War in the Middle East, again

[Raphael]

Kind of interesting to see something actually happen that people have been speculating about for 20 years. I hope it doesn't get out of hands.

[WeepingElf]

This is worrying, but I don't think WWIII is imminent. Trump is a coward who shies the cost of a war, and would only intervene if Israel was facing annihilation, and Putin, while being allied with Iran, would drop that ally like a hot potato if the United States attacked them, because I don't think he wants WWIII, and he has enough trouble with Ukraine, which has turned out to be a much tougher enemy than he initially thought.

[Raphael]

This is worrying, but I don't think WWIII is imminent. Trump is a coward who shies the cost of a war, and would only intervene if Israel was facing annihilation, and Putin, while being allied with Iran, would drop that ally like a hot potato if the United States attacked them, because I don't think he wants WWIII, and he has enough trouble with Ukraine, which has turned out to be a much tougher enemy than he initially thought.

Unfortunately, both of your assumptions sound fairly shaky to me.

[Torco]

I don't think we know that trump is a coward, but he's got a clear pattern of supporting us allies less than previous admins, so it would be reasonable to expect his support for israel to be tepid. likud can extend their tenure on power, in the short term at least, very securely by inciting war with Iran, but the same is not true of the regime in the US, which has nothing to gain I think by trading blows with Iran... especially with all the protests domestically, and trump's falling popularity i think? Whatever level of support you would have to Israel expected from Biden, times that by a third. I don't at all think Putin would drop Iran if the US sent troops into it.

Like, we've seen this exact scenario before, right? the soviets support a local faction, the gringos send troops (a la vietnam) or maybe the ruskies send troops and then the gringos support some local faction (a la afghanistan, the original not the sequel). I'd expect either style here, but more likely the second cause:

sure, maybe trump sends troops to iran: maybe directly to israel... he can't use kuwait or somewhere like that: that's exceptionally dangerous! you're basically turning the world's most important trade route, or the second whatever, into a watery warzone: that'd be really really harmful. but what, is he going to get permission from the iraqis to invade from irak? is he going to invade from pakistan? possibly, but they're all exceptionally difficult and costly. and either way, a military invasion of Iran would be such a huge military endeavour. not D-day, but maybe half-a-d-day ?

on the other hand, the ruskies are close by. and they have a lot of experience using PMZ and unmarked troops and clandestine ops in the middle of nowhere supporting more or less effective local militas, just like the us has (though they don't have as much money). It's not like they're winning in the ukranian front but things there are more or less stable, and have been for years, so but they're in a much better position, just logistically, to send guys to, say, help hezbollah. or the houthis. not two divisions of infantry, i don't think but say a few hundred fellas to train and assist and run radios and help set up hospitals or whatever else. that's not an invasion, but it is pressure. more pressure, for less cost, than the us can exert.

mostly, an heating up of the iran-israel war will probably mean, well, long-range shelling: iran's winning strategy is here shitty cardboard airplanes with old car engines and an arduino, so to speak, but I don't know that they'll do that. either way, I don't anticipate either getting invaded by the other, even if tons and tons of ordnance gets thrown both ways [which, tbh, is what's more and more happening]

there are two questions i think are interesting here: what will the EU say to this? will they become more or less supportive of israel? what about the arab states, which are already vocally bothered by the ongoing genocide?

[bradrn]

This is a helpful overview of some of the thinking which led up to this: https://xcancel.com/Nadav_Eyal/status/1 ... 2690369833

[jcb]

And here's an alternative view that isn't Israeli propaganda: https://jacobin.com/2025/06/israel-iran ... -netanyahu

TLDR: Netanyahu hopes to drag the US into a war with Iran by exploiting Trump, who often just agrees with whoever was the last person to talk to him.

[Raphael]

This, from Bluesky, is extremely worrying:

https://bsky.app/profile/vcdgf555.bsky. ... oxvffs5c2b

And here's an alternative view that isn't Israeli propaganda: https://jacobin.com/2025/06/israel-iran ... -netanyahu

TLDR: Netanyahu hopes to drag the US into a war with Iran by exploiting Trump, who often just agrees with whoever was the last person to talk to him.

Interestingly enough, if that's what the article says, it's not that different from the Israeli propaganda linked above, aside from some differences in spin.

[bradrn]

This, from Bluesky, is extremely worrying:

https://bsky.app/profile/vcdgf555.bsky. ... oxvffs5c2b

I don’t understand what this means…?

