Public Opinion Survey: Views on Israel's Response to Iran

[gutlib]

I'm curious about the public opinion. Please take a moment to respond. Thank you.

[Sam 77]

The Jewish pride in me says revenge

[EliJelly]

The Jewish pride in me says revenge

If only others were so open as you.

The concern for Jewish blood in me makes me very very unsure. Leaning towards moderate only, if the US isn't part of it.

[YitzyS]

My answer is to bomb their nuclear facilities. I don't know which category that would fall into.

[EliJelly]

My answer is to bomb their nuclear facilities. I don't know which category that would fall into.

I don't think Israel can attack their nuclear facilities without US help.

[YitzyS]

I am no expert of these things, but my gut tells me that one of two things may be true:

1. The US maybe would help, as long as nobody knows that the US is helping.

2. The Israelis may be able to do it without US help, but it would take some ingenuity. In the past, they have displayed that ingenuity, but they seem to be devoid of it over the last year or so.

[HudZ]

Is it true that the IDF looks here for advice and opinions?

[HudZ]

Can you put a 'What do I know' vote.

[YitzyS]

Is it true that the IDF looks here for advice and opinions?

Yup. They actually have a special division just for this.

[yshad]

I'm still trying to understand what the OP's native language is, because it sure does not seem to be English

[AsherO]

I think it should be more than in-kind, but not disproportionate in quantity, only disproportionate in quality. And not out of revenge, but as a military response that is called for to deter future attacks.

[Alexsei]

What was Israel's response to the 1992 Israel embassy bombing?

[CountValentine]

Is it true that the IDF looks here for advice and opinions?

Where do the nations of the world go for military advice. What a stupid question, DDF! 

[Moshe Green]

I think it should be more than in-kind, but not disproportionate in quantity, only disproportionate in quality. And not out of revenge, but as a military response that is called for to deter future attacks.

+1
The Iranian leaders need to know that any attack on Israel will mean that they are sleeping in a bunker for the next year.

[CountValentine]

When Israel destroyed the Iranian consulate annex building adjacent to the Iranian embassy, they knew Iran would/had to respond.
Iran's response was a complete failure.
Israel's original strike was a complete success.
Both sides know this.
Go back and finish your original objective (Hamas).

ETA: Clarified first sentence so @Just A Jew does not have to nitpick. 
The other(s) will still just hate.

[Just A Jew]

When Israel struck their consulate, they knew Iran would/had to respond.
Iran's response was a complete failure.
Israel's original strike was a complete success.
Both sides know this.
Go back and finish your original objective (Hamas).

Not to nitpick, but they didn't strike the consulate. That would be a different kind of escalation. But I generally agree with you in dealing with the more pressing issues first. Iran isn't going anywhere.

[AsherO]

Iran's response was a complete failure.
 …
Both sides know this.

I don’t think this is true. Israel was only as successful as they were because they were prepared and had their coalition partners engaged and on high alert.

If Iran gets away with this strike scot free, it’s only a matter of time before they repeat it on a larger scale and exploiting any weakness they might have discovered during this attack.

[momo]

Not to nitpick, but they didn't strike the consulate. That would be a different kind of escalation. But I generally agree with you in dealing with the more pressing issues first. Iran isn't going anywhere.

Yes to Nitpick. Call out lies, and misinformation, when they are given as fact. They did not strike a consulate building.

[Just A Jew]

Yes to Nitpick. Call out lies, and misinformation, when they are given as fact. They did not strike a consulate building.

It's nitpicking because it was irrelevant to his point. I clarified it, which still doesn't change his point or his opinion, because I also felt the accuracy was important. But let's tone down the accusatory language. Doesn't help get the point across any better.

[Yehuda57]

When Israel struck their consulate, they knew Iran would/had to respond.
Iran's response was a complete failure.
Israel's original strike was a complete success.
Both sides know this.
Go back and finish your original objective (Hamas).

They did not strike their consulate. It's not semantics, it's a huge difference. Israel has been hitting targets in Lebanon and Syria, it's not an escalation. Had they killed the same target in Iran it would have been an escalation.

Iran's response was a failure, unless Israel doesn't respond, in which case it turns sending ballistic missiles into the status quo. That's what Israel did with Gaza and look how that is going.

Yes, they must not lose sight on the objective. Retaliation doesn't even have to be immediate. But ignoring it will result in dead Israelis, not peace.