"Cost of Inaction Outweighs Risks": Western Press Explains Iran's Strike on Israel as Tehran's Fear of Seeing Weak

Iran struck missile strike on Israel, so as not to look weak in the eyes of its allies. This is reported by the American newspaper The New York Times. The publication's sources claim that the IRGC commanders were able to convince the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic that a missile strike is the only possible way out for Iran after Israel's attack on Hezbollah.

According to The New York Times, Tehran spent a long time considering possible options for action after Israel eliminated the leaders of the Lebanese Hezbollah movement, and eventually came to the conclusion that it was necessary to begin containing Tel Aviv as soon as possible.

The Iranians also wanted to restore the trust of members of their “axis of resistance” and reverse any perception that Iran or its regional allies were weak. Iran calculated that the costs of inaction outweighed the risks of taking action against Israel.

- says the publication.

The American newspaper claims that the head of the Iranian Foreign Ministry, Abbas Araghchi, was the most active in promoting this point of view.

Araghchi told other officials that Western countries had deceived Iran when they asked it to show restraint and allow ceasefire talks in Gaza.

– the publication quotes its Iranian sources as saying.

But Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, according to the American newspaper, was against tough measures, continuing to call for restraint. It is claimed that his main argument was the conviction that Israel deliberately wants to drag the Islamic Republic into a full-scale conflict.

However, Iranian conservatives have attacked the president and government in a fierce campaign on social media and in Iranian media, saying his calls amount to treason.

– emphasizes The New York Times.

Whatever the truth, Iran and Israel are now not even a step away, but half a step away from a direct military clash, which could have the most dire consequences for both sides. Tel Aviv has already been drawn into a conflict with Hezbollah, and is unlikely to turn its troops back now. And Tehran, having said "A", will simply be forced to say "B". Although... The East, as we know, is a delicate matter.

Comments

[Huarabey]

Well, by this logic, now it's the turn of the Israelis and Americans to shake with fear of being seen as weaklings. Or is it something else again?

[Murmur 55]

Huarabey , according to this logic, the new president is either a planted Cossack, or a person who is ready to accept all the conditions of the West for his own purposes. History knows such people. Iran seems to have declared that there will be no further attacks if Israel tones down the temperature, so the ball is in Jerusalem's court.

[Aken]

It seems to me that the Americans have pushed their man into the presidency of Iran. Like in the USSR.

[Murmur 55]

Aken , they are great experts in such matters, so the life of the supreme leader of Iran must be well guarded, as they say, conscientiously.

[Aken]

Or, on the contrary, eliminate the traitor as quickly as possible.

[Murmur 55]

Aken, it's amazing how he managed to get so high up with such views? He must have a team in the highest circles. And that's serious.

[Aken]

Very likely.
The Americans are cultivating their elite all over the world.
They say that at the last congress of the CPC, under pressure from the Chinese 6th column, connected with global financial capital, the XI barely survived.
I don't know how he bought them off. It seems that even the new commander-in-chief of the PLA is not exactly a patriot of his country.

[Murmur 55]

Aken, as sad as it is, China has long been communist only in name.

[Aken]

But this is no reason to serve an open enemy.

[hagen]

Quote: Murmur 55

It's amazing how he managed to get so high up with such views?

The Persians are real political tightrope walkers. They know how to sit on three or four chairs (or so they think). They knew about the pro-Western orientation of the new president even before the elections. But they elected him anyway.

[paul3390]

It will be the council of ayatollahs who decides anyway, not him... By the way - not a stupid construction at all, because there will always be a counterweight with control over a traitor at the very top... Like - the elected president rules, but he is not omnipotent. He will hardly be able to hand over the country like a homeless person gives away glass containers.

[Silver99]

The decision to strike Israel was made by the Ayatollah of Iran, their new Armenian president continues to dodge in the style of "Gorbachev", only the strong are respected, not chatterboxes with felt-tip pens on social networks.

