Dr. Trita Parsi is an American-Iranian scholar who always provides well-reasoned, cogent analysis on Iranian actions.

Dr. Parsi has written 3 books on Iran-US relations and is the cofounder of the Washington DC think-tank, The Quincy Institute for Responsible State-Craft. (The other founder is Col. Andrew Bacevich.)

Again, discover some level-headed analysis free of the common western-Israeli anti-Iranian hysteria.

On April 1st Israel bombed the Iranian embassy in Damascus, Syria, killing between 12 to 16 people (reports vary). At least 7 of those killed were Iranian military personnel. At least 1 of them, a high ranking general.

Embassies around the world are all considered the sovereign territory of the nation it represents. To attack an embassy is to attack the country.

Imagine the American response, or the Israeli response, if Iran had attacked

the American embassy in Israel, or the Israeli embassy in the US. You can bet your bottom dollar that this would be described as a flagrant act of war and a significant military response would soon

follow.

Yet, when Iran responds similarly Israel and the US describe Iran’s counter-attack as an uncalled-for act of aggression.

The UN Security Council censured Iran for its response. Yet, the same UN body failed to censure Israel for its previous attack against Iran. This is anything but even-handedness.

Given the rank hostility against Iran eminating from Israel and its western allies, let me mention a few facts about Iran’s attack that a westerner is unlikely to learn from the mainstream (or the Christian) media:

• Yes, Iran launched between 300 to 350 attack drones and missiles against Israel over the weekend. Some of the missiles were cruise and ballistic, but the vast majority were slow moving, outdated hardware (like the drones).
• The attack was launched in two waves. The massive first wave consisted of the older, slower hardware. The vast majority of which was shot down by Israeli defenses working in tandem with US, French and British anti-missile defenses in the region.
• The second wave consisted of high-powered cruise and ballistic missiles targeting two Israeli military facilities, one in the north and one in the south of Israel. These two were targeted because they were the two operational bases from with the assault against Iran’s embassy were launched.
• Both of these military bases were struck and damaged by Iranian missiles. Yet, no personnel were injured.
• Analysts claim that Iran intended for the first wave of attacks to act as ‘cover’ for the second wave, knowing that Israel’s defensive capacities would be nearly overwhelmed by this attack. Hence, the idea of its providing ‘cover’ for the second wave of missiles.
• The only Israeli casualty was a young Bedouin girl injured by falling missile debris. No one was killed.
• Iran had given the US 72 hours advance warning of what it was planning to do.
• Iran gave Israel an additional advance warning 8 hours before the attack.
• This hardly seems like the actions of a ‘crazy, out of control nation’ (as the western media so often describes Iran) hungry to slaughter Israeli Jews.

Below is an excerpt from a recent article by Scott Ritter, former Marine intelligence officer and UN weapons inspector. He offers a careful, informed analysis of this attack following Israel’s aggression against Iran.

The article is titled “The Missiles of April”:

I’ve been writing about Iran for more than two decades. In 2005, I made a trip to Iran to ascertain the “ground truth” about that nation, a truth which I then incorporated into a book, Target Iran, laying out the U.S.-Israeli collaboration to craft a justification for a military attack on Iran designed to bring down its theocratic government.

I followed this book up with another, Dealbreaker, in 2018, which brought this U.S.-Israeli effort up to date.

Back in November 2006, in an address to Columbia University’s School of International Relations, I underscored that the United States would never abandon my “good friend” Israel until, of course, we did. What could precipitate such an action, I asked?

I noted that Israel was a nation drunk of hubris and power, and unless the United States could find a way to remove the keys from the ignition of the bus Israel was navigating toward the abyss, we would not join Israel in its lemming-like suicidal journey.

The next year, in 2007, during an address to the American Jewish Committee, I pointed out that my criticism of Israel (which many in the audience took strong umbrage against) came from a place of concern for Israel’s future.

I underscored the reality that I had spent the better part of a decade trying to protect Israel from Iraqi missiles, both during my service in Desert Storm, where I played a role in the counter-SCUD missile campaign, and as a United Nations weapons inspector, where I worked with Israeli intelligence to make sure Iraq’s SCUD missiles were eliminated.

“The last thing I want to see,” I told the crowd, “is a scenario where Iranian missiles were impacting on the soil of Israel. But unless Israel changes course, this is the inevitable outcome of a policy driven more by arrogance than common sense.”

On Monday night, early Tuesday morning, April 13-14, my concerns were played out live before an international audience — Iranian missiles rained down on Israel, and there was nothing Israel could do to stop them.

You can read the entire article here.