GTBT - Iran Strikes Amidst Israel Invasion.

: Hubert Walas; Created: 14 November 2024

Late in the evening of October 1, Iran launched the largest single missile attack on Israel in history. As part of Operation True Promise 2, Tehran launched more than 180 ballistic missiles, hitting several Israeli bases. Israel immediately vowed a severe response. However, there are many indications that the entire escalation is calibrated to keep the exchange in check. But before we talk about that, let's bring things back into chronology with events that, let's keep in mind, are changing very rapidly.

On Monday night, the Israeli army made an incursion into Lebanese territory. Although limited in scope (for the time being), the event marked the official start of yet another Israeli war in Lebanon, only this time the target is not the Lebanese state, but the heavily entrenched Shiite militia, Hezbollah.

As we reported in an earlier episode, to which we refer for more information, Israel's move was preceded by a massive air campaign aimed at "preparing the ground" for an attack. As a result, Hezbollah's leadership was decimated, with the group's leader, Hassan Nasrallah, killed along with the other nine top commanders. Two months earlier, the commander of another pro-Iranian militia, Hamas, Ismail Haniyeh, was also killed.

The death of the two leaders of the "Axis of Resistance", Nasrallah in Beirut and Haniyeh in Tehran, was the official reason for the attack by the Islamic Republic of Iran, which took place Tuesday night. At about 7 p.m. local time, hundreds of ballistic missiles fired from Iran flew over Israel. It later turned out that Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps had launched some 180 ballistic missiles, including Emad and Ghadr ballistic missiles. Tehran also claimed to have launched a domestically produced medium-range hypersonic ballistic missile, the "Fattah-2," for the first time. The Iranians' targets, according to Iranian Defense Minister Aziz Nasir Zadeh, were Israeli "military, operational and intelligence" centers, as well as the destruction of Israel's Arrow 2 and Arrow 3 ballistic missile interceptor systems.

The Iranians struck the Nevatim base, where Israeli F-35s are based, as well as the Hatzerim and Tel Nof bases, among others. Nevertheless, the Israelis most likely had all of their F-35s in the air at the time of the attack. The footage also showed strikes near the headquarters of Israel's intelligence agency, the Mossad.

The Iranian attack was larger than the one in April, when 120 missiles came at Israel from the east. Tel Aviv reported that it intercepted "most" of the rockets, in which Israel was aided by an American ally.

The Americans maintain very significant forces in three bodies of water in the region. In the eastern Mediterranean, as of October 1, there were 7 American ships, including the USS Cole, USS Arleigh Burke, and USS Wasp, and one British landing ship RFA Lyme Boy. In the Red Sea, 5 ships, including the USS Frank E. Peterson Jr. or USS Stockdale. A large US-British force of 6 ships is also deployed in the Persian Gulf - including the USS O'Kane, and HMS Lancaster.

Meanwhile, the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier strike group is on standby in the Gulf of Oman.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was quick to announce the upcoming harsh retaliation for Iran's attack, saying that Iran had made a big mistake and will pay for it. As of this writing, however, Tel Aviv has not yet made its move, which may or may not come in the coming hours or days. Will we now see an Israeli salvo devastating Iran? Which has less robust anti-aircraft defenses, and can't count on anyone's support the way Israel could count on the Americans?

Why, then, in spite of the spectacular images we see on the screen, are there indications that the exchange is nevertheless taking place within a certain framework that both sides are, as it were, "writing into the cost calculus"?

In trying to assess the dynamics of events, it is impossible not to return to Iran's April attack on Israel, which provides an important point of reference in this context. The attack, although smaller in scale, was an unprecedented event. At the time, recall, Iran fired some 300 rockets and drones into Israel following an Israeli strike on a diplomatic outpost in Damascus that killed seven officers of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Although large in scale, Israel (with U.S. help) handled the attack quite easily at the time, in part because… the Iranians had warned the Americans 72 hours before the attack that it was coming and thus giving Israel time to prepare for the attack.

This time, contrary to appearances, the situation was very similar, except that the stakes were raised, since Iran was no longer responding to the killing of seven corps officers, but to the killing of two leaders of the main pro-Iranian axis of resistance organizations in the region, as well as to the very fact of Israel's incursion into Lebanese territory.

In keeping with the logic of escalation, Tehran also upped the ante by increasing the number of ballistic missiles (which are harder to intercept) from 120 to about 180. It also shortened the warning period for the attack, again informing the Americans, but this time giving them only a few hours to prepare. In addition, Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps carried out a parallel hacking attack on the IDF's cyber forces.

But even a short warning was enough to avoid casualties. As apart from minor damage to bases, such as this one at the Nevatim base, Israel emerged from the attack essentially unscathed, which is surprising given the scale of the attack and the fact that it takes only 15 minutes for rockets to fly from Iran to Israel. Only one unfortunate Palestinian was killed, when one rocket's propulsion module fell on him.

