Neither Israel nor prticularly Palestine benefitted from triggering Oct 7th.
Apart from Israel getting the excuse to do what they’ve always wanted to do, of course.
none of that refutes that Iran has been using Gaza, Hezbollah and the Houthis like chess pawns to strengthen their position in the middle east
Are they strengthening their position? Or is this a matter of survival? They’ve been under attack by the US and Israel for the past 2 decades. Framing their actions as some surreptitious plan to conquer the middle east is no different from describing Israel’s actions against Palestine as self defense.
It’s not so much that Iran is the voice of reason, but that they’re left with no other choice than to be the counterweight to what is happening. And if they had not done so covertly, they’d be putting their very existence in danger as well.
Apart from Israel getting the excuse to do what they’ve always wanted to do, of course.
Unless you’re saying bibi paid hamas to attack them, this is true, but…an unforced error on the part of hamas.
As for the rest about Iran’s strategy:
I guess every interlocutor of Iran in the world except the US and Israel are fine with that at this point as long as things deescalate. But going back to my original point, this should not be painted as Iran being the reasonable guys in contrast, there are a lot of interests in the middle east who are wary of their activities over time.
Unless you’re saying bibi paid hamas to attack them
Bibi paying Hamas is common knowledge. I assume the attack on October 7th was really convenient, and I would assume they at the very least let it happen. I think there is also evidence to support that theory, but since I’ve only watched from the sidelines, I’m not going to try and build a case.
this should not be painted as Iran being the reasonable guys in contrast
Well, what would be reasonable for Iran to do when it is being encircled, attacked, and for years called out as the next target? I think they’ve shown quite a lot of restraint as it is.
yeah, I don’t know, I feel that there are plenty of normal strategic honorable pragmatic (e.g. JCPOA and I know some iranian emigrants) people in Iran who are strongly against winning influence through the martyrdom of others, but while they are led by a theocracy that keeps supporting islamist groups, I’m skeptical of the overall improvement of the region from their strategic approach and looming leadership.
Apart from Israel getting the excuse to do what they’ve always wanted to do, of course.
Are they strengthening their position? Or is this a matter of survival? They’ve been under attack by the US and Israel for the past 2 decades. Framing their actions as some surreptitious plan to conquer the middle east is no different from describing Israel’s actions against Palestine as self defense.
It’s not so much that Iran is the voice of reason, but that they’re left with no other choice than to be the counterweight to what is happening. And if they had not done so covertly, they’d be putting their very existence in danger as well.
Unless you’re saying bibi paid hamas to attack them, this is true, but…an unforced error on the part of hamas.
As for the rest about Iran’s strategy:
I guess every interlocutor of Iran in the world except the US and Israel are fine with that at this point as long as things deescalate. But going back to my original point, this should not be painted as Iran being the reasonable guys in contrast, there are a lot of interests in the middle east who are wary of their activities over time.
Bibi paying Hamas is common knowledge. I assume the attack on October 7th was really convenient, and I would assume they at the very least let it happen. I think there is also evidence to support that theory, but since I’ve only watched from the sidelines, I’m not going to try and build a case.
Well, what would be reasonable for Iran to do when it is being encircled, attacked, and for years called out as the next target? I think they’ve shown quite a lot of restraint as it is.
yeah, I don’t know, I feel that there are plenty of normal strategic honorable pragmatic (e.g. JCPOA and I know some iranian emigrants) people in Iran who are strongly against winning influence through the martyrdom of others, but while they are led by a theocracy that keeps supporting islamist groups, I’m skeptical of the overall improvement of the region from their strategic approach and looming leadership.