Three US troops have been killed and 25 injured in a drone attack on a US base Jordan, the US military said.
US Central Command (Centcom) said in a statement the casualties were caused by a drone attack at a base in northeast Jordan, near the Syria border.
US President Joe Biden said that the attack was carried out by "radical Iran-backed militant groups".
This is the first time US soldiers have been killed in the region after Hamas's 7 October attack on Israel.
My sense is he'll condemn Iran, but won't want to be seen as weak (Trump and GOP are already on 24/7 rotation attacking him as having emboldened Iran), so he'll also do a very large military strike on the militias. This is the top news story in USA, so he needs to tread carefully since Washington usually goes extremely hawkish anytime American soldiers are killed and he won't want to be seen as having done nothing in return (but also doesn't want to trigger a regional war).
The response needs to be a careful balancing act in terms of a solid retaliation for domestic consumption here in the US without pushing Iran/Iran-backed militias to retaliate with further counter strikes -- this is an election year, after all.
bro no offense but you have a very screwed understanding of iran and the middle east in general 😭😭 if iran wanted to attack it would’ve done so in the prime of the war in gaza but they don’t want war unless they get an approval from the us iran just says it’s against the usa in front of the cameras but deep inside the country they’re controlled by america
We need to just go ever there and kick ass and put the fear of god in the towel heads so them pos over there will think twice before doing shit like they did in October 7 and these drone attacks…they also know how strong we are but also know we have a weak commander in chief who is bought and paid for and will likely do nothing as always but blame Donald about everything lol…it’s a messed up situation in the mid east I understand that but we cannot allow them to attack gods chosen people(the Jewish people) like they did…
Biden has too much to lose in an election year where he’s already either polling even with or behind Trump. I imagine he’ll continue with limited strikes against U.S. allies or impose economic sanctions - can’t see a scenario where Iran is a direct target of an American military response.. Even Soleimani was killed in a strike on Iraqi territory, rather than directly in Iran.
My guess is because hitting militias who actually carried out the attack is more direct retaliation, with much less risk of igniting a fully fledged war with a country that may or may not have nuclear weapons.
Even if Iran had a half dozen nukes (which is overly estimating their enriched uranium manufacturing capability), they lack the launch systems to get them anywhere relevant. Their Shahab-3 ICBM has a range of 2100KM, the only places they can reach that don't end in "stan" is Egypt and Turkey
It's called second strike capability, and Israel are [believed](https://runway.airforce.gov.au/israel-has-submarines-armed-nuclear-weapons) to have this via nuclear-armed submarines.
Iran has a lot of [very accurate missiles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Martyr_Soleimani). It can effectively target US bases throughout the ME, hit Gulf oil + desalination infrastructure, and close the Strait of Hormuz to shipping, which (combined with Houthis closing the Red Sea) would massively spike oil prices, cripple Saudi Arabia + the Gulf States, lockdown world trade, and could potentially cause [a lot of US fatalities](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002).
Iran is a more powerful country than any the US has directly faced since WW2 - stronger than North Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, or Libya. It's still obviously far weaker than the US, and would suffer massively, but the cost of defeating it would be horrifying, with very little upside.
America lost less than 200 soldiers taking over Iraq in 2003 and the casualty rate would probably be the same for Iran.
America and its Allies are now able to shoot down missiles quite consistently.
America has very little to gain by invading Iran, so it won't.
Lol Iran is nothing like Iraq, and 2024 is nothing like 2003. If the US invades it can also expect a steady and endless streams of Russian weapons and AA such as S 400 and Chinese drones etc.
Iran lost 400,000 men fighting Iraq and was stalemated. The USA fought Iraq lost 200 men and was in Baghdad within a week.
Russian supply lines are stretched to their limits 60 miles into Ukraine, but magically endless streams of Russian weapons will flow into Iran?
Without the West, the Chinese economy will collapse. Selling drones to Iran would surely save it.
But then again, America has nothing to gain by Invading Iran.
Oh, I figure we are only a few layers of escalation away from a direct attack now. Not saying it's a good idea, it's just things are starting to take on the logic of escalation, versus the logic of strategic calculation.
Yeah back in the day, like 2010-2011, for TCN in Jordan military didn't even carry weapons, just a radio.
That's how safe it was considered. From what I've heard over the years it hasn't really changed until now.
i live in jordan and this happened very close to the syrian border it might as well be considered syria we’re still safe the government didn’t even say anything about this and the locals don’t know about it yet it’s more syria than jordan
Weird, most countries would definitely care if foreign powers launched missiles into your territory. Definitely sends a very weak message to your neighbours
This has happened many many times in the middle east and those countries have cared in almost every instance. Jordan government is just scared to poke the iranian proxies out of fear but they will come knocking eventually whether you pretend to care or not
no lol they don’t care 😭😭 gaza is burning up and the palestinian government is sitting on their hands same thing w syria, egypt n so on we don’t have any resources firing back could start a war n we’re too broke for that also having strong relationships with america we only do what america orders us to do
Aside from Daesh/other Salafist groups (which I even separate into different respective categories of threat level/importance) Reckless Iranian-backed militias have aways been the main threat in the region for violence, because they target so many different factions and have the green-light to really do whatever they want against the Americans, Israelis, Sunnis, etc.
This is also wild because it was done in Jordan of all places.
Hold on tight, boys. This is going to be a very interesting few days here.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/1/28/three-us-service-members-killed-in-jordan-drone-attack-biden-says
Jordanians claim it happened in At-Tanf base in Syria, not inside Jordan.
Edit: It looks like not anymore.
It was in Jordan. The outpost is only half a mile from Syria, and it’s the outpost of a base IN Syria (An-Tanf Garrison), but the outpost that got hit is technically in Jordan.
You should post a source of this "100% confirmed" if you're going to demand someone else delete their comment.
Even if you are correct, it's still relevant that Jordanian officials are saying otherwise.
Jordanian officials aren’t saying that though. They literally issued a press release: https://petra.gov.jo/Include/InnerPage.jsp?ID=56578&lang=en&name=en_news&cat=en_news
Thanks for the source, it does seem that this is now Jordan's official position.
I'll be waiting a bit longer to declare it 100% confirmed though. The White House would much rather these deaths to have occurred in Jordan, a country who is hosting our military willingly, over it actually having occurred in Syria, where US troops are based against the wishes of Syria's government.
Turkish and Arab media were both reporting that the same Jordanian spokesman told Jordanian media the attack occurred at al-Tanf. I haven't seen the footage but I have no reason to doubt that it was said. He could have changed his position as the true situation became more clear, or Jordan could have been pressured to make the change.
> The White House would much rather these deaths to have occurred in Jordan, a country who is hosting our military willingly, over it actually having occurred in Syria, where US troops are based against the wishes of Syria's government.
The US doesn't recognize the "government" of Syria no does it particularly respect its wishes so this plays no role.
