed their blows.

At this point I'm wondering what IS the point?

As far Israel responding, I still say maybe they shouldn't at all. If Israel cannot blow Iran back into the Stone Age (which would be fine with me), anything else is just going to escalate into a war of attrition Israel cannot win alone. With the civil unrest currently in Iran, giving Iranians something to come together and focus on, like an attack from Israel, is all Khomeini could ever hope for.

Maybe the Biden Admin should stop funding Iran's war machine? Just a thought

[Kathianne]

I don't necessarily agree with the assessment. Just my opinion. Iran put on a fireworks show at tremendous cost that resulted in one injury. All the firebreathers need to be wondering about that rather than not getting past the part that Iran attacked Israel and knee-jerk reacting. Had they aimed every single weapon simultaneously at Tel Aviv they would have overwhelmed any defensive capability and there would be mass casualties. As it is, they telegraphed their blows.

At this point I'm wondering what IS the point?

As far Israel responding, I still say maybe they shouldn't at all. If Israel cannot blow Iran back into the Stone Age (which would be fine with me), anything else is just going to escalate into a war of attrition Israel cannot win alone. With the civil unrest currently in Iran, giving Iranians something to come together and focus on, like an attack from Israel, is all Khomeini could ever hope for.

Maybe the Biden Admin should stop funding Iran's war machine? Just a thought

IF Biden said he'd freeze all Iranian assets and no more $$$; while simultaneously saying defensive only for Isreal, I'd back that.

It's NOT what he's doing.

[Kathianne]

I don't necessarily agree with the assessment. Just my opinion. Iran put on a fireworks show at tremendous cost that resulted in one injury. All the firebreathers need to be wondering about that rather than not getting past the part that Iran attacked Israel and knee-jerk reacting. Had they aimed every single weapon simultaneously at Tel Aviv they would have overwhelmed any defensive capability and there would be mass casualties. As it is, they telegraphed their blows.

At this point I'm wondering what IS the point?

As far Israel responding, I still say maybe they shouldn't at all. If Israel cannot blow Iran back into the Stone Age (which would be fine with me), anything else is just going to escalate into a war of attrition Israel cannot win alone. With the civil unrest currently in Iran, giving Iranians something to come together and focus on, like an attack from Israel, is all Khomeini could ever hope for.

Maybe the Biden Admin should stop funding Iran's war machine? Just a thought

I think Iran accomplished more than what you state. One, IF Iran hadn't made clear what they were planning on, there was more than even chance that many of the ballistic and perhaps some cruise missiles would have hit Israel. There were over 100 ballistic and more cruise missiles sent-with ballistic sent in one wave. US, Israel, and Jordan were all employing air forces to shoot down, UK and FR also assisted, though not quite clear if it was fighter jets or not.

Here is someone with real credentials, unlike my attempt at 'commonsense.'

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blog...hould-respond/

New Atlanticist

April 14, 2024


Iran is trying to create a new normal with its attack. Here’s how Israel and the US should respond.
By William F. Wechsler


Iran’s supreme leader took his time to consider how and where to respond to Israel’s strike in Damascus on April 1. The United States and Israel should similarly take time to consider what he likely intended to accomplish with this weekend’s retaliation and what messages he was trying to send.


Most immediately, Tehran clearly intended to deter Israel from once again targeting its diplomatic facilities—locations that it previously thought were safe enough to use for military purposes. Israel’s longstanding “war between the wars” has put Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps officers at risk when operating near Israel’s borders, so Tehran is undoubtedly loath to see its remaining sanctuaries become an accepted part of the battlefield.


Operationally, Iran sent an unmistakable signal that it wanted to avoid a further escalation that could spark a truly regional war. It chose long-range attacks that could be readily thwarted by known Israeli defenses and pointedly did not target any US facilities. It did this all while issuing extraordinary statements (in English) that “the matter can be deemed concluded” and that “U.S. MUST STAY AWAY!” (emphasis in the original).


While Hamas might be desperate for a wider conflagration, its patron Iran is certainly quite satisfied by the post-October 7 status quo, from which it benefits immensely. For many people across the region, awash with images of Palestinian suffering, their perceptions of Iran have never been more positive, as it alone is “standing up” to Israel—previously through its proxies and now directly as well. Reports of Jordan actively defending Israel from Iran further exacerbate the dichotomy between Tehran, which presents itself as the leader of the resistance against the ”Zionist entity,” and Arab governments that are seen by many of their citizens as secretly doing Israel’s bidding.