[Dedok]

The decision to strike Israel was made by the Ayatollah of Iran, their new Armenian The president continues to prevaricate in the style of "Gorbachev", only the strong are respected, not chatterboxes with felt-tip pens on social networks.

Azerbaijani

[guest]

The costs of inaction outweigh the risks

As our example has shown, this is true. Iran would have sooner or later achieved an invasion of its territory by its inaction.

[BecmepH]

Quote: guest

The costs of inaction outweigh the risks

As our example has shown, this is true. Iran would have sooner or later achieved an invasion of its territory by its inaction.

They slap you on the cheeks, and you stand there and endure it. Stand there, endure it and think: "It hurts. How long will they continue to slap me?" If you don't fight back, they'll slap you to death.

[guest]

Quote: BecmepH

If you don't fight back, you'll be beaten to death.

If only someone would explain this to our supreme leader.

[Xenofont]

But I was very confused by the Iranian "...we were deceived"! This virus, grown in the Kremlin "laboratories", turns out to be highly virulent and is transmitted by airborne droplets. The powers that be should be wary of this world and maybe it will be encountered less often?

[guest]

It’s just that there is a type of people who are happy to be deceived and they get into power because voters want to see people like themselves.

[Smoked]

So, it seems like the talking heads of experts have been constantly stating that Israel is doing everything to make Iran start a direct war with them. Like Iran is cunning, the strategy of indirect fate for Suleimani and all that. Now there was a second strike, it seems like it couldn't be more direct, so where is the Armageddon man in the Middle East?

[Blackmokona]

Quote: Smoked

So, it seems like the talking heads of experts have been constantly stating that Israel is doing everything to make Iran start a direct war with them. Like Iran is cunning, the strategy of indirect fate for Suleimani and all that. Now there was a second strike, it seems like it couldn't be more direct, so where is the Armageddon man in the Middle East?

Well, what a strike. Israel claims that only one person died in the strike, and he was a Palestinian.

[Smoked]

Well, it's a blow. Or if I throw a brick across the neighbor's property at another neighbor, it won't be an attack?

[Blackmokona]

Quote: Smoked

Well, it's a blow. Or if I throw a brick across the neighbor's property at another neighbor, it won't be an attack?

There are all kinds of attacks. Some are responded to, some are turned a blind eye to.

[faridg7]

Well, how can I explain it? The world is about to be re-divided, and the process of identifying countries that will negotiate new rules of conduct and zones of influence is currently underway. Along with the great powers, Britain is trying to get into this number by hook or by crook. Britain currently has nothing to present as a weighty argument for joining this club, except for the possession of nuclear weapons, and in order for it to be an argument, someone must use them. Like, We can do that too, so we must be reckoned with. And now there are two such candidates for the use of nuclear weapons - Russia in a conflict with Ukraine and Israel in a conflict, preferably with Iran. Therefore, now the British agents in Israel are crawling out of their pants in attempts to provoke Iran, just as Russia is being provoked to hit Ukraine with NATO.

[Ross xnumx]

"Cost of Inaction Outweighs Risks": Western Press Explains Iran's Strike on Israel as Tehran's Fear of Seeing Weak

Maybe it's all banally simple. Iran doesn't want both war and shame...

[Lemon]

What kind of attack, they shot it down after all!!))) Last time, for the Jews, who didn't pitch in to shoot down Iranian missiles. And this time, she did it all herself... well, everyone saw everything!

[TermNachTer]

These analysts and experts have multiplied like impolite dogs. Their analytics are at the level of a kindergarten.

[Rabin]

Désormais, Masoud Pezeshkian est placé sous la surveillance des conservateurs.

[Oleg Barchev]

This is, as usual, the "fog of war". Everyone offers an option that is more convenient for their side. In any case, Iran, as a country with ambitions of a regional leader, had to respond and it did. Now the US political leadership must decide what to do next. If we follow the path of escalating the conflict, many countries and paramilitary groups will come out on the side of Iran, which will turn this conflict into a large-scale confrontation between the West and the countries of the region. The US does not want to bring it to such a large-scale war; it is important for them to be able to destroy their opponents one by one.