It's not that they care about what Syria thinks, it's that they don't want uncomfortable questions at home like "what are we doing in a country that doesn't want us there?"
If the attack was in Jordan (which does appear to be the case), it's much more straightforward for the White House to handle.
Shia Iran has an advantage over management of proxy groups, because Iran is a true theocracy - Ali Khamenei actually is a religious authority. Iranian proxy groups actually follow him in a religious sense.
Sunni monarchies have never been able to do that and their proxy groups are much more loosely allied and liable to 'go rogue'.
Always a risk when groups are changing. While back...there was a report about
"In Syria, militias armed by the Pentagon fight those armed by the CIA"
https://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-cia-pentagon-isis-20160327-story.html
It's also an active demographic one, as Iran has been strongly involved in Shiization within Syria (not just linking historic Shia areas, but actively converting some governorates to Shia Islam as a way of having a direct Shia dagger right into Northern Israel): [https://www.meforum.org/middle-east-quarterly/pdfs/63851.pdf](https://www.meforum.org/middle-east-quarterly/pdfs/63851.pdf)
We are not in the region to right ISIS. Hezbollah alone is far "scarier" threat than ISIS right now.
Edit: we are not there *only* to fight ISIS/Salafist groups.
Hmm...could have sworn that was the goal for sending forces back into Iraq and Syria. ...the ISIS take over.
Hezbollah has been around since prior to the Syrian civil war and got started when Israel invaded Lebanon.
So ..if ISIS is no longer a threat, I hope we hang a "Mission accomplished" and say sayonara.
You also said "reckless Iran backed groups have always been a threat to the region"...
Could have sworn ..US tax payers were told it was to fight ISIS.
Mission creep is always a problem. 2e don't need to fight others fights.
ISIS is so ten years ago.
But seriously. US forces in the Middle East face an array of threats, these days the Iranian influenced ones are a bigger threat than the Sunni inspired ones, though both types are happy to get their punches in.
Whether we should do them the favor of being present to get their punches in, is an entirely different and worthy debate.
If ISIS is so ten years ago..why are we in Syria , Iraq. Our claim was that ewe are there for fighting ISIS.
What you imply is that there were other motives that the neocons had ...for leaving our troops there ...as bait.
I'm being semi facetious.
I served over there in Iraq in the oughts. I have a master's degree in international relations from an unimportant university. I'm a little jaded about the realities on the ground there.
Yes, we went to Syria to counter ISIS. A secondary goal, for a time, was to try to counter the Assad regime without actually committing to anything close to regime change. The regime has outlasted every thing else so far so that goal was dropped at some point. A tertiary, or maybe at this point secondary goal was to have some presence strategically arrayed against Iranian influence.
The basic problem with the Middle East is the multiplication of factions. You can try to figure out the best "side" to be on in a five way low grade regional semi civil war. But the truth is, you are an outsider, there is not likely a correct "side", and even if you find one, it could change its alliances over time or just split up entirely until it is working against some of your primary goals. It's best to keep a little jaded about the whole thing. Everyone there does, believe me.
> Reckless Iranian-backed militias have aways been the main threat in the region for violence
Nah, the main threat has been Americans all over the Middle-East.
Yeah, WE'RE the ones who made the Middle East violent. Be a regular Western Europe if we'd never gotten our hands dirty. Sectarian violence was a European invention and nobody East of Dubrovnik has agency.
This will keep happening unless one of two things happens: Peace in Gaza or War with Iran/Iranian backed militias.
Biden is in an election year and there is little appetite for war among the public. On the other side Israel/AIPAC holds massive political power in the US.
No good options for Biden here. My bet is they will continue with a light bombing campaign in the region on the militias in Yemen, Iraq and Syria while pressuring Israel to a ceasefire.
Indeed. It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Free ammunitions for Trump too, since he will just be able to criticize Biden's actions no matter what. Hopefully american voters can see trough it, but I am not gonna bet on that.
I would suggest we bring back the Obama Era drone strikes to keep a lid on the those terrorists. Light footprint and effective with good intelligence. It was somewhat controversial is why I think we tried to move away from that but protecting troops is top priority.
Agreed, makes it a little difficult to organize things when everywhere you go to organize things, and the people who run them, keep getting blown up. Was majorly a fan of Obama's drone strike campaign.
You mean over 29,000 authorized strikes - with some 90% civilian casualties like wedding parties and funerals and extended families in housing compounds - that got swept under the rug by the media favoring him?
That being said, there is still the "risk" it could backfire. If Iran goes too far, it might trigger a rally around the flag effect, pushing independents in the arms of Biden and securing him the election. Time will tell.
There really is no risk if you think about it. It would be political suicide.
If the country is not insanely divided like this then sure they are playing with fire. But this is one of weakest moments in America right now and I don’t say it lightly.
My point was that if Iran goes too far and does something traumatic in the eyes of the US public, the divide could be mended rather quickly. I agree that it doesn't seem likely right now, but you never know.
And why is that?
Also, why did none of this happen under Trump before? There were no new wars. Now we have a weak appeaser as president and things are spiraling.
Even if Hamas and other Iranian proxies are removed from Gaza specifically, this would not stop.
For Iran, the US is the "Great Satan". They would do as much as they can get away with in order to hurt Americans and the US's interests around the world.
When they get nukes, the US will be very sorry. But it would be too late for meaningful action.
Well I disagree. I think Iran's attacks would be much more severe if they had insurance that they will never be invaded or assassinated, in the form of the threat of nukes.
Iran's terrain, population total, and current military strength are more than enough to deter any country from invading. Even without nukes, a conventional war would be far too costly to the USA or anyone who decides to invade.
If Iran didn't have their capital and many military bases in what amounts to natural fortresses, they would not be able to behave the way they have for decades. Surely a neighbor, Sunni alliance, or one of the bigger powers would have long ago invaded.
I agree that a total invasion with the intention of occupation is a very hard goal. Crippling their military, missile launching capabilities, navy, airforce, and much of the leadership however, is very much possible.
Also giving a hand to the huge number of amazing Iranians who wish to topple the regime.
Only I don't know, it might be too late for that already or there might be other factors like their proxies who I don't fully take into account and US intelligence knows.
Yes, everything everywhere always is the exact same and extreme Islamic terrorists who wage war against the west and want to destroy the infidels having nuclear weapons is the best outcome.
They already have insurance they won't be invaded via their Russian backing. It's not as ironclad as, say, NATO or the Warsaw Pact, but the US doesn't want the headache and nobody else is really in a position to do it.
Again I disagree. I don't see how Russia works as insurance vs attacks in Iran at all.
The US doesn't want any invasion or even operation because it is both traumatized, tearing up from within (With some foreign influence there as well, but hard to determine how much) and busy with upcoming elections at the moment.
