Did Israel Win This War With Iran?

Did Israel Win This War With Iran?

There is no doubt that war is difficult. Running in and out of shelters and dealing with airport closures takes a toll. Now, the pain that Israel has endured appears to have eased—at least temporarily—thanks to a ceasefire.

But the enemy is still alive and seething. That may be enough to ignite another war within a few years.

And President Donald Trump will be gone. No one knows whether the next US president and administration will be as accommodating, helpful, or effective as this one has been. Given the direction of American society, that seems doubtful.

There’s also no question that Israel carried out some extraordinary operations—both during this war and throughout the 600-plus days that preceded it. Still, calling this a “win” is misleading. A poll by TOP NEWS shows that 71.6% of Israelis oppose the ceasefire and believe military action against Iran should continue.

Claims that Iran’s nuclear infrastructure was completely destroyed don’t hold up. Analysts estimate that the strike set Tehran’s program back by three to five years. Maybe.

But Iran, Israel’s most dangerous enemy, remains alive, capable, and angry. It was wounded, not killed. Israel shot Iran in the leg, not the brain. The Islamic Republic can recover, rebuild, and rethink its next steps.

This war won’t truly be over until Israel can declare victory through regime change. Only with a new government in Tehran can Israel hope to stop being the target of Iranian aggression.

Did the US reach a ceasefire with Japan? No. That war ended on September 2, 1945, with surrender. The same goes for Germany: May 8, 1945—again, surrender. Both nations formed new governments after the war.

Iran’s regime, by contrast, is still in place. That means the current ceasefire is just that: a pause. It is no different from the many ceasefires with Hamas, until October 7, 2023, shattered the illusion of calm.

The statement “if someone wants to kill you, kill him first” is a paraphrase of a principle from the Talmud, a central text of Rabbinic Judaism that records centuries of legal, ethical, and theological discussions. That principle reflects the idea that preemptive self-defense is justified when there is an imminent threat of death. While not a legal argument on its own, this idea informs self-defense laws around the world.

“If someone comes to kill you, hurry to kill him.”

It doesn’t say, “beat him up.” It says—preempt him—“hurry to kill him.”

The author of this blog or other opinion piece is a third-party contributor who is independent of The Media Line Ltd and its partners or supporters. All assertions, opinions, facts, and information presented in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and are not necessarily those of The Media Line and/or all parties related thereto, none of whom assumes any responsibility for its content.

If you believe you have discerned any form of abuse, please contact editor@themedialine.org

TheMediaLine
WHAT WOULD YOU GIVE TO CHANGE THE MISINFORMATION
about the
ISRAEL-HAMAS WAR?
Personalize Your News
Upgrade your experience by choosing the categories that matter most to you.
Click on the icon to add the category to your Personalize news
Browse Categories and Topics