With all the typical revenge rhetoric the Israelis have been using through the years, the recent response to Iran’s attack was measured and weak. I found this to be very puzzling and out of character for the Israelis.
I was aware that the Biden regime made appeals to the Israelis to not retaliate with a massive attack, and Biden even sent Sec. of State Blinken to make their case.

It must be realized that the Israelis have a staunch historical policy of hitting back against all enemies with attacks greater than was launched against them. Even their Mossad slogan is to “Rise up and kill first”. So, the question was, why did they suddenly change tactics and policy and not retaliate in an aggressive way against Iran?

I found the answer by accident when I was watching a video on modern “war gaming”. To lay a foundation of historical context, a person has to go back to just after WW2. After the Soviets exploded their first atomic bomb, the US went into secret studies to come up with a plan on how to deal with this new threat. They even considered taking out the communists with a preemptive strike, before they could build more bombs and place them on missiles.

As the years went by, they started doing war gaming scenarios to discover how to deal with this growing threat. During the course of these studies US professors came up with a simple system of attacks between the US and an enemy, to discover what strategy would be best. One such study was called: “Game Theory, the Prisoner’s Dilemma”. Another research theory was called: “The Evolution of Trust”.

In these game theories they were looking for patterns on military responses to find how a nation should respond to an attack, or if they should be fully aggressive and stay in a full attack mode at all times, or consider theories in between.

Eventually this required the creation of computer algorithms that could be compared against each other to determine which plan of action would be best for a “win”. The end result showed that one program called “tit for tat” worked best, which was to stay in “trust and peace mode” and only counter attack when attacked, but then go back to refraining from attacks.

The bottom line was that a nation could “pretend” to be “altruistic” and peace loving as a crafty strategy to cause the enemy to feel comfortable to stand down. That is when I realized that is exactly what the experts told Israel to do - to fool the Iranians they wanted peace, and not want to elevate the conflict to a higher level.

This meant that Israel's moves are a shrewd tactical move and does not change their long-standing policy of revenge and total power over an enemy. Later, at a time of their choosing they will attack Iran when they least expect it.

It must be also realized that during these token attacks between Israel and Iran, the bombing campaign has continued by Israel against Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon and Syria, and thousands have died the past 2 months.

With the upcoming Trump administration that is extremely pro-Israel, it can be expected that the US will join forces with Israel to wipe out all anti-Israel terrorist groups, Iranian proxy forces and Iran itself.
In fact, these new style neo-cons are itching to go to war for a variety of reasons, thinking they are invulnerable to counter attacks. That is a dangerous and reckless combination and could lead incrementally to a nuclear exchange.
Typically, a new administration will be wanting to prove to the world that they can win any conflict, and if they don’t make a bold showing right away, they will be considered weak and feckless. George Eaton

(below is the video I mentioned)

https://youtu.be/mScpHTIi-kM?si=O9xftwD075xKDkBI