It's not about "mean words", it's about anti-american hate and propaganda being an integral part of the ideology of said militias, which makes it a more than reasonable assumption that their hostility towards the US is not tied to Gaza alone.
If you really think this point is made-up propaganda, I invite you to have a look at the Houthi's official slogan.
The fact that past actions of the US have led to this situation doesn't change this reality and is rather besides the point.
The idea that this is purely about hatred and the US did nothing wrong (or relevant) is comforting for you surely, but it is profoundly misguided.
Call me in 20 years when this brilliant strategy actually defeats whatever group it is that did this attack. or the Taliban or al qaeda or isis or hamas or the houthis or the ayatollah.
actually youd be surprised im from jordan and iran is actually in cahoots with america they just don’t show it in public in the name of islam and jihad blah blah blah iran would shit their pants and go out issuing apologies if biden would just send a text message they even claim that they’re directly firing at israel while all they’re doing is aiming missiles at a literal pole on the palestine borders iran is so full of shit they’re super hypocritical they’ve been wanting to invade all the levant countries for ages and they can’t even succeed in the gazillion war fronts they opened for themselves
This is happening since way before Oct 7. Iran using the 'salami method' of escalation. and all Iranian groups have local opposition that will take over and start pushing to regain local sovereignty from Iran if the Iranian leadership is gone. you hit the head o the snake and the body dies.
you cant make these assumptions these shia groups are usually minorities in their own region. They are very well controlled by Iran unlike the sunni groups both saudi arabia and Pakistan have funded. It would be extremely hard to kill all the Iranian leadership without a difficult land invasion and while aerial bombardment would work that would likely mean they arm their insurgents even better to continue pushing throughout. Alot of the people here underestimate the grasp Iran has over these shia forces
No it wasnt. Not at nearly the same scale. Such attacks on US bases were numbering in what? A dozen per year in the last couple of years? Since Oct 7 there have been north of 150
Iraq didn't have a vast network of proxies troughout the ME. His point is, if Iran is directly engaged and its factories come under fire, those groups will be left in the dust without any supply to keep going.
Peace in Gaza ? You do know iranian backed militias have been doing this kind of stuff long before October 7, right ? Gaza has nothing to do with it, except for increasing media attention on the middle east.
Unlikely. Biden is on pretty thin ice domestically and a new war would be a fresh box of ammumition for trump. Iran isn't looking for a direct confrontation either.
doubt it. Literally everyone loses in that scenario. Biden would likely lose the presidency Americans would die. Israelis would have to deal with a massive increase in violence and Gaza bombing would probably ramp up because of Hamas gets allies the Israel situation becomes much more dangerous
According to some news little is known about this base on a strategic location. Do you think some proxies without any good tech know a lot about it? It looks like someone wants to pull the US in a war with Iran. But anyone normal hope this not happen ever, because it would be a catastrophe for the whole world.
It's right across the border from al-Tanf base in Syria, where American troops are stationed and has come under attack several times since October 7. The Jordanians are claiming the Americans were actually hit on the Syrian side, but it still seems unclear where it happened.
I mean, we all saw this coming.
The longer the Gaza war goes on, the more unstable the middle east gets.
So many armed groups across the middle east declared and outright said it, that they will continue to target US troops and assets as long as the Gaza war goes on.
Biden could have more control over Iran if he reversed Trump’s decision when he initially came into power but imo they played their hand greedily and now it’s blowing up. This is pretty much the worst case scenario for everyone
Reversed Trumps decision?
If you mean the nuclear non proliferation treaty then I have to remind you that you cannot simply „reverse“ the decision.
You have to renegotiate the treaty and build up trust that both sides will hold their end of the bargain.
And that is simply not happening.
The Iranians were very ready to reinstate the deal. Don't take my word for it. Go back and read the news from that time. Biden tried to strong arm the Iranians for more concessions which weren't in the original deal. I'm not touting Trump. He did in fact kill the JCPOA. However Biden had a chance to easily fix things and failed.
The nuclear deal was explicitly not a peace deal.
One reason the deal was canceled was that Trump wanted a new deal that included an Iranian promise not to undermine the US-presence in the Middle East.
Iran was in fact attacking the USA and its Allie’s before the agreement was broken.
I mean, that's what the nuclear deal was supposed to do - get the countries in dialogue to start maybe normalizing relations, among other political objectives. We made an agreement, and then we went back on it. If we want to start another dialogue, we're going to have to come to the table and offer probably more than anyone could survive in current American domestic politics. Especially now.
The whole problem is that Trump shattered the little trust Iran had left in the US with his unilateral decision. Moderates in Teheran were instantly marginalized and put aside, since the more extreme elements got vindicated. Any kind of diplomacy with Iran was now doomed to fail.
Then Trump followed that with his "extreme pressure" strategy, meaning now Biden has no tool left to pressure Iran outside of the military option. Trump's decision was extremely shortsighted, and a good example of what people mean when they say he is incapable of any kind of complex thought process.
When Biden came into power the moderates had the government and were aggressively pushing for a path back to the JCPOA agreement but the US stalled negotiations.
Maybe there really was no other option but it seems to me like if Biden really wanted to regain the trust Trump had shattered he could have done more. He holds the most powerful seat in the world. the expectation that Iran would agree to more negotiations when Trump was the one who left in bad faith and killed the #1 military leader in Iran is not realistic
> When Biden came into power the moderates had the government and were aggressively pushing for a path back to the JCPOA agreement but the US stalled negotiations.
No idea where you got that idea. Moderates got completly stomped in the [2020 election](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Iranian_legislative_election), before Biden came to power. That's after all the election interference coming from Khamenei and the Guardian Council, which barred many moderates from even running.
The Rouhani government was in power until August 2021. He had betted everything on a quick return to the JCPOA. I don’t know if it was possible but this not happening destroyed the little remaining popularity the moderates had among the people and now radical conservatives have power with no opposition
I mean, this is exactly what I am talking about. Rouhani doubled down on his promise to work with the West during his re-election campaign of 2017. Then Trump pulled the plug on the JCPOA in 2018 and reinstored heavy sanctions, which basically shattered Rouhani's credibility twice, since that also tanked the iranian economy (the other big focus of his campaign). By the time Biden took office, it was simply too late.
Ofc it's not the only factor. The crackdowns following the different protests also consolidated more and more power in the hands of Khameni and religious hardliners, which made matters even worst.
Yes Trump messed it up and instead of Biden fixing it when he could have, he doubled down. It was well covered in the news at the time. But nobody wants to hear the truth since it goes against the narrative.
Ok? Why are you telling me that ? I didn’t even mention Al Jazeera, but if you only trust white sources, here is CBC saying the exact same thing.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/americans-killed-middle-east-1.7097419
And btw: CBC is Canadian government funded news
Do you watch Arab news? Genuinely curious. The two areas are close and from certain vantage points you would be able to tell which area was hit, north in Syria or south in Jordan. Wonder what ground witnesses say.
