As best understood - a statement of some kind that appears self-contradictory yet actually semi sorta has a foundational hello of or in truth.
"Danged if ya do - danged if ya don"t"
Like Little Satan"s ever imminent strike on Iran's new clear chiz?
2 possible ways to dissuade Little Satan from such an attack:
Preacher Command could finally open serious negotiations for a formula to verifiably guarantee that the unclear new clear programme will remain a civilian one;
or Great Satan could step up her covert actions to degrade the program so much that Little Satan would decide that military action wasn’t necessary.
A “short-war” scenario assumes five days or so of limited Little Satan strikes, followed by a U.N.-brokered cease-fire. Little Satan is said to recognize that damage to the nuclear program might be modest, requiring another strike in a few years.
That Short Strike Sounds Sweet - yet hold the happiness please:
Iran already has the technical means to produce a nuclear bomb, and an attack could set the program back by no more than a few years — of value in itself but not a solution.
Iran has hundreds of Shahab missiles capable of striking Little Satan. And along with Syria, Iran has provided Hiz"B"Allah with an almost unfathomable arsenal of more than 50,000 rockets, designed precisely for this scenario, which can blanket all of Israel from Lebanon.
There is no reason to believe that Hiz"B"Allah will not use this arsenal. During the 2006 Lebanon war, Hiz"B"Allah fired 4,000 rockets at Little Satan, about one-third of its 13,000-missile arsenal at the time; if it were to employ a similar ratio today — and it could be far larger — the results would cause a level of destruction Israel has never before experienced. Hamas too has a large rocket arsenal in waiting, but "just" thousands.True - enough - thus a short war against Iran may naughtily nee" necessity require some pre emptive preventive projectile provocateuring
Furthermore, the destabilization of the regimes in Egypt and Syria, following the Arab Spring, greatly increases the dangers that they too might be drawn into the confrontation. Syria, because it may have an interest in deflecting domestic unrest by focusing public attention on an external enemy. Egypt, because the new Islamist-based government will, at very best, be far less committed to peace with Israel. An explosion of popular fury on the Egyptian and Arab street may force it to act.O really? LOLZ!! Yeah riiiight - ebberdobby 'members Arab Street's rage when Little Satan refrained from going Grozy on the Strip and flung Cast Lead by the bucket load (fully crunk with willie P!!) back in the day - bout as rageful as when Commonwealth did go Grozny on Grozny
What will the mighty mighty (impotent) Aegypt or Arab League do exactly? Beat up more of their own girls? Surge J!hajies into B'Kah Valley and Sinai?
Arab League's Military power is a laugh - besides the Saudilanders would most likely diss or at least dilute any retaliation against Little Satan for putting paid to their own enemies in Iran or Leb Leb Lebanon
A nuked up seemingly unhinged Preacher Command with eyes on Imperium, and a radical (haha!) realignment of strategic import with all the money traps containment means and a potential risk to Little Satan"s' existence versus the uncertain results of military action, the likelihood of a devastating Iranian/Hiz"B"Aallah response, the risk of an end to the peace with Egypt and even a military confrontation (zzzz) and regional war, severe international opprobrium
Pic - "Strike Package"