(Also: Nadav Eyal is a journalist. He’s not affiliated with the Israeli government.)

[Raphael]

This, from Bluesky, is extremely worrying:

https://bsky.app/profile/vcdgf555.bsky. ... oxvffs5c2b

I don’t understand what this means…?

Apparently, it means that the US military is moving tanker planes east across the Atlantic.

(Also: Nadav Eyal is a journalist. He’s not affiliated with the Israeli government.)

Yes, but he's still a product of the Israeli political mainstream, and, consequently, sees things from an Israeli political mainstream perspective.

I hope things turn out well for your relatives.

[bradrn]

This, from Bluesky, is extremely worrying:

https://bsky.app/profile/vcdgf555.bsky. ... oxvffs5c2b

I don’t understand what this means…?

Apparently, it means that the US military is moving tanker planes east across the Atlantic.

Ah.

(Also: Nadav Eyal is a journalist. He’s not affiliated with the Israeli government.)

Yes, but he's still a product of the Israeli political mainstream, and, consequently, sees things from an Israeli political mainstream perspective.

Well… I mean, I too am reasonably well aligned with the ‘Israeli political mainstream’ (insofar as such a thing exists at all; I’ve already mentioned the extreme political division in Israeli society). Does this mean that everything I say should be labelled ‘Israeli propaganda’? I hope not!

(For that matter, let me mention that Jacobin is hardly an unbiased source either…)

I hope things turn out well for your relatives.

Thank you.

[Raphael]

Well… I mean, I too am reasonably well aligned with the ‘Israeli political mainstream’ (insofar as such a thing exists at all; I’ve already mentioned the extreme political division in Israeli society). Does this mean that everything I say should be labelled ‘Israeli propaganda’? I hope not!

No. But, depending on the topic, it can be close.

(For that matter, let me mention that Jacobin is hardly an unbiased source either…)

Yes, that's why I found it interesting that, judging from jcb's summary, they and Eyal seem to be partly saying the same thing, aside from differences in spin.

[bradrn]

Well… I mean, I too am reasonably well aligned with the ‘Israeli political mainstream’ (insofar as such a thing exists at all; I’ve already mentioned the extreme political division in Israeli society). Does this mean that everything I say should be labelled ‘Israeli propaganda’? I hope not!

No. But, depending on the topic, it can be close.

What precisely is that supposed to mean…?

(For that matter, let me mention that Jacobin is hardly an unbiased source either…)

Yes, that's why I found it interesting that, judging from jcb's summary, they and Eyal seem to be partly saying the same thing, aside from differences in spin.

But are they, really? I think there’s at least one big difference, in that Marcetic treats an Iranian nuke as a ridiculous prospect to even contemplate, only existing as an excuse for Israel to launch a war, whereas Eyal makes it clear that he believes it’s real and an imminent threat. (My own position is distinctly closer to Eyal’s than it is to Marcetic’s, though it’s always possible that both of them are wrong in opposite directions.)

Similarly: Marcetic talks about how ‘peace threatened to break out in the Middle East’, whereas Eyal talks of how ‘the idea of physically destroying Israel as a functioning polity wasn’t just a slogan chanted in mosques’. You could call this a difference in spin, I guess… but to me they seem more like diametrically opposite factual claims.

[Raphael]

Well… I mean, I too am reasonably well aligned with the ‘Israeli political mainstream’ (insofar as such a thing exists at all; I’ve already mentioned the extreme political division in Israeli society). Does this mean that everything I say should be labelled ‘Israeli propaganda’? I hope not!

No. But, depending on the topic, it can be close.

What precisely is that supposed to mean…?

To be honest, I'm not at all sure that you can draw a clear line between "propaganda" and "not propaganda". What standards would you use? Are there any political statements that won't sound like "propaganda" to some people? And so, pro-Israel statements will usually sound like "propaganda" to a lot of people.

[keenir]

And here's an alternative view that isn't Israeli propaganda: https://jacobin.com/2025/06/israel-iran ... -netanyahu

TLDR: Netanyahu hopes to drag the US into a war with Iran by exploiting Trump, who often just agrees with whoever was the last person to talk to him.

...which is why its worrying(?) that this back-and-forth between Israel and Iran, happened after Trump started working with/talking with Iran to reach a new deal about their nuclear reactors/power stations/fissionables.