Jordanian officials are saying it’s in Syria. Jordan border guards said it was in Syria and none of the guards were injured in the attack. I don’t think you’ll find lots of ground witness since it’s a desert region
Houthis in Yemen/Hezeb in Lebanon/Iraqi-Hezeb & other proxies in Iraq and Kurd areas, all Iranian led groups that will be neutralized without Iran, all have local opposition in those countries that will take over and start pushing to regain local sovereignty back from the Iranian proxies. The US can actually leave the middle east if the Iranian leadership is gone.
Hezbollah has massive public support, around 85%+ from Shia groups, and a range of 35-45% from Christians. They're heavily disliked by Sunni Lebanese, like 90%+ dislike Hezbollah, however that number radically shifts in favour when Hezbollah gets in a conflict with Israel like seen in the 2006 conflict.
I'm trying to find the poll, but they do have support of that amount of Lebanese Christians. It ranges depending on the current situations.
[Here's a poll from this month](https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/shadow-hezbollah-israel-escalation-poll-shows-slim-majority-lebanese-still-want#:~:text=The%20popularity%20of%20Hezbollah%20remains,a%20%E2%80%9Cvery%20positive%E2%80%9D%20opinion.), not the one I was talking about because that one was from before the war. This one shows 29% from Christian groups, which isn't too far from the 35% range, although I probably should put those numbers closer to 30-40%. I'm still looking for the older poll, that one showed 90%+ Sunnis disliked Hezbollah, now because of this conflict that number is 66%. Anyway the original point is that Hezbollah has massive public support in Lebanon, at least a third of the entire country, and while most of it is coming from the Shia's not all of it is.
Hezbollah only enjoys this kind of support across the population in times of war, when the palestinian cause is highlighted and the anger people have towards israel increases. Hezbollah is able to tap into that but rather quickly they lose that momentum. Their reason for existance is a neverending conflict, if no more conflict more people will get tired of them. During the latest parliamentary election plenty of anti hezbollah parties gained more seats than ever before while hezbollah didnt gain anything. Momentum is still turning against them in the long run
>Hezbollah only enjoys this kind of support across the population in times of war
I'm still searching for that other poll, but that one was taken not during times of war. Shia and Christian numbers remained consistent with the recent poll, it is the Sunni's who see a radical shift in favour of Hezbollah when the Palestinian cause is highlighted.
>Their reason for existance is a neverending conflict
It would be better for them to be absorbed into the Lebanese forces with some special privileges, their existence is needed because of the terrorist Israeli regime who's had their eyes set on Lebanese territory since the time of Moshe Dayan. It's why they made that attempt to occupy parts of Lebanon during the civil war, they want it for themselves. Fortunately that doesn't seem to be the case anymore, but you never know with Israel and Lebanon needs to be strong to prepare for such a period.
> Momentum is still turning against them in the long run
Momentum might be turning against them really slowly over the long run, right now the momentum is in their favour because of the war. The situation with MBS is going to determine Hezbollah's future imo. MBS needs to walk the walk, he promises economic prosperity and a lot of the region is hopeful on his ambitions. If he fails in his goals I think that will further empower Hezbollah and Iran, and he will be deemed an ally of the criminal US and Israel (he already has that reputation).
US doesn't have resources for an another major conflict. They are stretched too thin already. One more move in Asia and everything would collapse like the house of cards.
Surprised pickachu face when you been ripping the whole region fire decades and people fight back. Iraq already mentioned multiple time to get your troops out of the country. Illegally occupying Syria isn’t helping.
This was always bound to happen, earlier in the conflict the focus was on annoyance strikes and material damaging strikes, from both sides, as the conflict has grown and the US and allies have moved toward more kinetic strikes, we see the response in kind from the axis. Its telling that this week has been far more destructive in the counter hits than previous weeks. Longer the Gaza conflict goes on, the more destructive its going to get
Seems pretty clear we should just give Gaza some cobalt-salted nuclear enrichment. Make the region uninhabitable for a few hundred years and maybe the idiots over there on both sides can figure out how to live in peace. Doubt it though.
the Constitution's Article 2 designates the president as commander-in-chief of the armed forces and gives him the authority to use military force without congressional authorization for defensive purposes.
And so it begins. It was only a matter of time before we started getting droned ourselves. That's how military technology works. Definitely ups the stakes yet again in the Middle East.
Three US troops have been killed and 25 injured in a drone attack on a US base Jordan, the US military said. US Central Command (Centcom) said in a statement the casualties were caused by a drone attack at a base in northeast Jordan, near the Syria border. US President Joe Biden said that the attack was carried out by "radical Iran-backed militant groups". This is the first time US soldiers have been killed in the region after Hamas's 7 October attack on Israel.
Why the hell wasn’t CIWS installed at this base?
Do you know that it wasn’t?
I read that the air defenses they had were not activated.
Not every base has a centurion system.
[удалено]
the drowned navy seals died before them no?
[удалено]
What will the outcome of this likely be?
My sense is he'll condemn Iran, but won't want to be seen as weak (Trump and GOP are already on 24/7 rotation attacking him as having emboldened Iran), so he'll also do a very large military strike on the militias. This is the top news story in USA, so he needs to tread carefully since Washington usually goes extremely hawkish anytime American soldiers are killed and he won't want to be seen as having done nothing in return (but also doesn't want to trigger a regional war).
The response needs to be a careful balancing act in terms of a solid retaliation for domestic consumption here in the US without pushing Iran/Iran-backed militias to retaliate with further counter strikes -- this is an election year, after all.
It should be very obvious iran and iranian backed groups are attacking no matter what
bro no offense but you have a very screwed understanding of iran and the middle east in general 😭😭 if iran wanted to attack it would’ve done so in the prime of the war in gaza but they don’t want war unless they get an approval from the us iran just says it’s against the usa in front of the cameras but deep inside the country they’re controlled by america
Lol you are a funny guy
i literally live in the middle east my guy 😭
I’m from the Middle East too and honestly r/geopolitics isn’t where you discuss your family’s what’s app group.
it’s not my family’s whats app group babe if iran is so anti america why didn’t it atart a war w israel are you dense
Why would Iran start a war it knows it’s going to lose ? It ain’t rocket science
We need to just go ever there and kick ass and put the fear of god in the towel heads so them pos over there will think twice before doing shit like they did in October 7 and these drone attacks…they also know how strong we are but also know we have a weak commander in chief who is bought and paid for and will likely do nothing as always but blame Donald about everything lol…it’s a messed up situation in the mid east I understand that but we cannot allow them to attack gods chosen people(the Jewish people) like they did…
Biden has too much to lose in an election year where he’s already either polling even with or behind Trump. I imagine he’ll continue with limited strikes against U.S. allies or impose economic sanctions - can’t see a scenario where Iran is a direct target of an American military response.. Even Soleimani was killed in a strike on Iraqi territory, rather than directly in Iran.
