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

[shapurzolaktaf]

The audacity of commenting on other nation affairs when one own nation is highly infiltrated by Mossad/CIA which gets it's own Leadership (Civilian, Military, Scientists) killed and then the same moles send pictures of dead body of the leadership to Mossad. And the news of Death is confirmed by Mossad/CIA first instead of coming from own Iranian officials.

In short, concentrate on topic.

Differs from open cooperation (Pakistani Generals and CIA). Picture of dead body was fake and the Khamenei was at his daily workplace, nothing special.

 

[ShapurII]

Abbas Araghchi was in India on 7th - 8th May 2025, making deals and singing praises of India when India was lobbing missiles at Pakistan and killing Pakistanis. Shall I share videos and pictures of that visit? Or of Iran was singing praises of India last month ( or June) and how Chahbahar port project can be re-activated again?.

Your mentality needs a course correction. When Pakistan hurts Iran physically then we can talk about Pakistani system could be trusted or not. As of now, Iran is dependent upon Pakistan & Qatar to mediate with America.

Iran has it's own interests to protect so does Pakistan. When each other interests starts to hurt one another, then we can discuss who is friendly towards another.

Stop writing stupid bullshit. Show us those "deals" and "praises". You should share the texts of those deals and praises. Iran has never "praised" India other than what we have praised Pakistan. And honestly, none of these countries deserve any sort of praise.

Chabahar Port will be developed and reactivated again as soon as the war is over. Chabahar Port is part of Iran's territory and we will develop it. And it is absolutely none of your business how we develop our country.

Pakistani system cannot be trusted. And you're a nobody to tell people what their mentality should be.

Pakistan can have their own interests. It's not my business what Pakistan does, you have every right to pursue your interests as you see fit. That goes without saying and it is trivial. However, it is clear that the Pakistani system is not friendly towards Iran and the Islamic Republic should take that into account.

 

[Bratva]

Differs from open cooperation (Pakistani Generals and CIA). Picture of dead body was fake and the Khamenei was at his daily workplace, nothing special.

Stop with the strawman arguments.America openly accused invaded and killed Pakistani soldiers. But what do you know about it? Because you and people sharing your mentality are here just for gotcha moments and mudslinging. 2025 war ceasefire with Israel was mediated through Trump and Qatar. Does it mean Iranian leadership was working with Trump?

 

[ShapurII]

And - how has Pakistan "betrayed" Iran in your eyes?

Starting from the MoU, which you betrayed Iran by creating two different versions of the MoU and gave a different version to Trump, and then your military alliance with Saudi Arabia and Kuwait while they're in conflict with Iran, in the middle of the largest war in the Middle East since the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Not that I care though, I never did. I said this would happen and it happened. I'm just reminding my Iranian friends on here.

Here's the truth: While some people in Pakistan, mainly civilians and sometimes people in your parliament, are friendly towards Iran, the bulk of the Pakistani system is pro-Saudi and you cannot be pro-Saudi and friendly towards Iran at the same time. Period.

 

[shapurzolaktaf]

Stop with the strawman arguments.America openly accused invaded and killed Pakistani soldiers. But what do you know about it? Because you and people sharing your mentality are here just for gotcha moments and mudslinging. 2025 war ceasefire with Israel was mediated through Trump and Qatar. Does it mean Iranian leadership was working with Trump?

If Iran allows Iranians to be droned by CIA inside Iranian territory, then YES, that's clear treason and cooperation with CIA. You can't compare that to diplomatic contacts, which is not uncommon between countries during war.

 

[Ali_Baba]

Starting from the MoU, which you betrayed Iran by creating two different versions of the MoU and gave a different version to Trump,

This statement by you is an outright lie ... Prove there was two different versions. There were no 2 versions, Trump as usual did not honour his side of the bargain made in the MoU.

and then your military alliance with Saudi Arabia and Kuwait while they're in conflict with Iran, in the middle of the largest war in the Middle East since the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Saudi and Kuwait alongside Qatar, UAE and Bahrain, Jordan have all been stupid enough to allow Americans to setup actual American bases in their countries which have been used to attack Iran, yes. And Iran has rightly attacked those specific bases and has the legal right to continue to attack those bases.