Meanwhile, Iran’s nuclear program has fallen off the front pages and continues to progress largely unimpeded, already leaping past milestones that were once widely regarded to be unacceptable. Moreover, Iran has thus far avoided any real risk to Hezbollah, the crown jewel of its proxy network since Hezbollah’s second-strike capacity helps deter an Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear infrastructure. Iran seeks US withdrawal from the region; the last thing it wants is to provoke a wider regional war that would risk a direct US-Iran military confrontation.


Setting a precedent
Strategically, Tehran also sought to establish a novel precedent that will shift the nature of the ongoing conflict with Israel to its further advantage. The precedent is that Iran can attack Israel directly, that it can do so from Iranian soil, and that it can target civilians inside Israel. Iran is thus following a playbook that it has honed for decades: experimenting with a new set of malign actions, assessing the response from adversaries, and, if those responses are deemed either minimal or temporary, establishing those actions as a new normal that then becomes accepted implicitly. This pattern is how Iran became the only country in the world that routinely gives precision weapons to non-state proxies and instructs them to target civilians across borders—and how the rest of world became so inured to this reality that it is now barely even remarked upon.


In recent months, Iran has already successfully established several “new normals” that work to its long-term advantage: Through the Houthis, it has demonstrated a newfound ability to shut the Bab el-Mandeb Strait whenever it wants and to whomever it wants; through Hezbollah, it has demonstrated its ability to threaten Israelis at home and now force massive internal displacements; and through its own actions, it has demonstrated once again its capacity to commit piracy near the Strait of Hormuz and attract little in the way of international condemnation for doing so. If Tehran is similarly successful in establishing the precedent that it can directly target Israelis from Iran, the resulting new normal would become especially valuable after Tehran becomes a declared nuclear-weapons power.


Diplomatically, Iran also hoped to demonstrate both the limits of US power and the reliability of its own. The United States has been committed to Israel’s security for decades and President Joe Biden has personally demonstrated his own dedication to that goal. And yet Iran is nevertheless able to directly threaten Israel without triggering a US military response—or so it hopes. With this weekend’s attack, Iran likely intends that Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Arab governments take away the lesson that they shouldn’t depend on an unreliable and ineffectual US security umbrella, and especially not if that’s the benefit on offer for normalizing relations with Israel. Similarly, Iran hopes to encourage its ally-in-all-but-name Russia and its major economic partner China to blame Israel for the escalation in tensions and to protect it at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). This is likely to be a successful strategy; after six months, the UNSC still hasn’t been able to clearly condemn Hamas for its terrorist attacks against Israel, so the odds are that the UNSC will not pass a resolution that plainly condemns Iran for its actions.


Next steps for Israel and the US
Iran’s objectives were rational and well-considered, and they play to perceptions of its own strengths and its opponents’ weaknesses. So too must be the response to Iran’s actions. Neither Israel nor the United States should allow Iran to achieve the objectives outlined above, but calls for an immediate military campaign on Iranian territory are as reckless as they are unwise. Instead, the focus should be as follows.


In the months to come, even as it continues its “war between the wars” undeterred, Israel’s top priority should be to achieve its military objectives against Hamas convincingly: decapitating its leadership, dismantling its tunnel infrastructure, and destroying its remaining military brigades. It should do so while working with the United States to far better protect civilians in Gaza, to establish internal security there and deny Hamas’s reconstitution, and to vastly improve humanitarian conditions for innocent Palestinians. Nothing would do more immediate damage to the Iranian narrative than to have Iran’s partner in Gaza suffer an indisputable defeat.


Furthermore, Tehran would suffer an even more devastating strategic setback if Israel, after having achieved its military objectives against Hamas, is able to summon the political courage and strategic wisdom to accept the US-proposed principle of a “time-bound, irreversible path to a Palestinian state,” begin good-faith negotiations on how to operationalize those terms, and in the meantime normalize relations with a Saudi Arabia that has strengthened its security relationship with the United States. The Biden administration has been ambitiously pushing toward this scenario for over a year, recognizing that achieving it would fundamentally change the geopolitics of the region—all to the strategic detriment of Tehran and its network of violent rejectionists.