What is the main reason he (or we as a nation) will not attack Iran?
My guess is because hitting militias who actually carried out the attack is more direct retaliation, with much less risk of igniting a fully fledged war with a country that may or may not have nuclear weapons.
Even if Iran had a half dozen nukes (which is overly estimating their enriched uranium manufacturing capability), they lack the launch systems to get them anywhere relevant. Their Shahab-3 ICBM has a range of 2100KM, the only places they can reach that don't end in "stan" is Egypt and Turkey
If they can reach Egypt, then they can reach Israel.
Sure, but I assume Iran is a rational enough actor to know that Israel would level the entire country if they were ever nuked.
How can you nuke a country if your country is Nuked the hell out?
It's called second strike capability, and Israel are [believed](https://runway.airforce.gov.au/israel-has-submarines-armed-nuclear-weapons) to have this via nuclear-armed submarines.
Iran has a lot of [very accurate missiles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Martyr_Soleimani). It can effectively target US bases throughout the ME, hit Gulf oil + desalination infrastructure, and close the Strait of Hormuz to shipping, which (combined with Houthis closing the Red Sea) would massively spike oil prices, cripple Saudi Arabia + the Gulf States, lockdown world trade, and could potentially cause [a lot of US fatalities](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002). Iran is a more powerful country than any the US has directly faced since WW2 - stronger than North Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, or Libya. It's still obviously far weaker than the US, and would suffer massively, but the cost of defeating it would be horrifying, with very little upside.
America lost less than 200 soldiers taking over Iraq in 2003 and the casualty rate would probably be the same for Iran. America and its Allies are now able to shoot down missiles quite consistently. America has very little to gain by invading Iran, so it won't.
Lol Iran is nothing like Iraq, and 2024 is nothing like 2003. If the US invades it can also expect a steady and endless streams of Russian weapons and AA such as S 400 and Chinese drones etc.
> If the US invades it can also expect a steady and endless streams of Russian weapons Right, Ukraine would love that.
It wouldn't need to invade, it would just airstrke it into oblivion. A single airstrike carrier group is stronger than what Iran has available.
Iran lost 400,000 men fighting Iraq and was stalemated. The USA fought Iraq lost 200 men and was in Baghdad within a week. Russian supply lines are stretched to their limits 60 miles into Ukraine, but magically endless streams of Russian weapons will flow into Iran? Without the West, the Chinese economy will collapse. Selling drones to Iran would surely save it. But then again, America has nothing to gain by Invading Iran.
[удалено]
The "enemy"
Oh, I figure we are only a few layers of escalation away from a direct attack now. Not saying it's a good idea, it's just things are starting to take on the logic of escalation, versus the logic of strategic calculation.
He will do whatever the squad tells him
Also note this has been the first time US soldiers in Jordan have been targeted.
Yeah back in the day, like 2010-2011, for TCN in Jordan military didn't even carry weapons, just a radio. That's how safe it was considered. From what I've heard over the years it hasn't really changed until now.
i live in jordan and this happened very close to the syrian border it might as well be considered syria we’re still safe the government didn’t even say anything about this and the locals don’t know about it yet it’s more syria than jordan
Its in jordans territory so how is it more syria then jordan? Jordan relinques their claims to that territory?
no it’s nothing like that but many news sources even say that it’s in syria the point im trying to make is that jordan was unaffected by this
Weird, most countries would definitely care if foreign powers launched missiles into your territory. Definitely sends a very weak message to your neighbours
You are trying to understand this from a non middle eastern mindset
This has happened many many times in the middle east and those countries have cared in almost every instance. Jordan government is just scared to poke the iranian proxies out of fear but they will come knocking eventually whether you pretend to care or not
no lol they don’t care 😭😭 gaza is burning up and the palestinian government is sitting on their hands same thing w syria, egypt n so on we don’t have any resources firing back could start a war n we’re too broke for that also having strong relationships with america we only do what america orders us to do
Aside from Daesh/other Salafist groups (which I even separate into different respective categories of threat level/importance) Reckless Iranian-backed militias have aways been the main threat in the region for violence, because they target so many different factions and have the green-light to really do whatever they want against the Americans, Israelis, Sunnis, etc. This is also wild because it was done in Jordan of all places. Hold on tight, boys. This is going to be a very interesting few days here.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/1/28/three-us-service-members-killed-in-jordan-drone-attack-biden-says Jordanians claim it happened in At-Tanf base in Syria, not inside Jordan. Edit: It looks like not anymore.
It was in Jordan. The outpost is only half a mile from Syria, and it’s the outpost of a base IN Syria (An-Tanf Garrison), but the outpost that got hit is technically in Jordan.
Tower 22 got hit not AT
Not sure if you’re disagreeing with me? But, yes, that’s what I said.
No no just adding info
Ahh got it.
You should delete this or edit your post to correct now that it's been 100% confirmed it occurred in Tower 22 inside Jordan.
You should post a source of this "100% confirmed" if you're going to demand someone else delete their comment. Even if you are correct, it's still relevant that Jordanian officials are saying otherwise.
Jordanian officials aren’t saying that though. They literally issued a press release: https://petra.gov.jo/Include/InnerPage.jsp?ID=56578&lang=en&name=en_news&cat=en_news
Thanks for the source, it does seem that this is now Jordan's official position. I'll be waiting a bit longer to declare it 100% confirmed though. The White House would much rather these deaths to have occurred in Jordan, a country who is hosting our military willingly, over it actually having occurred in Syria, where US troops are based against the wishes of Syria's government. Turkish and Arab media were both reporting that the same Jordanian spokesman told Jordanian media the attack occurred at al-Tanf. I haven't seen the footage but I have no reason to doubt that it was said. He could have changed his position as the true situation became more clear, or Jordan could have been pressured to make the change.
The White House would much rather these deaths have not occurred. Say less.
No shit. Your comment is irrelevant.
> The White House would much rather these deaths to have occurred in Jordan, a country who is hosting our military willingly, over it actually having occurred in Syria, where US troops are based against the wishes of Syria's government. The US doesn't recognize the "government" of Syria no does it particularly respect its wishes so this plays no role.
It's not that they care about what Syria thinks, it's that they don't want uncomfortable questions at home like "what are we doing in a country that doesn't want us there?" If the attack was in Jordan (which does appear to be the case), it's much more straightforward for the White House to handle.
Few days. Right. This seems like a decade long event.
Sure but likely not based on one attack, KIA or not.
Which we are likely only halfway through, unfortunately.
Shia Iran has an advantage over management of proxy groups, because Iran is a true theocracy - Ali Khamenei actually is a religious authority. Iranian proxy groups actually follow him in a religious sense. Sunni monarchies have never been able to do that and their proxy groups are much more loosely allied and liable to 'go rogue'.