So can we expect Israel to launch a massive counterattack against Iran? Although Tel Aviv's offensive posture is well known around the world, the dynamics of events point to a rather calculated retaliation. Recall that in April, Netanyahu also announced a tough response, but the Israeli Air Force "only" carried out a precision strike on the S-300 air defense system in Isfahan, one of Iran's key bases. While this attack was smaller than the Iranian strike, it was intended to demonstrate Israel's ability to strike strategic sites, including those related to Iran's nuclear program, without escalating the conflict into a full-scale war.

In this bloody variation of the cat-and-mouse game, the goal is to maintain a certain level of escalation without going too far. Israel has been on the offensive for months, while Iran, in order to "save face" both among its own establishment, the supporters and fighters of the Axis of Resistance, and among the leaders of the "Axis of Evil", has had to respond for the damage, Israel has inflicted on its allies.

Strangely, however, Iran's powerful attack did almost no damage to Israel. Or maybe that was the point?

In our previous material we mentioned that Iran's entry into the war was unlikely, and literally during the upload Iran started the missile barrage, which drew a quick reaction from some viewers. However, the October missile attack, like the one in April, is hard to equate with a full-fledged Iranian entry into the war, but rather an attempt to stay in an escalating proxy war with Israel. While this still threatens a wider outbreak, it appears to be under some control for now.

All the more so because Iran is at a loss in a long-distance exchange, geographically-wise. Its aerospace and missile systems are inferior to the most advanced military technology available to the Jewish state. Not to mention that a mighty US Navy is stationed just nearby, in the Persian Gulf and the wider region, ready to support Israel's campaign.

It is not without reason that Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi says: "We have the ability to reach and attack anywhere in the Middle East, and those of our enemies who have not understood this will soon understand it.” This is not a bluff. Still Iran poses a much more dangerous risk in a classic ground campaign, which would mean de facto war.

Needless to say, Israel is not interested in such a scenario, especially as it begins a difficult ground campaign with Hezbollah in Lebanon.

For the time being, Israel has bombed the Russian base of Hmeimim in the Latakia region of Syria. According to Syrian TV, "Israel bombed the base an hour after the arrival of an Iranian plane belonging to the 'Qashim Fars' airline”. Israel's response is unlikely to end there, but it shows that Tel Aviv's retaliation will be "targeted" rather than "massive”. Apart from that, it also shows that Israel is not shying away from hitting Iran's proxies, in this case the Russian Federation.

Meanwhile, the Israel Defense Forces continue their ground operation in Lebanon, where they are beginning to feel the cost of the operation. As of October 3, the first eight IDF soldiers have officially been killed. However, Sky News Arabia, citing an anonymous source, says there have been 14 casualties.

Unsurprisingly, Hezbollah claims there were even more casualties. In this footage, a member of the Shiite militia claims the group have destroyed 3 Merkava tanks with crews, shot down a helicopter, and ambushed IDF Special Forces. The credibility of these claims is difficult to verify, but some of Israel's losses may indeed have resulted from these events.

Finally, the pro-Hezbullah reporter adds, "Welcome to hell”.

On the other hand, the IDF announced the killing of 60 Hezbollah fighters and the destruction of 200 more targets during the air campaign, which is also constantly invoked against the group's targets throughout Lebanon.

We also know the initial directions of the incursions. Israeli tanks were seen in Maroun al-Ras, near the village of Bint Jbeil, and at the level of Kiryat Shmona, in a settlement called Aadaysit Marjaayoun.

Divisions 36th and 98th are involved in the operations, while the IDF has released footage showing, among other things, the destruction of Hezbollah tunnels. The Lebanese Forces claimed that Israeli forces entered Lebanon about 1,300 feet deep near Odaisseh and Khirbet Yaroun and withdrew after a "short period of time."

Speaking of Lebanon's Armed Forces, it must be said that they have positioned themselves as passive observers of events, caught between a rock and a hard place.

After the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the LAF officially announced a "repositioning" of about 5-6 kilometres to the north. The fact is that the Lebanese army wants to avoid direct clashes with the IDF. First, because of the stark difference in military potential. Second, Tel Aviv officially proclaims that Hezbollah, not Lebanon, is its target. The LAF is a weaker formation than Hezbollah, and besides, in theory, its mission is not to fight for the values proclaimed by the paramilitary group. Moreover, the Americans are said to have talked with both sides to avoid direct contact and not to fight each other.

However, one should not be under the illusion that the Lebanese army is on Israel’s side here. Not at all. The sight of another army operating on its own territory is a difficult experience for Lebanese soldiers, but the LAF could potentially play an important role in restoring order in the country if Hezbollah's omnipotence inside Lebanon weakens.

It is also worth noting the disturbing message sent by the IDF to the Arab population of southern Lebanon, telling the residents of those areas to move north of the Awali River, which is much farther north of the Litani River, precisely 50km or 30miles. It basically instructs all the residents of Southern Lebanon to evacuate north. The communiqué implicitly suggests that this entire area could be the eventual target of Israeli operations. Moreover, at the level of the Awali River is another strategic point - the Syrian capital of Damascus. Another important centre of the Iranian axis of resistance.

Despite attempts to contain the escalation, all the players are treading on thin ice, which - when it comes to the Middle East - can turn into a boiling pot at any moment.

Sources: