Was Iran’s Strike Against Israel a Psy-Op?

Was Iran’s Strike Against Israel a Psy-Op?

by Janet Phelan, Activist Post
April 15, 2024

 

Image credit: CBS

 

Saturday saw a rather spectacular night-sky display over Tel Aviv and elsewhere in Israel, as Iran sent hundreds of drones and missiles aimed at the Jewish state. From all reports, the display of force exhibited by Iran was stopped cold by a coordinated response by Israel, the US, the UK and even Jordan and Saudi Arabia, as around 99% of the projectiles were blown up before reaching the target. There was one critical injury reported–that of a Bedouin child who has subsequently been hospitalized. Physical damage was also reported as minor.

The strike by Iran, the first ever that came directly from Tehran and not via its proxies, was in retaliation to an attack by Israel on an Iranian consulate building in Damascus, killing Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Zaheoi, a senior IRGC commander, and seven other IRGC officers. This Israeli assault came as a result of Iranian attacks on Israeli citizens which took place along the Syrian border. Since October 7, Iran and Israel have engaged in escalating exchanges which many fear will erupt into outright war.

As stated by Behnam Ben Taleblu, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and an expert in Iran’s missile capabilities, and quoted in Politico,

“Until now, Iran had never directly targeted Israel from Iranian territory in an overt and attributable fashion…. The strike also was the first ballistic missile attack from Iranian territory against a defended target.”

There are a couple of ways to view such a dramatic failure as Iran’s unprecedented attack on Israel. One is to thank the Master of the Universe for intervening and protecting Israel. Another way is to recognize the effectiveness of Israel and its allies in successfully stopping the Iranian attack.

A third way involves some dispassionate analysis of what Iran intended and what it may have set in motion by its actions in launching the failed assault. The remainder of this article looks at the events as a possible psy-op, ostensibly launched by Iran but further promulgated by the general Western response to the attack.

The amount of media attention given the Iranian attack in the days leading up to Saturday’s attack was definitely…weird. Media outlet after outlet broadcast the pending attack, and even nailed down the probable time frame. “Iran to Attack Israel Within 48 hours,” bleated headline after headline. And sure enough, within the predicted time frame Iran stepped up.

With an attack which could not have been less stealthy–the drones taking about six hours to reach Israeli air space–and with all the formal pomp and circumstance accorded such a well publicized attack, Iran sent its projectiles against Israel. As one commentator. Reid Baron, put it,

“This is a strategic move by Iran to see how Israel and it’s allies will reply. Why else would many Iranian drones have their lights on and take ~6 hrs to reach Israeli airspace? That’s like telling someone you’re going to punch them in the nose and taking 10 minutes to set up the punch.”

If all the advance notice and the fact that the attack was so easily tracked and therefore thwarted was not enough, the media gave considerable attention and weight to the failed attack. CNN posted over 50 updates, giving a blow by blow account as the drones entered Israeli airspace and were duly blown out of the sky. CNN also gravely informed us of Biden’s high level meetings during the air strike and actions by other state parties, such as the UK, which rushed to Israel’s defense. CNN also covered Iran’s announcement that the assault had “concluded.”

But has it really? And was Iran’s attack on Israel anything more than a decoy, a psy-op?

In an article published April 14, Politico asks the bold question—

“Iran’s Attack Seems Like It Was Designed to Fail. So What Comes Next?”

If indeed the Iranian attack was “designed to fail,” the reasons for this must include the fact that Israel will most likely respond. And this presents the likelihood of a full blown Iranian/Israeli war.

Coming at a time when President Biden exhibits such waffling in his support of Israel, and coming at a time when it appears that Iran has indeed achieved its long-sought goal to obtain a nuclear weapon, this does not bode well for the future of stability in the region. Also of concern is that public sentiment seems to have turned somewhat against Israel, largely due to the success of Hamas’s propaganda in convincing people that the Palestinian death toll is much larger than it really is.

And given Israel’s remarkable lapse on October 7, when the fence breach and invasion by Hamas took place, one wonders who is really watching over Israel’s defenses. Not only was advance notice that Hamas was doing drills around the fence ignored, not only was the technologically state-of-the-art fence somehow breached and the IDF failed to respond for hours following the breach, but no adequate reason has yet been tendered for this massive failure on the part of Israel’s defenses.

Although Biden has stated that his support for Israel is “ironclad,” his recent actions reveal a different mindset. When the US failed to veto a recent UN call for a ceasefire in Gaza, the Israeli response was stunned. When Biden authorized billions in aid for Iran, the Israeli response was equally redolent of shock and betrayal. And the President has made it very clear that should Israel respond to the failed Iranian attack, it is on its own.

What better way to lure Israel into a war with an enemy that has an undisclosed nuclear arsenal than to launch a faux attack? And given that Israel’s “BF” has tipped us off that it won’t support Israel should Israel retaliate, what better way to ensure that the tiny Jewish state suffers a lethal blow than to hang it out to dry at the ultimate challenge?

Citing a Wall Street Journal article, another commentator, Yan Gulko, had this to say—

“The Iranian strike was largely performative, not directed against population centers, communicated clearly hours in advance and designed to be intercepted with the resources available. Its intention was to clearly cross the red line, but do it in such a way that the world powers would not rally behind Israel’s retaliatory strike.”

In other words. “Come and get us. And make sure you come alone. We’ll be waiting for you.”

 

Janet Phelan has been on the trail of the biological weapons agenda since the new millennium. Her book on the pandemic, At the Breaking Point of History: How Decades of US Duplicity Enabled the Pandemic, has been published in 2021 by Trine Day and is available on Amazon and elsewhere. Her articles on this issue have appeared in Activist Post, New Eastern Outlook, Infowars and elsewhere. 

 

Connect with Activist Post

Cover image credit: tswedensky