I don’t think that Iran is going to get much useful sympathy from any country not already on its side (and of those, Russia has other priorities). Iran’s ambitions have put it at odds with both Western countries and the Arab world and international law (even if it is on Iran’s side - I don’t know) is never going to lead countries to act against the dictates of realpolitik.
I also don’t think that failing to destroy these facilities necessarily makes a nuclear-armed Iran inevitable, given that Israel and the USA apparently have total air dominance. The infrastructure needed to deploy nuclear ICBMs can’t all be kept deep underground and Iran’s dependence on oil exports makes its economy particularly vulnerable to strategic bombing. I just don’t trust Trump to see things through if his initial attempts fail - he’s too impulsive. (And I’m not sure the moral calculus remains the same either - it’s one thing to blow up a few underground weapons labs and quite another to engage in a strategic bombing campaign against the entire country.)
If anything, Israel and the US have clearly showed Iran that they will never be safe unless they develop military capabilities strong enough to deter attacks.
Like… what kind of message do you think you’re sending when you attack a country trying to develop nukes because they see you as an existential threat? Iran has been shown that the only way they will ever be safe from Israel is by developing nukes such that Israel doesn’t dare attack them.
The intent is presumably to force Iran to accept that it cannot be safe, and that the best it can do is to appease its enemies. That is, as a matter of fact, currently true if the USA decides to see things through. It’s a situation that many countries have been forced to accept over the course of history (and one that Iran has been eager to impose on is neighbors).
I don’t think that Iran is going to get much useful sympathy from any country not already on its side (and of those, Russia has other priorities). Iran’s ambitions have put it at odds with both Western countries and the Arab world and international law (even if it is on Iran’s side - I don’t know) is never going to lead countries to act against the dictates of realpolitik.
I also don’t think that failing to destroy these facilities necessarily makes a nuclear-armed Iran inevitable, given that Israel and the USA apparently have total air dominance. The infrastructure needed to deploy nuclear ICBMs can’t all be kept deep underground and Iran’s dependence on oil exports makes its economy particularly vulnerable to strategic bombing. I just don’t trust Trump to see things through if his initial attempts fail - he’s too impulsive. (And I’m not sure the moral calculus remains the same either - it’s one thing to blow up a few underground weapons labs and quite another to engage in a strategic bombing campaign against the entire country.)
If anything, Israel and the US have clearly showed Iran that they will never be safe unless they develop military capabilities strong enough to deter attacks.
Like… what kind of message do you think you’re sending when you attack a country trying to develop nukes because they see you as an existential threat? Iran has been shown that the only way they will ever be safe from Israel is by developing nukes such that Israel doesn’t dare attack them.
The intent is presumably to force Iran to accept that it cannot be safe, and that the best it can do is to appease its enemies. That is, as a matter of fact, currently true if the USA decides to see things through. It’s a situation that many countries have been forced to accept over the course of history (and one that Iran has been eager to impose on is neighbors).