On the Iran strike, everyone says it illustrates Iran's weakness and Israel's defensive strength. I'm not so sure. Iran communicated about its plans for its strike 72 hours in advance to everyone, including America (via the Saudis). It was meant to be intercepted, a mere performative show, and despite this you STILL had 7 missiles pierce through Israel's defenses. Imagine the impact a surprise strike would have... I think Iran's message was therefore "we show that we can hit you - this time we warn you in advance so you can defend yourself, but next time we won't". The reason why America overplays the "this shows Israel's defensive strength" message is obvious. Because a) they were the main security provider so they're not going to start saying it shows Israel's vulnerability and by extension how fragile their protective cloak is and b) they don't want to be drawn into a war with Iran so presenting this as a win for Israel means they don't need to retaliate. But taking a step back we end up in a situation where a) Israel, for the first time ever, was directly hit on its territory by Iran, b) you have America telling them they have to take it on the chin and not retaliate and c) despite being warned in advance, they still couldn't shield all the attack as 7 missiles got through. Hard to see this as a display of strength and invincibility.
On the Iran strike, everyone says it illustrates Iran's weakness and Israel's defensive strength. I'm not so sure. Iran communicated about its plans for its strike 72 hours in advance to everyone, including America (via the Saudis). It was meant to be intercepted, a mere performative show, and despite this you STILL had 7 missiles pierce through Israel's defenses. Imagine the impact a surprise strike would have... I think Iran's message was therefore "we show that we can hit you - this time we warn you in advance so you can defend yourself, but next time we won't". The reason why America overplays the "this shows Israel's defensive strength" message is obvious. Because a) they were the main security provider so they're not going to start saying it shows Israel's vulnerability and by extension how fragile their protective cloak is and b) they don't want to be drawn into a war with Iran so presenting this as a win for Israel means they don't need to retaliate. But taking a step back we end up in a situation where a) Israel, for the first time ever, was directly hit on its territory by Iran, b) you have America telling them they have to take it on the chin and not retaliate and c) despite being warned in advance, they still couldn't shield all the attack as 7 missiles got through. Hard to see this as a display of strength and invincibility.
@RnaudBertrand Iran so far comes across as a rational power and that is good for the world. The West worries about Iran having nuclear capability yet is somewhat comfortable with Israel run by the current Netanyahu government having the same. I just can’t understand this.