Saleh

I agree. In order to break the cycle of retribution we need to achieve justice. Otherwise people will continue to seek it. The difficulty includes that this wont work without having everyone involved face the reality of their actions. We will need extensive education and a process that will probably exceed the Nuremberg trials by a large factor. The only alternative to achieve "peace" in the long run would be to completely genocide or ethnically cleanse one side from the region. That is how the US got away with what it did to the native Americans.

i would hope the average American cares about himself

There can be no sustainable peace without justice.

i think it is more likely that the opposite would happen. Anyone with two brain cells understands that there is nothing to gain for the US from it. Maybe for the MIC but certainly not for the average American who will have to deal with high oil prices, recession and possibly his son coming back in a coffin.

Their sheer speed makes ballistic weapons challenging to intercept, but the initial reports of no fatalities within Israel and one in the West Bank would suggest despite the numbers of missiles launched it was a military failure

This part irks me quite a bit. Like in the retaliation against the US after the assassination of an Iranian general invited to a diplomatic talk, Iran seems to avoid causing casualties to show strength, w.o. pushing for escalation. This is quite opposite to Israel who makes a point of indiscriminately slaughtering thousands of civilians in their actions, since their goal is to escalate into a great war in West Asia, where the US has to do their dirty work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historian

Systematic historical thought emerged in ancient Greece, a development that became an important influence on the writing of history elsewhere around the Mediterranean region. The earliest known critical historical works were The Histories, composed by Herodotus of Halicarnassus (484 – c. 425 BCE) who later became known as the "father of history" (Cicero).

Now how many people had access to this knowledge is another matter, but studying history and learning from it was an important aspect in the education and training of leaders to be since more than a thousand years at the very least.

If we look at Moses and the Pharaoh as well as ancient Greek democracies, we can conclude that the principles of politics have not changed all that much in the past 3000-4000 years of human history. The knowledge was always there and the same mistakes are always repeated, with some very incremental progresses and regressions in between.

If the only tool you have is a hammer...

It shows what a failed kind of people they are, both intellectually and ethically, if the only language they speak is violence.

Going into a war with Iran will set the entire region ablaze. The only thing the Iraq war did, was increasing influence for Iran. The only thing the Afghanistan war did, was a 20 year sabbatical for the Taliban.

The US surely can destroy major Iranian infrastructure like oil production and probably cripple its conventional military capabilities. But then what?

In the process Iran would destroy the oil production of US allied nations.
We would see years if not decades of Iraq style insurgencies.
Tens of millions if not hundreds of millions of people would become refugees, with the pressure on Europe easily having the potential to break the Union and turn the states into full blown fascist hellholes. Russia would use the distraction and the high oil price income to deliver the final blow to Ukraine.
China could feel emboldened or threatened to push for its military ambitions in the South China sea and Taiwan.
Justified hatred for the US in all of the Middle East would be ensured for another three generations to come.
The resulting global economic crisis would plunge large swaths of Americans and Europeans into poverty (and many more people around the world, that the West doesn't care for unfortunately).

Meanwhile i don't see anything positive coming out of it. I don't see how it would stabilize the region in the long run, help economic development or create conditions under which better diplomatic ties grow.

The EU car industry, in particular German carmakers are at the verge of a crisis because they lobbied so successfully against more regulations, that they fell behind on innovation. Now China is swooping up the EV market.

The problem with regulation is never regulation. It is a problem of inefficient bureaucratic processes of enforcing it. In order to have efficient processes you need to invest well into the public sector, which is something Neoliberals like Macron fiercely oppose.

It would hurt much less, if the countries wouldn't get fucked in trade "agreements" for their agricultural products and resources.

This aspect is kind of where the whole "free market, everyone specializes, everyone wins" theory fails, as the "less developed" economies get pushed around diplomatically and militarily, rather than being allowed to participate in a fair market.

A temporary ceasefire is the first stop to a permanent ceasefire.

If Israel wants to win militarily against Hezbollah, i'd say Gaza is a cautionary tale for that. Despite all of the destruction Hamas is weakened but nut destroyed and only very few hostages were freed by force (with insane numbers of Palestinian civillians killed while doing it). The vast majority of hostages was freed by negotiations.

John Mearsheimer said that military action is a very limited tool. We have seen this in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Vietnam...

With that i also read, that the gulf states are concerned, that Iran might target their Oil production and close off the street of Hormus if the US attacks Iran.

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/lebanese-army-fires-israel-hezbollah-strikes-invading

“Our response will be solely directed at the aggressor. Should any country render assistance to the aggressor, it shall likewise be deemed an accomplice and a legitimate target," Iran's mission said.

Concerned Gulf Arab officials told their Iranian counterparts they would remain neutral in the conflict between Iran and Israel, as they look to prevent spillover into their territories.

Reuters reported that ministers from Gulf Arab states delivered the message to Iran at a meeting of Asian nations hosted by Qatar, worried about potential Iranian attacks on their oil facilities.

"The Gulf states think it's unlikely that Iran will strike their oil facilities, but the Iranians are dropping hints they might from unofficial sources. It's a tool the Iranians have against the US and the global economy," Ali Shihabi, a Saudi commentator close to the royal court, told Reuters.

I think this would be a gigantic strategic mistake to provoke by the US administration. If the oil price hikes and the US gets dragged into a great war in West Asia it will throttle the American economy and probably kill all prospects of the Dems winning in November. Meanwhile Putin will roll in money, stabilizing his economy on the one hand, and making use of the shifted US focus and arms prioritization, effectively sacrificing Ukraine to him.

Israel has fronts in Gaza, Westbank, Lebanon and conflict with Yemens Houthis and Iran+ Iran backed militias in Iraq and Syria. People in Jordan are getting fed up and celebrating people who attacked the Israeli occupation forces in the Westbank.

Israel decided to escalate things in the Westbank and now with Hezbollah, where before the conflict remained on a low, but also provoking Iran and Syria with attacks in the recent months.

Most Analysts say that this is because the IDF and Netanyahu need some wins, after failing to achieve the stated goals "destroy Hamas" and "bring back the Hostages" militarily and discontent has risen. Now with killing some Hezbollah leaders public opinion became favorable again. Hamas is countering that with pointing out the strategic failure in Gaza through this terroristic attack.