I know theres a lot of "it was the joos!" Out there but hear me out. This one lines up nicely.
Background - Russia has long propped up the Iranian regime as a counter to US/Israel in the region.
Premise - Israel had to neutralize Russias long range strike capabilities before risking a war on Iran.
Tactics - both attacks used infiltration and local drone assembly/attacks. Both totally novel and never seen before in close succession. Timng and tactics indicate the same origin.
Outcome - remaining capabilities moved to far east. Southbound ordinance would have to cross China, which is diplomatically touchy. Reduces but doesn't remove threat to Ukraine.
QED
So what you're proposing is that Israel didn't just attack Iran first, they aided in or orchestrated an attack on Russia so that they could attack Iran first. And that's somehow supposed to make Israel look better (by insinuation that it's not "the joos")?
My honest opinion thats a hard pill to swallow?
Theres a lot of bullshit noise purposely generated that blames bizarre and unrelated stuff on "tha joos" to run cover for their real operations they don't want noticed. The haters here and elsewhere are just useful idiots.
I don't see how your theory absolves Jews.
It doesn't, and isn't intended to. The opposite in fact.
I see what you mean now.
Then they're not doing a very good job of it.
Gone are the days where Israel can do whatever the fuck it wants and be able to have the media run cover for it now that everybody and their dog has a camera and an Internet connection. So too are the days of using the fear of Iran having WMDs being just around the corner when they've been repeating the same line for decades.
Forget the lunatic lefties who support Palestine over Israel because they have brown skin. What are mainstream Americans going to take away from the pictures coming out of Gaza and seeing Israel unilaterally attack Iran during peace talks? They may have the institutional support now but for how long can that continue in the face of their current optics?
The problem with this theory is that the planes only represent one part of Russia's nuclear triad. Even then, Russia still has planes capable of carrying nuclear weapons. By Ukraine's own (inflated) assessment they only knocked out 43% of their nuclear bombers. Reality is probably half that.
They're more than just nuclear though. They have been used extensively for conventional ordinance, which is more likely for defending allies.
I think they'd be much more likely to use SU 34s and the like to defend their allies rather than those old elephants.
That strike was another example of Ukraine's asymetric warfare. They can't win on the conventional battlefield so they use other tactics: bombing the Crimean bridge, drone strikes on Moscow, etc. Israel has nothing to do with it (though British intelligence probably played a part).
Dont disagree, but they pulled most planes off runway readiness, and many were moved further east out of Ukrainian strike distance.
Which probably puts them closer to Iran, ironically.
How so? Anything East of Krasnodar puts flight paths over several other countries.
Rumor is most are all the way out in Kamchatka.
I highly doubt they're in Kamchatka.
Why? Close to strike US.
Vladivostok is too antagonistic to China and North Korea imo. Nice place though, one of my favorites in Russia.
Is Russia close enough with Iran to commit the destroyed assets to Iran's defense? I don't know about that. Kiev/DC/Tel Aviv are definitely under a single entity though so you are at least half right.
It's not. Russia played both sides of the Middle East conflict until recently. Iran is a useful thorn in the West's side for Russia and China but they're not gonna go to war to protect Iran unless it's a pretext for something else.
China gets a significant amount of energy from Iran. Russia is in a defense pact with Iran. Its way more than just a thorn, its a supplier.
Yes? Krasnodar region is just across the Caspian Sea from Tehran.
But would Russia pull the trigger on it though? That's the question. Russia and Iran are close but are they that close?
Russia and Iran aren't very close.
All the UN sanctions against Iran have been approved by Russia.
They've gotten closer due to the US deep state waging an undeclared war against the both of them though.
Except they just signed a mutual defense pact. See below.
Did you read the third sentence?
Basically, the NATO blob treats everyone who doesn't obey its every whim as somehow being very close. When Russia votes in favor of sanctions against Iran, that's not being very close. I'm glad for their ignorance, because it prevents them from doing a divide and conquer.
Yes. Iran has been supplying them militarily and economically for decades.
They finalized a defensive pact just a few months ago: https://thegeopolitics.com/iran-russia-20-year-strategic-cooperation-agreement-key-takeaways/
I knew they were developing closer ties. I assume they might become even closer still thanks to being under fire from the same source. You could be right.
I'm sure all of Russia's bombers are now in Vladivostok.
The only threat to 'Ukraine' (not a real country) is its State Department-run coup government. The shithole non-country is progressively losing more and more territory (rightly so, because all of it is Russian territory). Can you believe that before the US coup'ed the government, Russia was willing to have 'Ukraine' retain sovereignty over even Crimea?
Playing tough isn't exactly working out for anyone except corrupt US deep state interests.
What are you even talking about? This is about Iran and Israel.
You said it. I'm questioning some of your assumptions. I'm pretty sure that Russian strategic bombers haven't been moved east, let alone the far east. I also very much doubt that this juvenile "we hit at the BAD RUSSIAN MAN" is going to work out for the bad guys.
Russia's long range strike capabilities were not "neutralized".
I did notice that it seemed almost exactly the same, even in how it was praised. I don't think it's so much the same people as the same suppliers.
The first shot of the Israeli/Iran conflict was at most recent, October 7th. But frankly, we can go back to the fall of the Shah of Iran.
I still find it weird that a country with the kind of intelligence and surveillance systems in place like Israel does (supposedly they can detect a bird landing on a surface from a mile away) was unable to detect a bunch of goat fuckers gliding in to a music concert like the start of a PUBG/Fortnight game.
It might have to do with the fact that the concert was relocated two days before it started, but you'd think that would disrupt the durkah-durkahs (that term predates South Park and Team America using it) more than Israeli super-spy systems.
I don't know man, I just can't square it in my head. I just know it's a cluster fuck and we need to stop being involved in it, and I'm safe in the knowledge I'll never have to go again. I also don't want others to have to for BS reasons.
I definitely accept that inability-to-square, and while it's clear that Israel as good intelligence, I do wonder if they were just arrogant. It isn't the first time Israel got cocky and paid dearly for it. Not to mention that in the west we get a lot of Israeli propaganda that will try to make the Mossad look more competent than they are.
I could easily imagine "Hamas can't do shit to us" or "Even if Hamas does shit to us, we'll beat them back in no time" being uttered by very important people at exactly the wrong time and place.
Based and scholar-pilled.
Thanks, that's kind of you. Honestly, the ME is one giant power-struggle between Syria, Egypt, Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Qatar, and Israel with different powers gaining and losing influence at different times for different reasons. It's a fascinating read, but you basically have to understand all of it to understand any of it.
Iran's Cold War with Saudi Arabia and Israel has never been properly addressed in west. We think way too simply about all these relationships with these countries.
And of course all the way back to Constantinople as well. Most don't even consider the Holy Roman Empire.
Why do you think the USG was backing a Saudi war on Yemen which has killed some hundreds of thousands of people?
For exactly that reason. The Yemeni rebels were Iranian backed, the Saudis went in to try and shut that shit down. The US had no problem selling weapons to the Saudis to kill and disrupt Iranian irregular warfare efforts.
Right, and there they made absolutely no pretense of being 'concerned' about their 'human rights' or killing of civilians.
Yes.