The Clear Case for Staying Out of the Brewing Iran War: America and Israeli interests part company at a certain point. The time is coming.

The American Conservative ^ | April 14, 2024 | Sumantra Maitra

[Angelino97]

The last time Persians attacked the Holy Land, they had the Jewish forces on their side. According to Antiochus, the Sasanian capture of Jerusalem resulted in the death of around 60,000 Byzantine Christians. Nearly 1,400 years later, retaliatory Iranian missiles struck Israel in a conflict where Persians and Jews are on opposing sides and the world’s still predominantly Christian hegemon is on the margins as a helpless bystander.

It is too fluid a situation to comment in detail, but it appears the Iranians wanted to keep the attack within that goldilocks threshold with ample warnings ahead. They had backchannels open with the U.S. They informed Iraq about the flight path and trajectory of their missiles. The choice of weaponry—no one intent on waging war uses subsonic drones that take hours to reach the airspace of the enemy to start an air attack followed by a few ballistic missiles, thereby letting enemy air defenses go fully active—was another signal that Iranian actions were predicated on reestablishing deterrence, and not escalation.

Iran’s official statement was measured, and targeted towards signaling the U.S. that Tehran wants to avoid a full-scale war.

"Conducted on the strength of Article 51 of the UN Charter pertaining to legitimate defense, Iran’s military action was in response to the Zionist regime’s aggression against our diplomatic premises in Damascus. The matter can be deemed concluded. However, should the Israeli regime make another mistake, Iran’s response will be considerably more severe. It is a conflict between Iran and the rogue Israeli regime, from which the U.S. MUST STAY AWAY!"

An almost Trumpian ending to a cautiously worded statement that attests three points: the conflict in Iran’s eyes is over, Iran will have to respond to further Israeli action, and the U.S. and Iran are not enemies—this is not between us.

[montag813]

The premise would make sense...IF we hadn’t already sent billions in funding to Iran. Obama and Biden funded this attack.

[faithhopecharity]

what a shame some people can’t see the forest for the trees when it comes to Moslem terrorist murder gangs and IslamoNazi dictatorships

when a dictator threatens you, take it seriously
because, surprisingly perhaps, they often do telegraph their attacks

[Angelino97]

IF we hadn’t already sent billions in funding to Iran.

We didn't fund Iran. We simply unfroze money that was already theirs.

[the_daug]

Before the UN was 1812

[PIF]

America First means bringing home the manufacture of critical products.

—
No - made in China parts are not allowed in the military and are destroyed when found.

The US does not have the industrialization needed - and that would take decades to recreate, if it were even possible, given all the environmental laws and regulations.

[SVTCobra03]

Genesis 12:3
King James Version
3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

[BB62]

“Iran just thumbed it’s nose at us,...”

it’s = it is
its = possessive form of “it”

FYI

[rmlew]

Cute set of delusions. Iran has been at war with American since 1979, not withstanding the Obama and Biden administrations giving them hundreds of billions and protecting their WMD and ballistic missile programs.

[rmlew]

Neoconservatives believe in a Clash of Civilizations? Since when?

[Angelino97]

Neoconservatives believe in a Clash of Civilizations? Since when?

Since always. I recall it being a popular Neocon talking point post 9/11, and one of the reasons given for why we must invade Iraq and Iran.

Have you forgotten all the Neocon war drums calling for war against Iran in the mid 2000s?

One Neocon eventually published a book with that title, in 2011, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.

[rmlew]

I think you don't know what a neoconservative is (or rather became) and who Samuel Huntington was and what he believed in.
Unlike first generation neoconservatives, who included the likes of Jeane Kirkpatrick, the second generation went full Wilsonian with the end of the Cold War. Francis Fukayama famously wrote The End of History and the Last Man pushing liberal democratic universalism and rejecting the idea that Liberal Democracy and freedom were tied to any specific history and civilization. This zeitgeist was behind those who wanted to democratize Iraq and Afghanistan with no understanding of the nature of those countries, their history, or cultures.

Samuel Huntington was a JFK liberal on foreign policy, but also a WASP who wanted to maintain Anglo-America, believing that our liberty was tied to our cultural heritage. You really should read his last book Who Are We? The Challenges to America's National Identity, which was published in 2005. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order was published in 1996, and grew out of his work looking at the success and issues with democratizing countries, The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century.

PS. I would suggest that you read Jim Kalb's Conservatism FAQ.