Response To Reports That Israel Is Planning A Major Retaliation

Wherein another off-the-cuff analysis...

Today Antiwar.com, a site I follow every day for foreign policy news, posted this new report:

Israel Planning Major Attack on Iran

The US is coordinating with Israel on its plans

Here is my off-the-cuff response which I posted there and reproduce here:

First, let's correct the number. The IRGC has explicitly said 200 missiles were launched. The 180 figure is from the Israelis, who can't count, otherwise they wouldn't be trying to invade Lebanon with a 1:1 or less ratio of troops compared to Hezbollah.

Second, Biden's "no strikes on Iranian nukes" is another bullshit cover story to shield him from blame when Netanyahu does it anyway, which is extremely likely. The fact that Biden was compelled to say that means Netanyahu is probably going to do it and has already told the US he will.

Third, an attack on Iranian air defenses would be considered "lame" at this stage of the conflict. They also are likely to fail since Iran now has not only S-300 from Russia and equivalent air defenses of its own design, but also Russian S-400 systems (how many is unknown, probably not a lot.) So there's a good chance Israel would lose F-35s in an attack on Iranian air defenses. Not only would that be a black eye for the US sales of the F-35, it would mean Israel loses expensive aircraft for no particularly great success.

Fourth, targeted assassinations take time to prepare and would also be considered "lame" at this stage, unless they were en mass.

So Israel has no choice but to "go big or go home." Their last retaliation in April was considered "lame" by everyone. They are going to have to do significant damage to Iranian civilian or military infrastructure to be taken seriously.

We should remember that Israel also have five Dolphin-Class submarines equipped for cruise missile launch, reportedly capable of nuclear warheads.

And then Iran will drop several hundred more missiles on Israel which Israel can't stop. However, as I've pointed out before (see below), Iran only has so many long-range missiles that can hit Israel (although they have many more drones that can with lesser impact), So Iran can't afford to get in a "tit-for-tat" exchange with Israel going forward.

This is how I put it in my previous article:

The mistake many people make is see the figure of "3,000 missiles" and assume Iran can drop 3,000 ballistic missiles on Israel. This is not the case. You have to count the estimated number of each missile which has the range which enables the missile to actually hit Israel from Iran. The shortest distance between Iran and Tel Aviv (as a likely primary target) is over 1,700km or approximately 1,000 miles. As you can see from the table above [see article] , only 7-9 Iranian ballistic missiles have the capability to hit Israel. Some of them may have longer ranges if fitted with a lighter payload than the maximum they are designed to carry. Some of them may not be fully operational or have not yet been produced in sufficient numbers to be a major threat. Since this information is classified, we can only consider rough estimates as provided by various open sources.

I'd also like to point out that the often-quoted figure of "3,000 Iranian ballistic missiles of all types" - usually quoted word-for-word - is sourced to one sentence in testimony given by General Kenneth McKenzie, Commander, United States Central Command (CENTCOM) in testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing on the Posture of United States Central Command and United States Africa Command, March 15, 2022. He did not break out that figure into any specific designation of missile systems or ranges in his testimony, nor did his prepared written statement. So the figure is essentially meaningless! What he did say was: "Some of which can reach Tel Aviv to give you an idea of range."

The time is now for Iran to go all in and green light the entire Axis of Resistance to go all in.

As I pointed out in my previous article, there’s no point in trying to “avoid a wider war” when that war is inevitable and coming to you regardless of what you do.

Brian Berletic once again covered the 2009 Brookings Institute Report which laid out the US plan to start a war with Iran in excruciating detail in an article from September 24 and a video on his Youtube channel yesterday.

Washington Sets Trap for Iran, Will Iran Take the Bait? Brian Berletic, September 24

Brian did argue in both that Iran was being smart to avoid the trap set by Israel and the neocons. What he doesn’t appear to understand is that the “trap” has also been set by Iran and the Axis of Resistance - a trap designed by the brilliant Major General Qassem Soleimani of the IRGC as I outlined in my previous article.

As I also pointed out in that article, both sides have decided that this is the final conflict between the West/Israel and the Middle East/Iran. Therefore whether either side “doesn’t want a wider war” is essentially meaningless. It essentially means that “yeah, we’d like to win without a war.” And as I like to say:

So again: the war is inevitable, because both sides do “want it” in the sense of having prepared for it and recognize that it is inevitable.

So Israel has to retaliate on Iran, and Iran back on Israel and so forth until one side or the other decides to go all in. There are no other options.