The war on Iran begins in Syria

[Serpentine]

Iran MFA already denied it.

 

[TheImmortal]

Iran MFA already denied it.

Not surprising, I wouldn’t expect Iran to acknowledge negotiating with Israel. Arab countries denied for years negotiating or talking with israel...we saw in the end what was true.

 

[Kastor]

Look up the origin of the word "Checkmate" in chess. They Israelis and Americans have check mated these clowns. The only thing I can say they better stop the brain drain of our country, it seems out best and brightest are all gone.

 

[Arminkh]

Look up the origin of the word "Checkmate" in chess. They Israelis and Americans have check mated these clowns. The only thing I can say they better stop the brain drain of our country, it seems out best and brightest are all gone.

I think Iran or pro-Iranian forces never had any presence near Israeli border. Israel was trying to create further buffer between itself and the resistance through protecting a group of rebels near Golan Heights in Syrian lands. As you may recall, each time Syrian forces tried to get those areas back from rebels, they were hit by Israeli forces. There were also news that Israel was directly supplying arms to those rebels and even took care of their wounded. With this agreement, if true, Syria can get rid of those rebels and restore its integrity with much less cost. This is inline with what Iran wants. Why do you think it is a bad deal? Iran is not there to fight with Israel. Iran is there to help Syria gain back control.

 

[Homo Sapiens]

https://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Know-Comment-Can-Israel-force-Iran-out-of-Syria-567670

• Jerusalem Post
  
• Opinion

KNOW COMMENT: CAN ISRAEL FORCE IRAN OUT OF SYRIA?
It may take a full-scale war, and it’s worth it, says General Amidror.
BY DAVID M. WEINBERG

SEPTEMBER 21, 2018 02:06

IRANIAN PRESIDENT Hassan Rouhani speaks in Tehran.. (photo credit: REUTERS)


Israel has fully joined the battle in Syria – a war against Iran in Syria – but it’s not clear it can achieve any of its goals there. It will be very hard to force the complete withdrawal of Iranian forces and their proxies from Syria.

According to Dr. Jonathan Spyer, a fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Strategic Studies (and a columnist for The Jerusalem Post) Tehran has invested somewhere between $30 billion and $100 billion (!) in propping-up the Assad regime and building its own military infrastructures in Syria over the last seven years. The Iranian investment in Syria is deep, formally based and long-standing.


Iran did so for good strategic reasons from its point of view: to create a hegemonic land bridge under Iranian sway from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean and to establish a new front against Israel. The ayatollahs aren’t going to simply reverse course, write off that investment and decamp back to Iran just because the Israel Air Force occasionally strikes a missile shipment to Hezbollah or a few anti-aircraft batteries. Iran is in this fight for the long term.

If Israel seeks to prevent the consolidation of an independent infrastructure of military and political power by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps on Syrian soil, along the lines of IRGC’s existing bases in Lebanon and Iraq, it is going to have to gear-up for more sustained conflict.

“The IDF will continue to act with full determination and strength against Iran’s attempts to station forces and advanced weapons systems in Syria,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in an especially tough speech in Dimona last month.

But this raises a series of difficult questions: Is broad-scale and perhaps direct ground warfare against the increasingly-entrenched Iranian forces in Syria coming, and is it worth the costs and risks? Is the IDF ready for such a sustained military campaign? Is the Israeli public ready to absorb the cost this will entail? And does Israel have not only the declarative backing of the US for such an effort, but also its guaranteed active involvement, including confrontation with Russia forces if necessary?

The answer to the critical first question is a resounding yes, according to Netanyahu’s former national security adviser, Maj.-Gen. (res.) Yaakov Amidror (who is now the Anne and Greg Rosshandler Senior Fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Strategic Studies).
In a major study published online this week (at jiss.org.il), titled “The Logic of Israel’s Actions to Contain Iran in Syria and Lebanon,” Amidror explains in stark terms why Israel must act forcefully against Iran even if this leads to full-scale war. The Hebrew-language version of the study caused a stir at defense headquarters in Tel Aviv and at intelligence headquarters in Glilot, and the English version is now reverberating through Western capitals.

AMIDROR VIEWS the Iranian beachhead in Syria and Iraq not only as a conventional threat to Israel (especially if Tehran bases accurate and advanced missiles closer than ever to Israel’s population centers), but even worse, as a cover for Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

Iran aims to have Hezbollah and the other Shi’ite forces it is building up in Syria (and to the extent possible, forces in Judea and Samaria and Gaza, too), acquire the capability of striking Israel so severely that no responsible Israeli leader would dare attack the nuclear weapons infrastructures being constructed in Iran, says Amidror. He calls this Iran’s attempt to create a “deterrence barrier” to protect its nuclear program; a program that has been thinly and only temporarily mothballed (if at all), Amidror is sure.

Amidror compares the Iranian strategic concept to that which pertains on the Korean peninsula. North Korea’s conventional threat against South Korea has become so overwhelming that it has left South Korean leaders paralyzed, preventing any action against the North’s non-conventional threat. Amidror says that Iran is building-up Hezbollah and its own forces in Syria because Tehran aspires to achieve a similar “Korean” state of affairs – to deter Israel from acting against Iran’s nuclear program.

“If Iran acquires the capability to attack Israel with a high degree of precision using missiles from Syria and Lebanon, Israel’s strategic situation would significantly worsen,” Amidror writes. “And given that the construction of an Iranian force in Syria is intended to deter Israel from acting to prevent Iran’s progress in the military nuclear sphere, impeding this undertaking justifies an Israeli preventive attack if the need arises or a suitable opportunity presents itself.

