What Israel must do next to retain the ‘iron-clad’ support of its Western allies

Certain contributors to The Independent’s letters page clearly have short memories. Prior to the Islamic Revolution in 1979, Iran did not appear to have any issues with Israel. But, on assuming power, supreme leader Ayatollah Khomeini arbitrarily declared it to be an enemy and set about uniting the religious, political and military powers to his view.

This was a time when the majority of Arab states, following the Yom Kippur war, were slowly coming to the conclusion that open conflict with Israel was pointless, and that negotiation was more likely to result in an acceptable settlement to the so-called “Palestinian question”. Not so Iran, who has continued to sponsor hostility to Israel’s very existence, but never hitherto fought an open war with Israel, preferring to rely on proxies (Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis) to do its “dirty work”.

My question is: why has the international community allowed Iran, through proxies, to threaten and kill Israeli citizens?

Still, having survived unscathed an unprovoked mass attack from Iran, Israel would be well advised to maintain its current stance and threaten no Iranian civilians, thereby retaining the “iron-clad” support of their Western allies.

David Smith

Taunton

I agree with other correspondents in The Independent’s letters page that the Iranian people deserve protection from the West just as much as the Israelis. After all, no one has provided an “iron dome” to protect Palestinian women and children.

There is another reason why Benjamin Netanyahu and his gang need to think again about retaliation. I believe the USA was pre-warned about Iran’s intention of targeting military sites with more than 300 drones and missiles. They were never meant to hit their targets – but served as a useful trial run. The armaments were probably “quality seconds” anyway, in the great order of the Iranian arsenal.

If Israel takes on Iran, will Israeli defences survive a sustained attack from multiple fronts? How big a chunk of the US resources will it take to protect Israeli civilians? Think about that, Netanyahu.

Simon Fisher

Sellindge

Israel is not a member of Nato, but neither is Ukraine. Therefore, can anyone explain why the RAF can be directly deployed to defend Israel against aerial attacks from an alien country while Ukraine is left to directly defend itself?

In the case of the latter, we are told that Nato membership is a prerequisite to such involvement – yet that does not seem to apply to Israel. Contradictory standards appear to apply, even more so when one nation provoked military action against it, whereas the other did not.

Tony Shephard

Norwich

It is plainly obvious that Netanyahu is “playing” Israel’s allies. Just as serious questions were being asked about the ongoing disaster in Gaza, there was a strike on the Iranian consulate in Syria in which senior Iranian officials were killed.

Iran is then provoked, makes threatening noises, and takes a forewarned, and probably token, action. Netanyahu could stop things there, but is still rattling the sabre because he knows that the USA and others will fall in line when the foe is the Iranian state – leaving him to get on with whatever he is trying to achieve in Gaza.

You don’t “play” your allies. Netanyahu is no friend of ours. Israel and Iran would both benefit from regime change.

Kevin Murphy

Southampton

“You judge a person by the company they keep,” my mother used to say to me. If we wanted any more evidence of the odd values that Liz Truss appears to possess, look no further than her endorsement of Donald Trump in the forthcoming US election. You do not have to look at Trump’s policies – we already know he is an utterly flawed human being.

How anyone could imagine granting him a second term in the White House, after the experiences of his first, defies belief. And an endorsement from our shortest-ever serving PM is hardly a shining credential.

Maybe I am out of step: Are these really the people who should be our leaders? God help us all.

Alastair Duncan

Winchester

On reading The Independent’s request for readers to share their views on the Sydney stabbing, I felt compelled to write.

From the news reports, it seems clear that the perpetrator of the stabbings was suffering from a serious mental health condition. However, his reported anger about “not being able to find a girlfriend” is common to many other men, too – we need look no further than the online “incel” communities that have formed in recent years.

Having embarked on my own personal development journey, I am of the opinion that, due to a lack of guidance and education, many modern men lack the required skills to manage their emotions – in short, many of us walk through life with extremely low levels of emotional maturity. The blame for this should not be put on men, as how can we know what we have never been taught?

I am of the opinion that society in general fails to give men the tools they need to be the best version of themselves. This is further compounded by cliched tropes such as “be a man”, “man up” and “boys don’t cry” – we are still being told to “bottle it all up”.

As with so many problems in the world, I believe the solution to this lies within providing better education and mental healthcare. At school, I was taught so many skills that have never proved any practical use in life. For the sake of everyone in society, the way we educate children about emotional regulation desperately needs a complete overhaul.

David Wooldridge

Address supplied