The killing of three U.S. troops and wounding of dozens more on Sunday by Iran-backed militants is piling political pressure on President Joe Biden to deal a blow directly against Iran, a move he's been reluctant to do out of fear of igniting a broader war. Biden's response options could range anywhere from targeting Iranian forces outside to even inside Iran, or opting for a more cautious retaliatory attack solely against the Iran-backed militants responsible, experts say. American forces in the Middle East have been attacked more than 150 times by Iran-backed forces in Iraq, Syria, Jordan and off the coast of Yemen since the Israel-Hamas war erupted in October.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The killing of three U.S. troops and wounding of dozens more on Sunday by Iran-backed militants is piling political pressure on President Joe Biden to deal a blow directly against Iran, a move he’s been reluctant to do out of fear of igniting a broader war.

Biden’s response options could range anywhere from targeting Iranian forces outside to even inside Iran, or opting for a more cautious retaliatory attack solely against the Iran-backed militants responsible, experts say.

American forces in the Middle East have been attacked more than 150 times by Iran-backed forces in Iraq, Syria, Jordan and off the coast of Yemen since the Israel-Hamas war erupted in October.

But until Sunday’s attack on a remote outpost known as Tower 22 near Jordan’s northeastern border with Syria, the strikes had not killed U.S. troops nor wounded so many. That allowed Biden the political space to mete out U.S. retaliation, inflicting costs on Iran-backed forces without risking a direct war with Tehran.

  • NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social
    52·
    10 months ago

    I’ve never seen the IDF do anything remotely comparable to the barbarity on display by Hamas. At worst they don’t care as much about collateral damage when attacking legal targets as some people say they should, despite taking precautions that no other countries do to minimize civilian deaths during their military operations.

    Have you been keeping up with news the last… three months? They’ve been shooting civilians carrying white flags, rounding up men and killing them, designating safe zones and bombing them, designating more safe zones and bombing them, blocking aid and everything else under the sun. And to make it worse at least half their bombs are “dumb” non precision bombs. The US took more care in Iraq and they’ve rightfully been grilled for it.

    Were Gaza occupied, you’d have a point, that would be collective punishment and therefore a war crime…

    It’s collective punishment regardless, but the UN still considers Gaza to be occupied because of the amount of control Israel has over it.

    I’m less informed about what’s going on in the West Bank, but the news articles I’ve read seem to indicate that it’s mostly settler violence that is the problem there, civilian violence. I hope for everyone’s sake that Israel prosecutes and punishes those responsible for crimes.

    They won’t and you know it. And IDF soldiers openly participate in that “civilian violence”, and when a Palestinian tries to defend themselves the IDF shoots them.

    • DarkGamer@kbin.social
      16·
      10 months ago

      Have you been keeping up with news the last… three months? They’ve been shooting civilians carrying white flags, rounding up men and killing them, designating safe zones and bombing them

      None of that holds a candle to the barbarity of what Hamas did on Oct 7. (Warning: NSFL, gore, cruelty, death.)

      • Collateral damage is unfortunate but common in war, and my understanding is that Israel’s strikes cause far fewer civilian deaths than the average when explosives are involved in urban combat.
      • I’ve only seen men rounded up and incarcerated, not killed. Trying to understand what you’re talking about, I googled found some articles about accounts of IDF soldiers killing civilians in Al Remal and the UN wanting independent inquiry about it, is this what you’re referring to?
      • Israel has been clear they will strike legal Hamas targets wherever they are found, the “safe zones” have been changing as the war progresses, and it appears there was some inconsistent and unclear messaging about safe zones. Pretty much getting people to leave keeps innocent civilians out of areas where anyone remaining will be considered a potential enemy combatant, and is not a guarantee of safety. Hamas also knows about them and likes to attack from refugee camps, hospitals, schools, mosques, etc.,

      It’s collective punishment regardless, but the UN still considers Gaza to be occupied because of the amount of control Israel has over it.

      I’m aware. The UN’s anti-Israel bias has been on display lately. I’d argue that a blockade and secure borders is not the same as an occupation, and it seems odd to have to supply a nation that’s actively at war with one’s own, but they were just ordered to supply Gaza, so… I guess there’s not any reason for them to not occupy Gaza again. They’re being treated like they are anyway. Unilateral withdrawal didn’t prevent any of the legal consequences of being an occupier. It didn’t provide safety. I wonder if the settlers will return to Gaza along with the IDF after Hamas is defeated.

      More on the argument whether Israel is an occupier or not.

      They won’t and you know it.

      I suspect they will but their attention is elsewhere on more existential matters at the moment.

      IDF soldiers openly participate in that “civilian violence”, and when a Palestinian tries to defend themselves the IDF shoots them.

      A lot of hate has been cultivated on both sides and this is a civilian army. This doesn’t justify it but I would be surprised if such acts didn’t occur. I can only imagine what it would feel like if my friends and family were one of the above victims.