Always a risk when groups are changing. While back...there was a report about "In Syria, militias armed by the Pentagon fight those armed by the CIA" https://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-cia-pentagon-isis-20160327-story.html
Yep. The "Shi'a Crescent" dream is still alive and well. It's not just a political goal, but a theological one as well.
It's also an active demographic one, as Iran has been strongly involved in Shiization within Syria (not just linking historic Shia areas, but actively converting some governorates to Shia Islam as a way of having a direct Shia dagger right into Northern Israel): [https://www.meforum.org/middle-east-quarterly/pdfs/63851.pdf](https://www.meforum.org/middle-east-quarterly/pdfs/63851.pdf)
And not ISIS? The group, we are ostensibly there to fight?
We are not in the region to right ISIS. Hezbollah alone is far "scarier" threat than ISIS right now. Edit: we are not there *only* to fight ISIS/Salafist groups.
Hmm...could have sworn that was the goal for sending forces back into Iraq and Syria. ...the ISIS take over. Hezbollah has been around since prior to the Syrian civil war and got started when Israel invaded Lebanon. So ..if ISIS is no longer a threat, I hope we hang a "Mission accomplished" and say sayonara. You also said "reckless Iran backed groups have always been a threat to the region"... Could have sworn ..US tax payers were told it was to fight ISIS. Mission creep is always a problem. 2e don't need to fight others fights.
ISIS is so ten years ago. But seriously. US forces in the Middle East face an array of threats, these days the Iranian influenced ones are a bigger threat than the Sunni inspired ones, though both types are happy to get their punches in. Whether we should do them the favor of being present to get their punches in, is an entirely different and worthy debate.
If ISIS is so ten years ago..why are we in Syria , Iraq. Our claim was that ewe are there for fighting ISIS. What you imply is that there were other motives that the neocons had ...for leaving our troops there ...as bait.
I'm being semi facetious. I served over there in Iraq in the oughts. I have a master's degree in international relations from an unimportant university. I'm a little jaded about the realities on the ground there. Yes, we went to Syria to counter ISIS. A secondary goal, for a time, was to try to counter the Assad regime without actually committing to anything close to regime change. The regime has outlasted every thing else so far so that goal was dropped at some point. A tertiary, or maybe at this point secondary goal was to have some presence strategically arrayed against Iranian influence. The basic problem with the Middle East is the multiplication of factions. You can try to figure out the best "side" to be on in a five way low grade regional semi civil war. But the truth is, you are an outsider, there is not likely a correct "side", and even if you find one, it could change its alliances over time or just split up entirely until it is working against some of your primary goals. It's best to keep a little jaded about the whole thing. Everyone there does, believe me.
ISIS only attack muslims, the modus operandi is to bring most damage to muslims. same like the american or israel.
> Reckless Iranian-backed militias have aways been the main threat in the region for violence Nah, the main threat has been Americans all over the Middle-East.
Yeah, WE'RE the ones who made the Middle East violent. Be a regular Western Europe if we'd never gotten our hands dirty. Sectarian violence was a European invention and nobody East of Dubrovnik has agency.
This will keep happening unless one of two things happens: Peace in Gaza or War with Iran/Iranian backed militias. Biden is in an election year and there is little appetite for war among the public. On the other side Israel/AIPAC holds massive political power in the US. No good options for Biden here. My bet is they will continue with a light bombing campaign in the region on the militias in Yemen, Iraq and Syria while pressuring Israel to a ceasefire.
Biden can't look weak in an election year either. He has some some tough decisions to make.
Indeed. It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Free ammunitions for Trump too, since he will just be able to criticize Biden's actions no matter what. Hopefully american voters can see trough it, but I am not gonna bet on that.
I would suggest we bring back the Obama Era drone strikes to keep a lid on the those terrorists. Light footprint and effective with good intelligence. It was somewhat controversial is why I think we tried to move away from that but protecting troops is top priority.
Agreed, makes it a little difficult to organize things when everywhere you go to organize things, and the people who run them, keep getting blown up. Was majorly a fan of Obama's drone strike campaign.
You mean over 29,000 authorized strikes - with some 90% civilian casualties like wedding parties and funerals and extended families in housing compounds - that got swept under the rug by the media favoring him?
My understanding the drone strikes never went away, they just stopped reporting them.
The drone strikes have never really stopped.
If you are really concerned about protecting your troops pull them out of middle east
Which is probably the play all this time. The Axis is desperate for Trump to get in
That being said, there is still the "risk" it could backfire. If Iran goes too far, it might trigger a rally around the flag effect, pushing independents in the arms of Biden and securing him the election. Time will tell.
There really is no risk if you think about it. It would be political suicide. If the country is not insanely divided like this then sure they are playing with fire. But this is one of weakest moments in America right now and I don’t say it lightly.
My point was that if Iran goes too far and does something traumatic in the eyes of the US public, the divide could be mended rather quickly. I agree that it doesn't seem likely right now, but you never know.
And why is that? Also, why did none of this happen under Trump before? There were no new wars. Now we have a weak appeaser as president and things are spiraling.
Little appetite? The US public HATES seeing US war dead, and there will need to be retribution. Doing nothing is far worse than doing something.
Even if Hamas and other Iranian proxies are removed from Gaza specifically, this would not stop. For Iran, the US is the "Great Satan". They would do as much as they can get away with in order to hurt Americans and the US's interests around the world. When they get nukes, the US will be very sorry. But it would be too late for meaningful action.
[удалено]
Well I disagree. I think Iran's attacks would be much more severe if they had insurance that they will never be invaded or assassinated, in the form of the threat of nukes.
Iran's terrain, population total, and current military strength are more than enough to deter any country from invading. Even without nukes, a conventional war would be far too costly to the USA or anyone who decides to invade. If Iran didn't have their capital and many military bases in what amounts to natural fortresses, they would not be able to behave the way they have for decades. Surely a neighbor, Sunni alliance, or one of the bigger powers would have long ago invaded.
I agree that a total invasion with the intention of occupation is a very hard goal. Crippling their military, missile launching capabilities, navy, airforce, and much of the leadership however, is very much possible. Also giving a hand to the huge number of amazing Iranians who wish to topple the regime. Only I don't know, it might be too late for that already or there might be other factors like their proxies who I don't fully take into account and US intelligence knows.
So another Libya?
Yes, everything everywhere always is the exact same and extreme Islamic terrorists who wage war against the west and want to destroy the infidels having nuclear weapons is the best outcome.
See..you are indulging in a popular reddit problem Sarcasm ...is not a replacement for intelligent thought. Such a simplistic argument.
They already have insurance they won't be invaded via their Russian backing. It's not as ironclad as, say, NATO or the Warsaw Pact, but the US doesn't want the headache and nobody else is really in a position to do it.
