top of page

The Rundown

The Rundown is a blog that pulls apart news stories our base is interested in and takes facts from CNN, FOX, The Atlantic, The Economist and the likings, and sorts out the fact from the fluff.

Search
Writer's pictureEmily Smith

The Israel-Iran Rocket Exchange

Israel and Iran have had high tensions as of late. In response to an attack by Iran of the Israeli occupied Golan Heights, Israel targeted Syria in a series of missile strikes.

Long exposure picture from CNN showing Israeli missiles headed toward their target

The three articles I'm pulling from today are from CNN, FOX, and BBC. (CNN being left leaning, FOX being right leaning, and BBC being relatively neutral) The headlines and links to the stories are as follows.





After looking through all three articles, I realized how telling just the headlines themselves can be. All three paint a substantially different picture. Both CNN and FOX have a lot of fluff, while BBC gets straight to the point. I found that to be pretty consistent throughout the rest of the pieces as well.


There were 4 main conclusions that I drew from reading the articles. All four of which were reported by both CNN and BBC, but were not touched on by FOX. The main points are as follows....

  1. Israel claims to have destroyed most of the Iranian military compounds located in Syrian territory

  2. The strikes are in response to 20 missiles that were fired at Israeli forces previously.

  3. This is where things get a little weird. BBC and CNN report two different numbers of casualties and deaths from two different sources. FOX doesn't report.

  4. Finally, both BBC and CNN report on several countries, including Russia and Germany, have called on both countries to show restraint.


So on number 1. All three sources open their articles with this basic fact. What's really interesting to me, however, is the amount of fluff each source uses to get the point across.

All three paragraphs are directly pulled from the articles I linked to above

This first point is relatively straightforward. CNN references Golan Heights, which is the territory that Israel currently occupies and where the Israelis were targeted by Iranian forces as mentioned earlier. FOX goes on in great detail about the type of infrastructure that was destroyed, and bot FOX and BBC report that this has been the biggest confrontation since the start of the civil war.


The second point is equally as straightforward, with very little deviation between outlets.

CNN for some reason really wants their readers to have a clear image of the rockets in the sky, but it also mentions something that I have found to be reflected in the other two articles at different points in the pieces; that is that several of the rockets were intercepted by both parties.


The third point is where things start to get a little more fun.

Both CNN and BBC report on the number of deaths. CNN references a statement from the Syrian government, while BBC uses numbers from The Syrian Observatory. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, is a UK-based information office whose aim is to document human rights abuses in Syria.


FOX doesn't report anything vaguely related to death count; however, it does give several paragraphs worth of juxtaposition of the two parties' military strengths and weaknesses. It states:

"But Israel’s military budget for 2018 is $20 billion – more than three times what Iran is reported to be spending, $6.3 billion. That figure, the site says, ranks Iran 33rd overall in the world in terms of military spending for 2018, lagging behind some of its neighbors – Turkey, Afghanistan and Pakistan – and significantly behind the leader in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia, which is reported to be devoting upwards of $56 billion toward its army. On land and in the air, Israel’s military appears to pack a greater punch than Iran’s. Israel boasts 2,760 tanks compared to Iran’s 1,650, and 596 aircraft to Iran’s 505, according to the website"

The website it's referencing is "GlobalFirepower.com"


The fourth and final point essentially states other countries', including our own's, take on the exchange. Again, FOX did not report on this.


Essentially, the United States is one of the few, if not the only, party that has officially condoned Israel's behavior. It quotes a statement from the White House, only days after Trump terminated the Iran Nuclear deal. In place of this, FOX reports heavily on the ties from Iran to local Islamic terrorist groups, and I quote:


Iran, during the Syrian conflict, has been trying to secure a steady land corridor from its border to the Mediterranean to help Hezbollah – a terror group it backs in Lebanon – and Syrian dictator Bashar Assad. Iran has also stationed increasing numbers of its Revolutionary Guard unit in Syria to bolster its aims. The use of the corridor is probably intended above all for the movement of troops to Syria to further assist in stabilizing the Assad regime,” it said. “However, at a later stage, or in parallel, the corridor can strengthen Hezbollah’s capabilities against Israel – and perhaps those of other Shiite militias currently stationed in Syria – and thereby intensify Iranian deterrence and the threat to Israel. It added: “The delay in operating the corridor is likely due not only to the continued fighting in some of the areas, but also to the Iranians' fear of attacks on convoys by the United States and/or Israel, as well as by Sunni elements, the Islamic State, and organizations opposed to Assad.”

So, to give you a rundown, Israel recently retaliated against Iran after they targeted Israeli forces stationed in Gabon heights. There's currently an inconclusive death count. Several other world powers condemn both parties' actions, although the US is not among them. Israel's military is funded significantly more than Iran's, and Iran is probably using these strategies to help secure a corridor for terrorists.


If your'e looking to find more information about Israel and Iran, their relationship, or their relevance to the Syrian war, I strongly recommend checking out the BBC article. They have in depth analysis with minor bias and extra information for those completely unfamiliar with the topic.

Was this a good topic to cover? Do you have another story you want covered in full but haven't had the time to check out? Please contact us! A contact form is located on our home page.

Comments


bottom of page