Iran - Israel/US War: Israel-US declare war on Iran, Iran responds

[RocketLaw]

And how is this "breaking news"?

Yes right! Of course, they are participated again Iran.

 

[Winthorpe]

Any thoughts on what Trump will announce Thursday night during his address to the Nation? I am guessing making a case for ground forces?

 

[RescueRanger]

Yes right! Of course, they are participated again Iran.

Everyone knows there are US bases in KSA. It's not news.

 

[VCheng]

The United States is an evil country, there's no doubt about that. It may not be the Great Satan or whatever other term coined for propaganda, but there's no doubt that most of the evil in the world since at least World War II comes from the United States alone.
However, it is not Iran's duty to fight the United States or Israel on behalf of the oppressed people of Palestine or any other country. We should've never got ourselves involved in this nonsense in the first place.


If you're trying to justify a war crime, I'm afraid you're failing at it miserably. The US is purposefully committing war crimes and your president has already admitted to it many times on national TV. There is no doubt that the whole responsibility for the recent attack targeting a location close to a hospital dedicated to children with cancer is on the United States and nobody else.

Dear Sir, as I mentioned to @RescueRanger above, everyone has an equal right to hold on to their views as they wish.

I would like to hold on to my views, different as they may be, from yours described above, and we can move on in peace, at least on the this thread and forum.

Directly relevant to the topic, as much as I can gather from the evidence available, the hospital in Ahvaz was not targeted.

I am not justifying any war crimes.

I am merely noting that military targets can and do pose a danger to any civilian assets in close proximity to them, and that is a simple fact, stated without any other ulterior motive in mind.

 

[Watandar]

Any thoughts on what Trump will announce Thursday night during his address to the Nation? I am guessing making a case for ground forces?

No, reports were it will be about election interference by foreign powers. Sure he may throw some Iran stuff in there but it's more about his attempt to rig the upcoming mid-term elections.

 

[RzA]

Thank you for your understanding, brother. I appreciate it.

The thing is, at the end of the day, it will be the people of Iran that will pay the price of our poor foreign policies.
I know that some people want Iran to be the hero that fights the Western imperialism and Israel, but we simply do not have the means to do that and Muslims, and the people of the Global South, not only are not united, but conspire against each other all the time.

It's so tiring being an Iranian. I just want us to be a normal country and live normal lives and have normal relationship(s) with everyone else. Is that too much to ask?

 

[krash]

I am afraid the U.S. and Israel have established a precedent where security interests trump all rights and laws. So now others have to live with the consequences as Iran views control over the SoH as a vital security interest.

Even if the US/Israel hadn't, it would be unwise of Iran to not do it, if it believes that it can attain its desired results.

However, the absurdly dense arguments that are being presented here just for the sake of cheerleading one side, or the other, are reaching Indian levels of self-awareness.

 

[VCheng]

I just want us to be a normal country and live normal lives and have normal relationship(s) with everyone else

Many here would say that those conditions already exist, there being nothing abnormal about Iran as a country. It just chooses to march to the beat of its own drum, that is all.

 

[VCheng]

Iran views control over the SoH as a vital security interest.

That is fair and understandable statement. If Iran can achieve it, it will be huge win geopolitically, without a doubt.

 

[Pakistan Space Agency]

Read item no. 1 very slowly.

Israel broke the MoU.

You and others on this thread need to take note of this actual harsh reality.

What happens now in the Strait is anyone's game. Without the MoU, we are left with two cartels scrapping with each other.

If the Islamabad MOU is null and void from Day 1 because Israel (which did not agree or sign on to anything) violated item 1, then why are Iranians insisting that item 5 gives them legal cover to attack foreign commercial ships?

Can't selectively pick and choose which part of the MOU is Halal and which is not.

 

[VCheng]

Even if the US/Israel hadn't, it would be unwise of Iran to not do it if it can, disregarding how vital it is or is not for its security interests.

I would defend Iran's right to determine its own course in how it decides to respond. Whether it turns out to be wise or not can only be determined by the outcomes of those decisions, some of which are already beginning to become evident.

The above rationale of course applies going the other way too, equally.

 

[ShapurII]

Dear Sir, as I mentioned to @RescueRanger above, everyone has an equal right to hold on to their views as they wish.

I would like to hold on to my views, different as they may be, from yours described above, and we can move on in peace, at least on the this thread and forum.

Directly relevant to the topic, as much as I can gather from the evidence available, the hospital in Ahvaz was not targeted.

I am not justifying any war crimes.

I am merely noting that military targets can and do pose a danger to any civilian assets in close proximity to them, and that is a simple fact, stated without any other ulterior motive in mind.

Sure, I never denied that you had a right to your views. It goes without saying that you do, as we all do.

Nevertheless, the excuse you are using to downplay the evil that the US is committing is not based on anything morally or rationally acceptable. First of all, we don't know what the US had targeted there exactly. We just know it was something close to the hospital. Secondly, all countries have military infrastructure in civilian areas. A police station is deemed a military target per the US very broad definition of targets with potential military use. A communication antenna is deemed a military target per the US definition. You even consider civilian bridges to be military targets lol An air defense system is definitely a military target, isn't it?

Heck, the US itself has deployed multiple air defense systems in the Green Zone of Baghdad, which is mostly an administrative and diplomatic area, and you are supposed to know that as a think-tank with an American flag in your profile. Israel has tens of air defense systems dispersed throughout its cities. Ukraine has done the same as well.

Also, it was me who said that the US hadn't directly targeted the hospital. So, I have no idea why you are reiterating it here as if I had claimed otherwise.

 

[Ali_Baba]

We will have to "wait and see" (TM)

So, you agree there is a logical possibility of that happening, and we are both in "wait and see" mode ?

 

[VCheng]

Also, it was me who said that the US hadn't directly targeted the hospital.

Yes. It was not targeted. Agreed.

Now, for the rest of your post, please note there is a post above saying clearly that allowing the use of military bases close to Makkah places Makkah itself at risk from an Iranian attack due to its proximity.

That logic works both ways, of course, as I mentioned, that close proximity of military targets to civilian assets places them at risk.

 

[RescueRanger]

So, you agree there is a logical possibility of that happening, and we are both in "wait and see" mode ?

Anything is possible right now.