[bradrn]

No. But, depending on the topic, it can be close.

What precisely is that supposed to mean…?

To be honest, I'm not at all sure that you can draw a clear line between "propaganda" and "not propaganda". What standards would you use? Are there any political statements that won't sound like "propaganda" to some people? And so, pro-Israel statements will usually sound like "propaganda" to a lot of people.

This is precisely the problem, and hence why I object to calling stuff ‘propaganda’ in these sorts of discussions. Too often it’s just a way of dismissing stuff without actually engaging with it.

(Exception: I’m happy to call something ‘propaganda’ if it’s literally a NK-esque ‘Arise for the glory of the Motherland and the Dear Leader!’ style of thing. But we’re all better than that here.)

[Raphael]

And here's an alternative view that isn't Israeli propaganda: https://jacobin.com/2025/06/israel-iran ... -netanyahu

TLDR: Netanyahu hopes to drag the US into a war with Iran by exploiting Trump, who often just agrees with whoever was the last person to talk to him.

...which is why its worrying(?) that this back-and-forth between Israel and Iran, happened after Trump started working with/talking with Iran to reach a new deal about their nuclear reactors/power stations/fissionables.

The Israeli source which bradrn posted seems to claim that Trump intentionally misled Iran about wanting to go on negotiating at a time when he already knew about the coming Israeli attack, and had already approved it.

[bradrn]

And here's an alternative view that isn't Israeli propaganda: https://jacobin.com/2025/06/israel-iran ... -netanyahu

TLDR: Netanyahu hopes to drag the US into a war with Iran by exploiting Trump, who often just agrees with whoever was the last person to talk to him.

...which is why its worrying(?) that this back-and-forth between Israel and Iran, happened after Trump started working with/talking with Iran to reach a new deal about their nuclear reactors/power stations/fissionables.

The Israeli source which bradrn posted seems to claim that Trump intentionally misled Iran about wanting to go on negotiating at a time when he already knew about the coming Israeli attack, and had already approved it.

At the same time, that doesn’t necessarily make Trump a hypocrite! (A sentence I never thought I’d write.) We all know that he’s in love with the idea of ‘making deals’, and seems to believe he has almost magical powers in that direction… so probably he thought he’d get the Iranians to agree to a deal before Israel attacked. Or that the attack would push Iran towards making a deal if they hadn’t already.

[bradrn]

And here's an alternative view that isn't Israeli propaganda: https://jacobin.com/2025/06/israel-iran ... -netanyahu

TLDR: Netanyahu hopes to drag the US into a war with Iran by exploiting Trump, who often just agrees with whoever was the last person to talk to him.

...which is why its worrying(?) that this back-and-forth between Israel and Iran, happened after Trump started working with/talking with Iran to reach a new deal about their nuclear reactors/power stations/fissionables.

The Israeli source which bradrn posted seems to claim that Trump intentionally misled Iran about wanting to go on negotiating at a time when he already knew about the coming Israeli attack, and had already approved it.

At the same time, that doesn’t necessarily make Trump a hypocrite! (A sentence I never thought I’d write.) We all know that he’s in love with the idea of ‘making deals’, and seems to believe he has almost magical powers in that direction… so probably he thought he’d get the Iranians to agree to a deal before Israel attacked. Or that the attack would push Iran towards making a deal if they hadn’t already.

[rotting bones]

Interestingly enough, if that's what the article says, it's not that different from the Israeli propaganda linked above, aside from some differences in spin.

For information purposes, this is what Iranian propaganda sounds like: https://www.youtube.com/live/3ltmhMbA_y ... elieSg90XT (Trigger warning: Iranian propaganda very likely contains antisemitism. I haven't watched the full video, so I don't know for sure.)

Based on what little I've seen, some of the details do sound different. It discusses why Iran should be optimistic, whereas all the analyses on Google News are about why Israel should be optimistic.

[rotting bones]

This is precisely the problem, and hence why I object to calling stuff ‘propaganda’ in these sorts of discussions. Too often it’s just a way of dismissing stuff without actually engaging with it.

(Exception: I’m happy to call something ‘propaganda’ if it’s literally a NK-esque ‘Arise for the glory of the Motherland and the Dear Leader!’ style of thing. But we’re all better than that here.)

Well, you have accused me of spreading antisemitism and Hamas propaganda because I criticized the IDF for targeting civilians. At least you agreed that Netanyahu is basically Putin.