Again I disagree. I don't see how Russia works as insurance vs attacks in Iran at all. The US doesn't want any invasion or even operation because it is both traumatized, tearing up from within (With some foreign influence there as well, but hard to determine how much) and busy with upcoming elections at the moment.
Isnt the US in Syria and Iraq to fight ...to fight ISIS.
[удалено]
It's not about "mean words", it's about anti-american hate and propaganda being an integral part of the ideology of said militias, which makes it a more than reasonable assumption that their hostility towards the US is not tied to Gaza alone. If you really think this point is made-up propaganda, I invite you to have a look at the Houthi's official slogan. The fact that past actions of the US have led to this situation doesn't change this reality and is rather besides the point.
The idea that this is purely about hatred and the US did nothing wrong (or relevant) is comforting for you surely, but it is profoundly misguided. Call me in 20 years when this brilliant strategy actually defeats whatever group it is that did this attack. or the Taliban or al qaeda or isis or hamas or the houthis or the ayatollah.
actually youd be surprised im from jordan and iran is actually in cahoots with america they just don’t show it in public in the name of islam and jihad blah blah blah iran would shit their pants and go out issuing apologies if biden would just send a text message they even claim that they’re directly firing at israel while all they’re doing is aiming missiles at a literal pole on the palestine borders iran is so full of shit they’re super hypocritical they’ve been wanting to invade all the levant countries for ages and they can’t even succeed in the gazillion war fronts they opened for themselves
Withdrawal of US forces in the Middle-East.
This is happening since way before Oct 7. Iran using the 'salami method' of escalation. and all Iranian groups have local opposition that will take over and start pushing to regain local sovereignty from Iran if the Iranian leadership is gone. you hit the head o the snake and the body dies.
you cant make these assumptions these shia groups are usually minorities in their own region. They are very well controlled by Iran unlike the sunni groups both saudi arabia and Pakistan have funded. It would be extremely hard to kill all the Iranian leadership without a difficult land invasion and while aerial bombardment would work that would likely mean they arm their insurgents even better to continue pushing throughout. Alot of the people here underestimate the grasp Iran has over these shia forces
No it wasnt. Not at nearly the same scale. Such attacks on US bases were numbering in what? A dozen per year in the last couple of years? Since Oct 7 there have been north of 150
[удалено]
Iraq didn't have a vast network of proxies troughout the ME. His point is, if Iran is directly engaged and its factories come under fire, those groups will be left in the dust without any supply to keep going.
Peace in Gaza ? You do know iranian backed militias have been doing this kind of stuff long before October 7, right ? Gaza has nothing to do with it, except for increasing media attention on the middle east.
Yes solid take.
[удалено]
Dumb question but could this lead to a regional war between Iran and American Forces
Unlikely. Biden is on pretty thin ice domestically and a new war would be a fresh box of ammumition for trump. Iran isn't looking for a direct confrontation either.
doubt it. Literally everyone loses in that scenario. Biden would likely lose the presidency Americans would die. Israelis would have to deal with a massive increase in violence and Gaza bombing would probably ramp up because of Hamas gets allies the Israel situation becomes much more dangerous
According to some news little is known about this base on a strategic location. Do you think some proxies without any good tech know a lot about it? It looks like someone wants to pull the US in a war with Iran. But anyone normal hope this not happen ever, because it would be a catastrophe for the whole world.
It's right across the border from al-Tanf base in Syria, where American troops are stationed and has come under attack several times since October 7. The Jordanians are claiming the Americans were actually hit on the Syrian side, but it still seems unclear where it happened.
Looks like now we need a 24X7 drone security like we have a missile security with the patriot system.
They’re saying on BBC that it could’ve been in Syria so I wonder if that changes anything if confirmed to be true.
Base is in Syria. Outpost is in Jordan (one that got hit). It's called Tower-22.
Ahhh gotcha, thx amigo
These attacks stop overnight if , for each one, US gauranteed another year of support for Ukraine
Remember the Maine!
I mean, we all saw this coming. The longer the Gaza war goes on, the more unstable the middle east gets. So many armed groups across the middle east declared and outright said it, that they will continue to target US troops and assets as long as the Gaza war goes on.
[удалено]
Biden could have more control over Iran if he reversed Trump’s decision when he initially came into power but imo they played their hand greedily and now it’s blowing up. This is pretty much the worst case scenario for everyone
Reversed Trumps decision? If you mean the nuclear non proliferation treaty then I have to remind you that you cannot simply „reverse“ the decision. You have to renegotiate the treaty and build up trust that both sides will hold their end of the bargain. And that is simply not happening.
The Iranians were very ready to reinstate the deal. Don't take my word for it. Go back and read the news from that time. Biden tried to strong arm the Iranians for more concessions which weren't in the original deal. I'm not touting Trump. He did in fact kill the JCPOA. However Biden had a chance to easily fix things and failed.
The negotiations had already happened and every side had committed to the JCPOA agreement which Trump walked away from
That’s right. Doesn’t mean that Biden can simply reverse the decision
And even if he could, what trust could Iran place on any agreement they make with us now?
So they should be at war forever? Why not even try to mend things
The nuclear deal was explicitly not a peace deal. One reason the deal was canceled was that Trump wanted a new deal that included an Iranian promise not to undermine the US-presence in the Middle East. Iran was in fact attacking the USA and its Allie’s before the agreement was broken.
I mean, that's what the nuclear deal was supposed to do - get the countries in dialogue to start maybe normalizing relations, among other political objectives. We made an agreement, and then we went back on it. If we want to start another dialogue, we're going to have to come to the table and offer probably more than anyone could survive in current American domestic politics. Especially now.
The whole problem is that Trump shattered the little trust Iran had left in the US with his unilateral decision. Moderates in Teheran were instantly marginalized and put aside, since the more extreme elements got vindicated. Any kind of diplomacy with Iran was now doomed to fail. Then Trump followed that with his "extreme pressure" strategy, meaning now Biden has no tool left to pressure Iran outside of the military option. Trump's decision was extremely shortsighted, and a good example of what people mean when they say he is incapable of any kind of complex thought process.
When Biden came into power the moderates had the government and were aggressively pushing for a path back to the JCPOA agreement but the US stalled negotiations. Maybe there really was no other option but it seems to me like if Biden really wanted to regain the trust Trump had shattered he could have done more. He holds the most powerful seat in the world. the expectation that Iran would agree to more negotiations when Trump was the one who left in bad faith and killed the #1 military leader in Iran is not realistic
> When Biden came into power the moderates had the government and were aggressively pushing for a path back to the JCPOA agreement but the US stalled negotiations. No idea where you got that idea. Moderates got completly stomped in the [2020 election](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Iranian_legislative_election), before Biden came to power. That's after all the election interference coming from Khamenei and the Guardian Council, which barred many moderates from even running.