“Israel must prevent the creation of an Iranian deterrence barrier at any cost, even if an Israeli attack will lead to war – that is, a large-scale operation involving fierce hostilities in Syria and Lebanon, as well as massive and painful assaults on the Israeli home front.”

This leaves Israel with quite a few challenges. On the diplomatic front, Israel must secure the freedom of action it needs to operate in Syria despite the presence of Russian forces, be they independent or part of the Syrian Army’s advisory network. This may have become more difficult following the incident last week in which a Russian transport aircraft was downed, killing 15 Russian military personnel.

Simultaneously, and without undermining the first element, Israel must enlist a reluctant America to take an active part in operations alongside it, and not only as a supportive observer from the sidelines. “Without such diplomatic backing, Israel will find it difficult to use its armed forces in the region in a situation where the two superpowers have a military presence,” avers Amidror.

Iran poses one of the most complicated and dangerous challenges Israel has faced over the 70 years of its existence. But “Israel must win this struggle against Iran, one way or another,” Amidror declares.

The writer is vice president of the Jerusalem Institute for Strategic Studies, jiss.org.il, which is convening an October 21 conference on Israel’s confrontation with Iran, featuring Maj.-Gen. Amidror and Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman

 

[timmy_area51]

it can but it would rather bomb iran randomly and humiliate them too .

 

[Homo Sapiens]

Iran poses one of the most complicated and dangerous challenges Israel has faced over the 70 years of its existence. But “Israel must win this struggle against Iran, one way or another,” Amidror declares.

It is much more believable when your foe admit it. More power to Iran.

Since Egypt withdrawn from hostility since 1979, Zionists became arrogant per excellence and killing the Palestinian people with impunity and their bellicosity towards Lebanon and Syria became intense. It would be a great positive development if an alliance among Iran, Turkey, Syria and Lebanon acts as a one powerful bulwark opposing the zionists crime in the region.Zionists do not want a powerful Iran or Turkey.Or in general any Muslim country.It always suits better when Muslim countries remain weak, primitive and infighting each others. Iran is progressing very fast and taking it's rightful position in the Middle East. That's why zionists are aching for a war to prevent it.This article amply demonstrate their warmongering as well as fear of a powerful Iran.

 

[timmy_area51]

It is much more believable when your foe admit it. More power to Iran.

Since Egypt withdrawn from hostility since 1979, Zionists became arrogant per excellence and killing the Palestinian people with impunity and their bellicosity towards Lebanon and Syria became intense. It would be a great positive development if an alliance among Iran,Turkey,Syria and Lebanon acts as a one opposing the zionists crime in the region.Zionists do not want a powerful Iran or Turkey.Or in general any Muslim country.It always suits better when Muslim countries remain weak, primitive and infighting each others. Iran is progressing very fast and taking it's rightful position in the Middle East. That's why zionists are aching for a war to prevent it.This article amply demonstrate their warmongering as well as fear of a powerful Iran.

yes , iran isn't egypt and it's gonna get "humiliated" again on the international stage , whether that would lead to another revolution in iran is something we must wait and see.

 

[Arminkh]

And why does Mr Amidror, think only Israel has this sacred obligation of preventing Iran from achieving nuclear capacity?
Israel can't do anything if Iran one day decides to develop nuclear weapons. Not because of what is going on in Syria, because it does not have the reach.

 

[SALMAN F]

Without war then no

 

[TheImmortal]

it can but it would rather bomb iran randomly and humiliate them too .

IDF is facing rapid degeneration based on society changes. Gone are the days when everyone was ready to be a soldier.

Israel doesn’t have the troop count to kick Iran out of Syria. Outside of calling up their entire reserve, the dream of kicking iran out of Syria via air strikes is just that....a dream.

Bombing never eliminates your opponent, just look at Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah Houthis, ISIS, Iraqi army circa 1991, list goes on and on.

Meanwhile, US/Israel keep making a bad situation even worse. In 2010 you had a Assad that while allies with Iran, still kept them at arms length. Now, it is dominated by Iran with a growing number of mini-Hezbollahs.

First Afghanistan, then Iraq, then Syria, then Yemen.

Yeah you are really “humiliating” Iran on the world stage.

The next shoe to fall is Jordan. That banana King time is numbered.

 

[Darth Vader]

Yes with Invasion ( foot soldiers )
Otherwise no
Iran has enough supply of people so

 

[TheImmortal]

yes , iran isn't egypt and it's gonna get "humiliated" again on the international stage , whether that would lead to another revolution in iran is something we must wait and see.

More uninformative babble from an outsider with no clue to what he is talking about.

First of all there is no organized opposition for their to be a revolution. Every revolution needs a leader (Chavez, Castro, etc). So unless you consider Communists or the Shahs old and washed up son “opposition”, you don’t have the main ingredient for the revolution reciepe.

Second, IRGC and it’s affiliated companies control up to 40% of the Iranian economy. So there is literally no way you can remove IRGC from Iran (to stage a revolution).

It’s like ripping the heart out of the patient because he has cholesterol and hoping he survives.

 

[timmy_area51]

which immortal are you ? are you from the movie 300 ? or from Alexander ?

 

[Homo Sapiens]

Yes with Invasion ( foot soldiers )
Otherwise no
Iran has enough supply of people so

Ground invasion is unlikely in a short term. Israelis are much more casualty averse than any country in the region. And hezbullah and others are ready to give them a bloody punch in their faces operating in their own backyards in Lebanon and Syria if Israel choose to send their ground troops.The war will remain inconclusive just like 2006 with much more casualties on both sides.And Israelis consider anything other that total victory is defeat for themselves. When they will see total victory is not coming easily, they will mount pressure to their govt. to withdraw.It will be a strategic defeat for Israel. I do not think Israeli leadership will take that risk this early.