Iran has directly attacked US assets in Iraq

[paxmao]

It has been reported across several media. Iran has claimed responsibility for the recent explosions near the consulate, likely in response to the attacks of US in Yemen, hitting the Houtis bases which in turn was an action derived of the Houtis attacks of ships in the Red Sea linked to Israeli actions in Gaza in response to the killing of civilians by Hamas, motivated by ... well you know. This is an escalation and it is likely we will see further actions along the next few weeks.

The worrying bit is that you only know when the scalation started, not where it ends.

https://abcnews.go.com/International/explosions-reported-us-consulate-iraq-iran-claims-responsibility/story?id=106390671

From a chair-general perspective, scalation is about who has more to gain from it. I am not sure Iran has more than the US to gain from further escalation. If you ask me this is an strategic mistake.

[1714935131]

1714935131

[1714935131]

1714935131

[1714935131]

1714935131

[pooya87]

likely in response to the attacks of US in Yemen

Yemen is more than capable of responding to those attacks and they've already done that multiple times. From the moment those Tomahawk missiles were launched, Yemeni forces shot USS Carney, USS Laboon and the British ship I forget the name of because of their participation in the attacks against their country. They've also closed down the Red Sea to all US and English ships (everyone else is still passing through without problem).

These targets that Iran attacked were the response to the terrorist attacks on January 3, 2024 in Kerman, Iran committed by two ISIS suicide bombers with the order and support of United States that killed 94 Iranians.

The retaliation wasn't just on US bases, it was in a ~3 million km² area starting from Iranian border (ie. separatist occupied northern Iraq, aka Kurdistan) all the way to Mediterranean sea (specifically terrorist occupied Northern Syria, a stone's throw from Turkey and Israel).
The targets included dozens of terrorist training camps, headquarters, facilities, US base and an Israeli headquarter, etc.

From a chair-general perspective, scalation is about who has more to gain from it. I am not sure Iran has more than the US to gain from further escalation. If you ask me this is an strategic mistake.

This had nothing to do with gains, it was to show who's the real boss and put an end to escalation.
It was also a "friendly" reminder to United States regime about the cost of supporting terrorism, specially against Iranian people.

The way these attacks were performed, the weapons and equipment used, the targets that were hit and a lot of other factors were sending very strong messages that can be discussed from a military perspective.
But the main messages was that no matter how many trillions of dollars US spends on early warning systems, satellites, Patriot, THAAD, Aegis systems, ... when Iran wants to a hit a target, that target will be hit. Like the 1500 kg warhead that landed at hypersonic speed 1300 km away with pinpoint accuracy tearing into a bunker with multiple layers of reinforced concrete neutralizing the terrorists hiding inside while all US systems were impotently watching it happen.

... all that is just Iran flexing its muscles.

[Hispo]

Not sure what Iran was thinking, assuming those attacks were actually carried out by them.
To me it is a mistake by Iran to attack or make such declarations against the United States, to be honest. The only reason I am think of is Iran seeking to further escalate the conflict into a more important regional event, perhaps in order to indirectly attack the state of Israel amid the chaos and confusion...
It is very sad to see how all these things continues to happen in the middle east, I would have expected to all the aggressions not to last this long, but it seems there is still a long path ahead before peace is in sight...

It is a tragedy, simply a tragedy.

[pooya87]

To me it is a mistake by Iran to attack or make such declarations against the United States, to be honest.

It's not that easy, you gotta look at the Iran related news over the past 4-5 decades (specifically the Hybrid War against Iran) since this wasn't started yesterday and it won't end tomorrow and it wasn't even started by Iran!

In summary when the enemy keeps poking you with a knife, you either have to poke back or bleed to death.
In fact they even have a name for their strategy against Iran: "death with a thousand cuts"! It is designed and named by Israeli terrorists. It is basically all these "small pokes" at Iran to exhaust the country and eventually turn it into Syria 2.0 so that they can get those sweet resources. The bulk of these attacks are supposed to happen by small and spread out terrorist groups that reside around Iranian borders, specially hiding in mountainous regions.

This is part of the Hybrid War against Iran so Iran naturally "pokes" back but the "poke" depends on what they did. Just to name a few of the big ones off the top of my head from past couple of years:

• For example in an act of piracy UK steals an Iranian oil tanker (Grace 1) so Iran retaliates by seizing a British oil tanker (Stena Impero) in front of its shadow British Royal Navy Warship!
• A while later US steals another Iranian oil tanker so now Iran ups the game and retaliates by seizing 2 US tankers with twice the amount of oil as to cover the stolen amount and an extra amount as the "fine" for committing theft or piracy.
• Israel hires a goon to assassinate a university professor in Tehran, Iran retaliates by eliminating 13 Israeli spy officers (neutralized on a ship in Italy last June).

The response in these 3 cases is in the same field even though Iran retaliates harder to "increase the cost" of the "pokes". But sometimes the retaliation has to be a lot harsher like:

• POTUS breaks the international law and orders an Act of Terror to murder an Iranian official (the commander of Iran's counter terrorism forces, general Soleimani) on an official business in Iraq, so Iran retaliates by flattening two US bases in Iraq leaving US with at least 280 casualties.

And sometimes even the field is changed like:

• US orchestrates a terrorist attack on civilians inside Iran, but retaliation in the same manner doesn't fit "Islamic" Republic so Iran retaliates by changing the field entirely hence the attacks that effectively changed the game and significantly incased the cost of performing terrorist attacks on Iran while simultaneously neutralizing dozens of terrorist cells.

This will continue until this Cold/Hybrid War against Iran ends one way or another...

[kentrolla]

We all know who is behind this mess in the Middle East and I don't think USA will be able to do much as it has already been on losing side on multiple war fronts be it Syria, be it Ukraine or be it Yemen. You can fight a government and defeat them like they did to Iraq in 2003 but not these groups like houthis as they themselves are occupiers who has ousted the president to take over part of country and dancing to the tunes of Iran who is their sponsor. It would be better if USA don't get involved in Middle Eastern affairs because you cannot stop smaller groups from attacking your allies and target and get embarassed on an international level.

[btc78]

scalation is about who has more to gain from it. I am not sure Iran has more than the US to gain from further escalation. If you ask me this is an strategic mistake.

I think it is not about who has more to gain but rather who has more to lose

A country can be aggressive in wars if they are capable and basically wants to prove something
it is really devastating that these attacks are launched without consideration of the lives it will affect
they are basically trying to assert some dominance