You should start with that framing because that's actually a valid point that's worth considering. Although I think you only really want an incompetent at the helm when you could otherwise off him if you're expecting a long drawn out conflict. As soon as killing him becomes a way to destabilize things and you're in a position to capitalize on it then it makes sense to strike.
Iran not being in a position to capitalize on Netanyahu's demise lends credence to your stance that killing him right now is at best a wash for them.
Not sure if you're talking Netanyahu or Khamenei, but it's Napoleon's old dictum "never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake". Netanyahu has presided over a historic collapse in Israeli diplomacy and PR, without (so far) much in terms of strategic victories.
What would the benefit be of replacing Netanyahu with a Netanyahu who has better PR? Or making Khamenei into a martyr and replacing him with his son?
Whats the guarantee the next guy will be any better than niggeryahu?
without (so far) much in terms of strategic victories
Blame that on the IDF on being the biggest bitches that they lose to a bunch of homeless hamas fighters and still haven't fully taken gaza to this day.
10% of israeli's are homosexuals, an even bigger percentage are pedophiles, and all of them are chronically low T. They're not going to be effective at anything they try to do that actually involves them getting their own hands dirty.
The benefit would be everyone seeing that the emperor has no clothes i.e. most of the world - including Americans - celebrating the death of Israel's leader.
HUH?
Remember, if you kill your enemies, they win!
So said Justin Tardu.
I thought it was common sense that if you kill an incompetent leader and a more competent one takes over, you don't actually benefit.
You should start with that framing because that's actually a valid point that's worth considering. Although I think you only really want an incompetent at the helm when you could otherwise off him if you're expecting a long drawn out conflict. As soon as killing him becomes a way to destabilize things and you're in a position to capitalize on it then it makes sense to strike.
Iran not being in a position to capitalize on Netanyahu's demise lends credence to your stance that killing him right now is at best a wash for them.
I knew I heard that from somewhere...
Sadly, his replacement was worse.
Not sure if you're talking Netanyahu or Khamenei, but it's Napoleon's old dictum "never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake". Netanyahu has presided over a historic collapse in Israeli diplomacy and PR, without (so far) much in terms of strategic victories.
What would the benefit be of replacing Netanyahu with a Netanyahu who has better PR? Or making Khamenei into a martyr and replacing him with his son?
Updooted simply for getting the reference correct and not attributing it to Sun Tzu like many go with.
Whats the guarantee the next guy will be any better than niggeryahu?
Blame that on the IDF on being the biggest bitches that they lose to a bunch of homeless hamas fighters and still haven't fully taken gaza to this day.
10% of israeli's are homosexuals, an even bigger percentage are pedophiles, and all of them are chronically low T. They're not going to be effective at anything they try to do that actually involves them getting their own hands dirty.
The benefit would be everyone seeing that the emperor has no clothes i.e. most of the world - including Americans - celebrating the death of Israel's leader.