• bdonvr@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    All of this argues not only for Israeli strikes—which will surely come—but for vigorous American action as well. Israel may well choose to attack economic targets, and in particular the oil industry that keeps Iran’s economy afloat. Attacks on the nuclear program—buried and dispersed at different sites—would probably be more difficult. In either case, Israel will need American help.

    Israel has a large and capable air force, including nearly 40 F-35s. But it lacks a large fleet of aerial refueling planes, necessary for long-range strikes, which the United States has in plenty. At the very least, the United States can quietly help supply that deficit. The question is: Should it do more?

    The answer is yes.

    Holy fuck this is deranged bloodthirsty shit.

    • ricdeh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Why? It is finally time to cripple the Iranian regime. Iran has a horrible government that does not treat its citizens (especially women) much better than slaves. Those abhorrent people of Iran’s leadership cannot get access to nuclear weapons under any circumstances.

      • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s wild how western war-mongers will point to restrictive domestic policy as a justification for (seemingly) unlimited violent aggression against them

        Like, “look what you made me do! if you weren’t so mean to your citizens I wouldn’t have had to bomb them and destroy their homes and infrastructure!”

        As if the US hasn’t overlooked exactly those humanitarian offenses when they funded and armed religious extremists in order to install pro-western governments the world over. It’s the kind of double-speak you read about in science fiction.