2024-10-03
한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina
the conflict between israel and lebanese hezbollah is intensifying. in the early morning of the 22nd, in retaliation for the israeli pager tragedy and the killing of senior hezbollah leader aqil, hezbollah launched hundreds of missiles and rockets into northern israel, causing damage to many buildings and personnel in the northern area. injured, a large number of people and medical institutions went underground. at the same time, according to foreign media reports, israel is preparing to launch a ground offensive against lebanon in order to establish a buffer zone "north" of the border between the two countries to allow 60,000 israelis to safely return to their homes in the north.
as we all know, the current war between israel and hamas has not yet completely ended, and hamas is still alive. this is like hitler's continued bombing of the british isles. seeing that the british empire was about to be unable to hold on, hitler backed down and pulled back. a large-scale attack was launched against the soviet union, resulting in a two-front war. everyone knows that "fighting on two fronts" is very disadvantageous in the military. israel and the jews are known for their intelligence, so how could they make such a childish mistake? in fact, the reason is very simple. this is actually to "drag the united states into the water."
former cia counterterrorism expert larry c. johnson said that israel is trying to provoke a counterattack by iran and hezbollah through constant provocations and attacks on targets, thereby expanding the war and "pressuring the united states to directly intervene", which is also to "drag the united states". get into the water". it is worth noting that johnson’s statement is basically consistent with our previous analysis. for example, we pointed out in early august that israel killed hezbollah leader shukr and hamas leader haniyeh at the same time in order to threaten trigger a bigger war, "drag the united states into the water" and "force the united states to participate in the war."
now israel first concocted the pager massacre and the walkie-talkie massacre, and then continued to launch attacks, killing aqil, the senior leader of hezbollah. in fact, it was all to drag the united states into the war, or to use it as a threat to demand that the united states take action on the gaza issue, it will "unconditionally" support israel in the lebanese-israeli conflict, otherwise it will provoke a war and "drag you into the water."
as we all know, the current great power strategy of the united states is the "six-character mantra", that is: trapping russia, threatening europe, and containing china. it does not want to waste strategic energy in the middle east and affect its own great power game. therefore, as israel continues to escalate the situation and add fuel to the fire, us national security council spokesman kirby "warned" israel on the 22nd: first, to prevent the risk of conflicts in the middle east from spilling over; second, to avoid as much as possible the risk of conflict in the middle east. lebanon opens a "second battlefield". obviously, the united states "prays" israel not to act recklessly, but there is really nothing that can be done to this middle eastern bully. the warning is a warning, but there is no punitive measure.
in fact, iran is in the same dilemma as the united states. the reason is not difficult to understand. on the one hand, hezbollah is an overseas armed force commanded by iran. now hezbollah leaders have been assassinated by israel, and thousands of hezbollah members have been killed or injured. it can be said that after the younger brother was beaten like this, if the older brother doesn't show some expression and support the situation, who will hang out with you in the future? on the other hand, iran does not dare to come forward. it can only express condemnation verbally and express support for lebanon and hezbollah in diplomatic situations, but it cannot make a strong response, let alone "end it personally."
there are three main reasons why it is so "difficult".
so under such circumstances, iran is actually in a difficult situation. israel's beating of hezbollah is equivalent to a slap in the face of tehran, but iran can only stand up without blushing and panting, pretending that nothing is wrong. this is too difficult. and even if you rely on being thick-skinned to survive, it will definitely damage your leadership prestige. after all, if you are timid at the critical moment, who will want to hang out with you?
therefore, both the united states and iran are currently in a difficult situation. iran has decided not to go to war if it is "embarrassed". anyway, it will not kill people if it is embarrassed. if a war begins, the regime may collapse; and the united states has also decided to exert all its pressure on iran and prevent iran from retaliating. , the reason is not difficult to understand. the united states has nothing to do with israel, but as long as it prevents iran from retaliating, the middle east war will not start. israel wants to drag me into the water, "there is no way", but iran will suffer from both sides, both from israel. angry - it was obviously the provocation first; but also angry with the united states - i can't fight back after being beaten?
finally, i would like to add that we have said before that this round of palestinian-israeli conflict has diverted the united states’ attention from the russia-ukraine conflict, thereby helping the big goose get out of trouble. so now that israel is constantly escalating the conflict with hezbollah, regardless of the overall situation of the great power game between the united states and the united states, will putin "hold a big name" again? it should be said that it is unlikely. the reason is very simple, "iran dare not come to an end." if iran does not come to an end, hezbollah and hamas will not be able to overturn the situation, and a war will naturally not start.
if the war cannot start, the united states will not have to end, and putin will naturally be unable to "encircle wei and rescue zhao" or "attack the east and attack the west." it can be seen that iran is the key to whether the drama in the middle east can reach its climax, but the tehran elite also said, "there is no need to risk your life for russia," so putin will not catch big names this time.