[Goose]

There are reports today that Israel is preparing for a more prolonged conflict than it originally envisioned.  I take this type of report with a grain of salt, but, if true, it supports the idea BigV advanced regarding mission creep.

IMO this "more prolonged" conflict is due to two things. First, Iran is still able to fire missiles into Israel. As long as this is undeniably true, Israel politically can't claim victory. Second, Israel still can't claim they have removed Iran's ability to enrich Uranium. Obviously there is lots of damage to that ability, but clearly lots of it remains and (more importantly) Iran hasn't renounced its intention to maintain that capability. IMO Israel expected that by now the US would have destroyed the remaining know capabilities. We have not done that, which is a big "oops" for Israel.

Also, Iraq lodged a complaint today about Israeli planes using its airspace.  Depending on the direction that dispute takes, Israel could need an alternative arrangement to continue the bombing campaign at the current pace, or even close to the current pace.  Another possible place where mission creep could occur.

IMO Iraq is doing this pro forma. They have no capability to prevent Israel from using their airspace. It however doesn't make sense to not acknowledge you have noticed and consider it illegal. OTOH if either Syria or Iraq figured out a way to actually deny Israel the ability to use their airspace, it is game over for Israel. Israel is attacking Iran directly only because it has a manageable way to get there. Israel can't come anywhere close to this tempo going the "long way around". Simply not an option.   

In sum, I continue to feel uneasy about the current situation, but I also don't know that there was a better option.  I continue to feel humility in assessing whether Israel is doing the right thing and I continue to feel apprehension about the potential for a catastrophic attack by Iran or its proxies, regardless of which path Israel follows.

I think we all feel uneasy. There are probably some that are "sure" what the way ahead should be, but IMO they just haven't though about the problem enough. I do feel even more uneasy when I hear that our country's decision will be based on "instinct". I would hope a well-reasoned logical analysis justifying whatever actions the US does or does not take would be presented. That doesn't mean the decision is "correct", because the information available is always imperfect and how much weight is ascribed to any given element is most often subjective. That said, it shouldn't be just "gut feel".

[Goose]

There are reports today that Israel is preparing for a more prolonged conflict than it originally envisioned.  I take this type of report with a grain of salt, but, if true, it supports the idea BigV advanced regarding mission creep.

IMO this "more prolonged" conflict is due to two things. First, Iran is still able to fire missiles into Israel. As long as this is undeniably true, Israel politically can't claim victory. Second, Israel still can't claim they have removed Iran's ability to enrich Uranium. Obviously there is lots of damage to that ability, but clearly lots of it remains and (more importantly) Iran hasn't renounced its intention to maintain that capability. IMO Israel expected that by now the US would have destroyed the remaining know capabilities. We have not done that, which is a big "oops" for Israel.

Also, Iraq lodged a complaint today about Israeli planes using its airspace.  Depending on the direction that dispute takes, Israel could need an alternative arrangement to continue the bombing campaign at the current pace, or even close to the current pace.  Another possible place where mission creep could occur.

IMO Iraq is doing this pro forma. They have no capability to prevent Israel from using their airspace. It however doesn't make sense to not acknowledge you have noticed and consider it illegal. OTOH if either Syria or Iraq figured out a way to actually deny Israel the ability to use their airspace, it is game over for Israel. Israel is attacking Iran directly only because it has a manageable way to get there. Israel can't come anywhere close to this tempo going the "long way around". Simply not an option.   

In sum, I continue to feel uneasy about the current situation, but I also don't know that there was a better option.  I continue to feel humility in assessing whether Israel is doing the right thing and I continue to feel apprehension about the potential for a catastrophic attack by Iran or its proxies, regardless of which path Israel follows.

I think we all feel uneasy. There are probably some that are "sure" what the way ahead should be, but IMO they just haven't though about the problem enough. I do feel even more uneasy when I hear that our country's decision will be based on "instinct". I would hope a well-reasoned logical analysis justifying whatever actions the US does or does not take would be presented. That doesn't mean the decision is "correct", because the information available is always imperfect and how much weight is ascribed to any given element is most often subjective. That said, it shouldn't be just "gut feel".