If the United States and its allies can rush to Israel’s defense in the skies, shooting down dozens of drones and missiles fired by Iran, why can’t they do the same for Ukraine — which has suffered under Russia’s missile attacks for more than two years?
That’s the question Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his country’s staunchest backers in the West were asking on Monday, hours after the U.S., the United Kingdom, France and Jordan helped Israel shoot down some 300 drones and missiles fired by Iran in retaliation after Israel killed its senior military commanders in Syria.
“European skies could have received the same level of protection long ago if Ukraine had received similar full support from its partners in intercepting drones and missiles," Zelenskyy wrote Monday evening in a post on X.
Because Iran doesn’t have a massive nuclear weapons stockpile.
The last few years have shown that any nation that wants to be taken seriously needs a capable nuclear arsenal. Literally nothing else matters.
Yep. Which is why the liberal “international rules based world order” is nothing but a scam at this point. To many countries the only line of defense against getting invaded by a major nuclear power is having a capable nuclear arsenal themselves.
This. This is what it boils down to. This is why Pakistan and India keep getting away with the shit they pull along with all other nuclear nations. The moment Iran claims nuclear capable, “restraint” will be shown. With the amount of back channel communication that’s been happening between the US and Iran over the Gaza and Israel situation, it’s very likely they already have shown their hand and ability to be nuclear, and therefore the calculus is now extremely complex compared to something like Iraq and Afghanistan.
This also explains why Iran demonstrated and telegraphed their attack the way they did and the US agreed to it, despite the “Iran is the devil” rhetoric being perpetuated worldwide.
Hate to say it, but might is right and has always been.
Edit: To add, if they admit they are nuclear capable publicly, they are inviting more sanctions and another escalation which is the last thing they need given the state of their economy. They will also be on the back foot because Israel gets the moral high ground for being right about their nuclear ambitions.
Your interpretation sounds pretty likely to me. I’d guess if they get nukes, they’ll go Israeil’s way and will newer admit to it publicy.
Kind of weird everyone needs a thesis on this. It’s literally why everyone wants a nuke. No one’s going to attack a nuclear power. Ukraine wouldn’t be in the position they’re in if they kept their nukes.
100%. There are fewer bigger security mistakes than giving up nukes. It’s a case study of why you shouldn’t just trust “diplomacy”.
There’s no black and white morality in real life. Even the chance to choose between actual totalitarianism and a hypocritical rules based world order is a massive privilege most don’t get. Most of us are born into one or the other and that’s that.
I completely agree with that but I fail to understand what you’re trying to exactly say in this context The international rules based world order has way too many holes and now with the emerging of the multipolar world we will see a lot more countries willing to exploit these holes. Some of these will end up invading others. That’s why many countries with aspirations to becoming a regional power will always invest in nuclear capabilities.
I’m being an apologist for the “not actual totalitarians” here. I like the idea of a rules based international system a lot more than I like the idea of dictatorships, and I’m fortunate to have even these poor options.
I fail to understand what the system of governance (parliamentary republic, one party system, or whatever) has to do with how the world is run, or better said what the protocols on handling situations and relationships between nation states have to do with how those countries are ran politically or economically.
With that being said, don’t forget that the “not actual totalitarians” here don’t necessarily have a problem with supporting or installing totalitarian regimes as long as it benefits them.
Countries should start building satellites that can drop rods from god instead. It polluted the environment less than our ancient nuclear weaponry and looks cooler
What would Russia’s response be if NATO countries defended Ukraine with missile and drones shot down over Kiev, Levin, Odesa. Not sure they would do anything.
They’d probably not do much, but we don’t know that for sure. It could also pull NATO into a direct conflict with Russia.
And noone is particularly keen on finding out where exactly the border lies for retaliation by Russia.
So best we can do right now is provide Ukraine with the military support they need, without getting directly involved in the conflict ourselves.
We’re in for, what? $150B already? I don’t think Russian nukes are what’s holding up Ukraine funding in Congress.
The Rightwing memelords have spent the last two years insisting Ukrainian military aid is tied to Hunter Biden’s cocaine dick and now half of Congress is blacklisting the funding in hopes of pleasing the 4chan party base.
Funding? No. But with the Iranian drone/missile strike US and other allied forces were doing interceptions. That’s not happening in Ukraine unless there are some dramatic escalations, right wing memelords or no.
From what analysis I’ve read, the Iranian strike largely landed in empty desert. It was intended as a show of force, not a provocative attack.
And one thing it showed that the US and Israel genuinely struggle with is that Iran can launch a $100 missile that US/Israel needs a $10,000 defensive rocket to knock down. Yeah, they got 99% of their targets. But they exhausted a fortune to achieve it.
Ukraine has the same problem with Russia. They have to expend enormous amounts of defensive weaponry to counter an incoming Russian strike. And Russia can simply wear them down by targeting over a large border and at a long range.
Because Russia and Iran are operating as war-time at-cost economies, while the US and Israel are running their militaries as for-profit private enterprises, the scale and scope of operations they’re capable of can eclipse more advanced nations simply because they aren’t running every weapons purchase through a dozen middle men.
Ukraine tried to operate as a war-time at-cost economy, but the Russians were too good at targeting their domestic factories and munitions plants. So now they’re out of domestic weaponry and forced to rely on foreign exports.
Israel doesn’t have this problem which - paradoxically - makes them a better market for US arms sales (they’ve got more money to spend and they can afford to spend it at market rate rather than cost).
If Dems retake the House, they’ll start re-gearing the war economy to be at-cost rather than for-profit. Republicans won’t. But that’s what’s really at stake here.
Doesn’t mean we couldn’t send interceptor rockets to Ukraine. We didn’t bomb Iran we just intercepted their missiles and drones.
Or Israel and Iran are both mentioned in the Bible and the apocalyptic Christians in the charge of the West only care about that?
Iran isn’t directly mentioned. Vague terms like “the North” appear, and historically many American evangelicals have identified the USSR with it, because that was the geopolitical bogeyman of the day. I’ve had older evangelicals insist to me that Russia borders Israel as a result.
Iran’s more plausible than Russia, but if we pretend for a moment it’s not all some desert guy’s mushroom trip it could just as easily be Turkey.
I guess if you want to lean hard into Syria as a Russian client state… maybe?
Although, the truly Big Brain move is to assert the Bible is talking about the Godless Protestants of Europe.
That’s not the reason.