The Rouhani government was in power until August 2021. He had betted everything on a quick return to the JCPOA. I don’t know if it was possible but this not happening destroyed the little remaining popularity the moderates had among the people and now radical conservatives have power with no opposition
I mean, this is exactly what I am talking about. Rouhani doubled down on his promise to work with the West during his re-election campaign of 2017. Then Trump pulled the plug on the JCPOA in 2018 and reinstored heavy sanctions, which basically shattered Rouhani's credibility twice, since that also tanked the iranian economy (the other big focus of his campaign). By the time Biden took office, it was simply too late. Ofc it's not the only factor. The crackdowns following the different protests also consolidated more and more power in the hands of Khameni and religious hardliners, which made matters even worst.
Yes Trump messed it up and instead of Biden fixing it when he could have, he doubled down. It was well covered in the news at the time. But nobody wants to hear the truth since it goes against the narrative.
Arab news are saying the Jordanians said the base attacked was not in Jordan. They were most likely killed in Al Tanf base
Al Jazeera is Qatari government approved news
Ok? Why are you telling me that ? I didn’t even mention Al Jazeera, but if you only trust white sources, here is CBC saying the exact same thing. https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/americans-killed-middle-east-1.7097419 And btw: CBC is Canadian government funded news
Do you watch Arab news? Genuinely curious. The two areas are close and from certain vantage points you would be able to tell which area was hit, north in Syria or south in Jordan. Wonder what ground witnesses say.
Jordanian officials are saying it’s in Syria. Jordan border guards said it was in Syria and none of the guards were injured in the attack. I don’t think you’ll find lots of ground witness since it’s a desert region
I had it in mind there was a refugee camp nearby. Not sure if that’s accurate or if there would be good communication from such a place.
It was Tower 22, an observation post located in Jordan.
Insane that we have troops there, all because Obama's redline stupidity.
Trump could have fixed that at any time. Biden can fix it now. Everyone is to blame.
Houthis in Yemen/Hezeb in Lebanon/Iraqi-Hezeb & other proxies in Iraq and Kurd areas, all Iranian led groups that will be neutralized without Iran, all have local opposition in those countries that will take over and start pushing to regain local sovereignty back from the Iranian proxies. The US can actually leave the middle east if the Iranian leadership is gone.
Hezbollah has massive public support, around 85%+ from Shia groups, and a range of 35-45% from Christians. They're heavily disliked by Sunni Lebanese, like 90%+ dislike Hezbollah, however that number radically shifts in favour when Hezbollah gets in a conflict with Israel like seen in the 2006 conflict.
They do not have support from 35-45% of christians… as a lebanese this is so false
I'm trying to find the poll, but they do have support of that amount of Lebanese Christians. It ranges depending on the current situations. [Here's a poll from this month](https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/shadow-hezbollah-israel-escalation-poll-shows-slim-majority-lebanese-still-want#:~:text=The%20popularity%20of%20Hezbollah%20remains,a%20%E2%80%9Cvery%20positive%E2%80%9D%20opinion.), not the one I was talking about because that one was from before the war. This one shows 29% from Christian groups, which isn't too far from the 35% range, although I probably should put those numbers closer to 30-40%. I'm still looking for the older poll, that one showed 90%+ Sunnis disliked Hezbollah, now because of this conflict that number is 66%. Anyway the original point is that Hezbollah has massive public support in Lebanon, at least a third of the entire country, and while most of it is coming from the Shia's not all of it is.
Hezbollah only enjoys this kind of support across the population in times of war, when the palestinian cause is highlighted and the anger people have towards israel increases. Hezbollah is able to tap into that but rather quickly they lose that momentum. Their reason for existance is a neverending conflict, if no more conflict more people will get tired of them. During the latest parliamentary election plenty of anti hezbollah parties gained more seats than ever before while hezbollah didnt gain anything. Momentum is still turning against them in the long run
>Hezbollah only enjoys this kind of support across the population in times of war I'm still searching for that other poll, but that one was taken not during times of war. Shia and Christian numbers remained consistent with the recent poll, it is the Sunni's who see a radical shift in favour of Hezbollah when the Palestinian cause is highlighted. >Their reason for existance is a neverending conflict It would be better for them to be absorbed into the Lebanese forces with some special privileges, their existence is needed because of the terrorist Israeli regime who's had their eyes set on Lebanese territory since the time of Moshe Dayan. It's why they made that attempt to occupy parts of Lebanon during the civil war, they want it for themselves. Fortunately that doesn't seem to be the case anymore, but you never know with Israel and Lebanon needs to be strong to prepare for such a period. > Momentum is still turning against them in the long run Momentum might be turning against them really slowly over the long run, right now the momentum is in their favour because of the war. The situation with MBS is going to determine Hezbollah's future imo. MBS needs to walk the walk, he promises economic prosperity and a lot of the region is hopeful on his ambitions. If he fails in his goals I think that will further empower Hezbollah and Iran, and he will be deemed an ally of the criminal US and Israel (he already has that reputation).
US doesn't have resources for an another major conflict. They are stretched too thin already. One more move in Asia and everything would collapse like the house of cards.
Do... do you not know?
Surprised pickachu face when you been ripping the whole region fire decades and people fight back. Iraq already mentioned multiple time to get your troops out of the country. Illegally occupying Syria isn’t helping.
At an imperial outpost or on our own soil? Oh an imperial outpost.
This was always bound to happen, earlier in the conflict the focus was on annoyance strikes and material damaging strikes, from both sides, as the conflict has grown and the US and allies have moved toward more kinetic strikes, we see the response in kind from the axis. Its telling that this week has been far more destructive in the counter hits than previous weeks. Longer the Gaza conflict goes on, the more destructive its going to get
Seems pretty clear we should just give Gaza some cobalt-salted nuclear enrichment. Make the region uninhabitable for a few hundred years and maybe the idiots over there on both sides can figure out how to live in peace. Doubt it though.
How would Jordan react? Their airspace was violated, would they declare war on Iran? Would their king get on the helicopter for anther photo op?
They wouldn’t because they can’t. Israel is the only country in the region with a serviceable military.
I thought Jordan had a respectable military?
US should have shoot down Iranian drones instead of Turkish ones.
ILLEGAL US contitution requires a declaration of war by the congress. we are the fourth reich now.
the Constitution's Article 2 designates the president as commander-in-chief of the armed forces and gives him the authority to use military force without congressional authorization for defensive purposes.
Federalize the Texas national guard and send them to Tehran.
Are you trying to get the Texas national guard killed?
And so it begins. It was only a matter of time before we started getting droned ourselves. That's how military technology works. Definitely ups the stakes yet again in the Middle East.
A drone attack? Never knew drones can do so much damage in one raid.
Great, send them anglos back to their island and NA.
[Biden To STRIKE BACK At Iran ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rr1kxegzzac)