• fukhueson@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    Massive payback can be commensurate with the attack on Israel, while still not escalating. Was Iran escalating when it directly attacked Israel for the second time? Or was that a measured response to the deaths of members of their proxies in other countries?

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      That’s a very strange interpretation of the word ‘massive’ you’re using there. In fact, it’s a usage of the word I’ve never seen before.

      • fukhueson@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I truly don’t understand what you think I’m saying. I think that a response to a second direct attack being massive does not preclude it from not escalating (unless there’s a less conventional definition specific to military responses I’m not familiar with). Is Iran’s second direct attack on Israel not considered an escalation, and do you think that is not massive, despite rhetoric from the Ayatollah?

        Or is Israel not supposed to respond to this?

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          There is a big difference between “proportional response” and “massive payback” and I’m not sure why you are unable to see that difference.

          • fukhueson@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I’m certain there’s no quantifiable way to address the difference between those phrases, and that this is rather a matter of opinion regarding what one thinks “massive” means in terms of military/political rhetoric. I think my point was made, despite my questions going unanswered.

            Thanks for the discussion!

            (I’m not continuing this discussion, since the interest here seems to be quibbling over one word of rhetoric.)

            Edit:

            https://www.dw.com/en/what-comes-next-for-iran-after-strike-on-israel/a-70387376

            Tehran is waiting for Israel’s response to a massive missile attack as the conflict in the Middle East threatens to escalate.

            Sounds commensurate to me :)