At the same time, the United States should expand its campaign against the Houthis from a mission narrowly defined to defend international shipping and degrade Houthi capabilities in the Red Sea, to one that also seeks to establish deterrence by decapitating Houthi leadership from the air. The United States is deeply experienced in such operations in Yemen after conducting them for years against the leaders of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula; the United States should carry out these strikes until the Houthis permanently halt their attacks on international shipping.


The United States should also declare a new doctrine: Any attack against any US person by an Iranian partner or proxy will henceforth be considered (a) an attack by Iran itself and (b) a successful attack, for the purposes of determining the US military response. For too long, Iran has been able to attack Americans with relative impunity by doing so through cutouts and conducting those attacks in such a manner that they can be expected to be successfully thwarted or only cause “minor” casualties. When three US servicemembers were killed earlier this year, the US response was clear and Iran responded by ordering a halt in such attacks. That was a successful application of deterrence. The same military responses can and should be taken when Iran attempts to kill Americans, not only when it successfully does so. By establishing this new normal, the United States will have successfully altered the rules of the game to its own advantage—and established a precedent for Israel to follow.


And finally, the United States should accept that Iranian malign behavior will not end until the regime itself does. After all, Iran’s conflict with Israel is entirely ideological, a product of the particular theology of the 1979 revolution; the previous Iranian government had no such hostilities. Furthermore, as was the case with the Soviet Union, the regime is increasingly fragile domestically, viewed as fundamentally illegitimate by a growing percentage of Iranians who repeatedly rise up in protest no matter the risks.


But a war with Iran to produce regime change would carry far too many risks for the region, not the least of which would be the deaths of countless innocents, and most likely serve to strengthen the regime’s hold on its people and to legitimate its nuclear program in the eyes of many abroad. Therefore, just as during the Cold War, the best long-term US strategy against Tehran would be one that targets this inherent regime weakness through increased sanctions enforcement, covert actions against Iran’s nuclear program, legal efforts to hold the regime accountable for its human rights atrocities at home and abroad, and a campaign of overt and covert support to those inside Iran who oppose the regime.


Given the inconsistencies of US policies across administrations in recent decades, such an approach may be beyond the United States’ capacity. But it has never been more important to build bipartisan support for a consistent Iran strategy that can succeed.


William F. Wechsler is the senior director of Middle East Programs at the Atlantic Council. His most recent US government position was deputy assistant secretary of defense for special operations and combatting terrorism.

[Kathianne]

Credit where due and it is:

https://hotair.com/david-strom/2024/...cords-n3786567

Air Defense of Israel Made Possible by the Abraham AccordsDAVID STROM 8:00 AM | April 16, 2024



AP Photo/Alex Brandon
I have said it before, and I will say it again: in a just world, Donald Trump would have gotten the Nobel Prize for the Abraham Accords.


Unfortunately, we live in a world where Barack Obama got it for merely existing and knowing how to dress well enough to keep a crease in his pants impeccably sharp.


I thought of this again as I watched the attack on Israel by Iran unfold. It seemed clear to me that it wasn't just the United States, Great Britain, and Israel who were defending the Jewish state while under Iranian attack: it was the entire Arab world as well.




Trump understood in a way other policymakers never did that Israel and the Arab world share similar foreign policy interests and that the Arab world understands that mutual good relations would benefit all concerned. The Palestinians have long since used up their victim credits with Arab leaders, and their alliance with Iran--an aggressive non-Arab country--made them nothing less than an enemy of most Middle-Eastern countries.


It is of course true that the "Arab street" is still filled with hostility to Israel, but the same can hardly be said for the people in power across the Arab world, so when Jared Kushner was dispatched to the Middle East to forge a deal he found a receptive audience.


We saw the results this weekend: as Iran attacked Israel, its neighbors quietly came to its aid. It was an easy choice, too.


As hundreds of Iranian drones and missiles winged across the Middle East Saturday night, a defensive line of radars, jet fighters, warships and air-defense batteries from Israel, the U.S. and a half dozen other countries was already activated against the long-feared attack from Iran.


Almost nothing got through to Israel.


The formidable display of collective defense was the culmination of a decades-old but elusive U.S. goal to forge closer military ties between Israel and its longtime Arab adversaries in an effort to counter a growing common threat from Iran.


But the U.S.-led effort to protect Israel in the days and hours before the Iranian attack had to overcome numerous obstacles, including fears by Gulf countries at being seen as coming to Israel’s aid at a time when relations are badly strained by the war in Gaza.


Much of the cooperation Saturday night that led to the shooting down of the Iranian-directed barrage needed to be forged on the fly, and many details about the role played by Saudi Arabia and other key Arab governments are being closely held.


