The cartoon of KAL in The Economist explains how the situation in Syria is getting out of control. Lattakia (a small area at the coast in the northwest where Assad and his vassals come from) is shouting with joy that Russia is so nice for them, they are allowed to suppress the rest of the country, even while Russia is suggesting that a tad less of blood shedding should be better. A civil war seems to have started.
Meanwhile Israel is thinking how they can devastate the three nuclear sites of Iran. That they will start a military operation is almost unavoidable, so reports the Wall Street Journal (article: How should Israel bomb Iran). The defence of Iran is weak, of third world quality and so it must be possible for Israel to do quite some harm in Iran. VA conquest of Iran is way too difficult (even for the US), but a military operation is seen as a real opportunity. That should happen in the spring. Israel should accept that lots of the 200,000 missiles pointed at Israel will be fired and do their (also human) damage. Israel seems to be convinced they will not exist much longer after Iran has the bomb. The US has told Israel not to attack, but is setting the light at orange. The interpretation of Israel is that they have to attack soon before the US sets the light at deep red.
Iran is threatening to close the street of Hormuz, but they know that will cost them dealy in the actions the US will deliver to open the street again, even atom bombs are not completely out of the question. For Iran maybe it is worth the trouble when they can disturb the US elections, but then they have to act only in September/October. This doesn’t look like rational behaviour for Iran, you know you will suffer a lot from the US military toys. However, Woody Brock warns this could be seen as a game of trembling hands. In game theory this normally doesn’t end well: when a party think it will be attacked on false arguments things canneasily go out of hand. This seems to apply well on Iran nowadays.
No comments:
Post a Comment