Come to think of it, it doesn't really make sense for Iran to want this sort of escalation to happen. The ideal situation from its standpoint is for Palestine to be a continuous thorn in Israel's side, but not too much. That's cheap to do and disruptive to Israel. If Israel connects the killing of hundreds of civilians to Iran, that could be justification for all out war. That would be damaging for both sides, but ultimately I think Iran would come out the worse.

For a vaguely comparable situation, look to Ukraine. NATO is willing to arm and train Ukraine, but committing NATO soldiers involves incredibly high amounts of risk. That's why NATO has held back, even though its conventional armed forces would have no trouble taking on Russia.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

One argument I've heard that sounds plausible is that Israel and Saudi Arabia were steadily improving their relations, which is really bad for Iran (which is a rival to both of them). Setting off this timebomb now could throw a giant dose of general chaos into the situation, which Iran might be betting will result in disruption of that relationship.

I'm fine with waiting for more evidence either way, of course. Snap judgments are a bad idea here.

[–] Cylusthevirus@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

"If you've got no good moves, scramble the board" is old advice.

[–] pingveno@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Or knock it over, if you're a pigeon. Iran definitely loves being the pigeon.