Forged on the fly? Perhaps tactically. But the strategic conditions that made that cooperation possible were created under Donald Trump's leadership.


Remember when the foreign policy establishment screamed bloody murder because Trump moved our embassy to Jerusalem? It was supposed to be the death knell to whatever role the US had in keeping the Middle East stable.


The opposite happened. As Westerners screamed, Arabs sat down to negotiate. A new security regime was created, and all to the good.


Efforts to build an integrated air-defense system for the region date back decades. After years of false starts and minimal progress, the initiative gained momentum after the 2020 Abraham Accords brokered by the Trump administration, which established formal ties between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.


Two years later, the Pentagon shifted Israel from its European Command to Central Command, which includes the rest of the Middle East, a move that enabled greater military cooperation with Arab governments under U.S. auspices.


“Israel’s move into Centcom was a game changer,” making it easier to share intelligence and provide early warning across countries, said Dana Stroul, who until December was the most senior civilian official at the Pentagon with responsibility for the Middle East.


One of the reasons I have been "soft" on Qatar is that I suspect its relations with Hamas and other extremists is purely tactical and implicitly approved of by the US and Israel. Qatar is a top-tier ally of the US and is a key part of CENTCOM, and now Israel is as well. For all intents and purposes, the two countries work together behind the scenes.


It looks ugly. At times it is ugly. But it pays dividends often enough.


In March 2022, Marine Gen. Frank McKenzie, then the top U.S. commander in the region, convened a secret meeting of top military officials from Israel and Arab countries to explore how they could coordinate against Iran’s growing missile and drone capabilities. The talks, held at Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, marked the first time that such a range of ranking Israeli and Arab officers met under U.S. military auspices to discuss countering Iran.


“The Abraham Accords made the Middle East look different…because we could do things not just under the surface but above it,” a senior Israeli official said. Joining Central Command enabled even more technical cooperation with Arab governments. “That’s what created this alliance,” the official said.


The truth is that Machiavelli rules when it comes to foreign policy, and in the case of the Middle East, the real enemy is Iran.


That's why Biden's appeasement policies toward Iran are so bizarre. Iran will never be an ally as long as the Ayatollas are in charge, but its implacable hostility has allowed the US to cobble together an alliance between former enemies and solidify US dominance in the region.


Biden's attacks on Saudi Arabia have been a disaster, and his appeasement of Iran has empowered it to become an important Russian ally and a thorn in the side of anybody who wants stability and peace. Iran is the author of most violence in the region, yet the US is funding it.


Insane.


The Biden Administration blamed Trump for Iran's attacks over the weekend, but the truth is that it was Trump's policies and diplomacy that saved Israel from a devastating defeat. Trump forged the alliances that brought Arab states and Israel together enough to create a coordinated air defense that beat back Iran's drone strike.




That Saudi Arabia is willing to admit helping Israel openly is thanks to Trump's diplomacy. That Iran attacked Israel and sponsors Hamas' war is thanks to Joe Biden.


Trump was always best on foreign policy and weakest on undermining the deep state. Let's hope he steps up his game domestically if and when he returns to power.

[Gunny]

I think Iran accomplished more than what you state. One, IF Iran hadn't made clear what they were planning on, there was more than even chance that many of the ballistic and perhaps some cruise missiles would have hit Israel. There were over 100 ballistic and more cruise missiles sent-with ballistic sent in one wave. US, Israel, and Jordan were all employing air forces to shoot down, UK and FR also assisted, though not quite clear if it was fighter jets or not.

Here is someone with real credentials, unlike my attempt at 'commonsense.'

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blog...hould-respond/

The United States and Israel should similarly take time to consider what he likely intended to accomplish with this weekend’s retaliation and what messages he was trying to send.

In general, I agree with the author. I doubt seriously it will play out that way. Both Biden and Netanyahu are more concerned about political survival than they are a war, IMO. In the meantime, Biden needs to quit funding both sides of the Israel-Hamas war.

[Gunny]

Credit where due and it is:

https://hotair.com/david-strom/2024/...cords-n3786567

Credit where it's due. I saw more or less what Trump was doing while he was doing it and agreed with it. After a good taste of Obama's ME policies, Israel not having to rely solely on a fickle US government/incompetent admin made perfect sense. Like a President funding both sides of the same war and/or an incompetent House majority that's main priority is itself