And yes, Saudi and Kuwait alongside Qatar, UAE and Bahrain, Jordan were all collectively stupid to spend tens to hundreds of billions of dollars to defend the Americans.

However, the new treaty does not cover this "use case", Iran is still free to attack the military American presence in those countries.

However, Iran is not free to attack Saudi civilian infrastructure, that was covered under the original Pakistan Saudi defence pact in Sept 2025, so did Pakistan betray Iran by signing a defence pact before this war started with the USA/Israel ??

And once this war is over, Saudi and Kuwait alongside Qatar, UAE and Bahrain, Jordan will have to rethink and ideally close down all these American bases and join the new Makkah accords. This is in the strategic interest of Iran to have no American presence in the region. This serves Iranian interests.

 

[Oldenwisdom...قول بزرگ]

cannot be pro-Saudi and friendly towards Iran at the same time. Period

Instead, Pakistan has done just that... it is you who is amplifying the deal that doesn't involve Iran... painting Iran as the target. While both zion and Indians know, who is!
Check out what they're talking about...
And it cannot be both, period!

 

[030292]

Very easy to understand

The bedouin operator discovered a RED button. Amused, he started pushing it for its "bip bip" sound until he got bored (after several hundred times). Now they complain they haven't got enough for their whole retard army...

This meme comes to mind

 

[ShapurII]

This statement by you is an outright lie ... Prove there was two different versions.


Both Saudi and Kuwait alongside Qatar, UAE and Bahrain have been stupid enough to allow Americans to setup actual American bases in their countries which have attacked Iran, yes. And Iran has rightly attacked those specific bases and has the legal right to continue to attack those bases.

And yes, Saudi and Kuwait alongside Qatar, UAE and Bahrain were all collectively stupid to spend tens to hundreds of billions of dollars to defend the Americans.

However, the treaty does not cover this "use case", Iran is still free to attack the military American presence in those countries.

And once this war is over, Saudi and Kuwait alongside Qatar, UAE and Bahrain will have to rethink and ideally close down all these American bases and join the new Makkah accords. This is in the strategic interest of Iran to have no American presence in the region.

Trump's ceasefire terms and Iran's ceasefire terms were absolutely different from each other right after the ceasefire was declared. That's a fact and I don't need to prove it.

So, can you tell me what the treaty does cover and why it has been signed when these countries are in active phase of war with Iran? And where does it say that Saudi Arabia or these countries have to shut down the US bases there? Are you even for real? What a joke. Do you take us for a fool and you think you can gaslight us into thinking that this is good for Iran?

Oh, I get it! You are uniting the "Ummah" against Israel. Is that what you're doing? Perhaps, the Mecca Accords are aimed towards Israel. Why not?

 

[Khorasan Black Flags]

The Makkah Agreement is doing what I think is in Iran's strategic national interests, and it amazes me that Iranians here don't understand this or is it because I don't understand Iran's true objectives?? This framework, will allow for the pushing out of the USA from the region with an alternate security framework to ensure the stability of the middle east. A security framework that is not hostile to Iran, and one day Iran could also join.

If Iran's intention is to lord over the middle east with its own hegemony to replace the American hegemony, then yes this constrains Iran's ability to achieve that ability. If Iran's intention and desire is to have the Americans leave the middle east entirely, then this Makkah Agreement will help achieve that, and that is in Iran's national interest and Iran should support that goal.

So, what is Iran upset about? Is it that the Americans are leaving, or that they cannot replace American role in the middle east ?????????

The Saudi regime is exploiting the name of Mecca to gain greater support for american and zionist mischief against Palestinian cause, people of Lebanon, axis of resistance and Iran

This is wrong

 

[ShapurII]

Instead, Pakistan has done just that... it is you who is amplifying the deal that doesn't involve Iran... painting Iran as the target. While both zion and Indians know, who is!
Check out what they're talking about...
And it cannot be both, period!

Oh, yes. The target is "Zion". That's why this agreement was signed just 2 months after Israel attacked Gaza. I mean if you are going to lie that ridiculously, don't hold back. Say that this agreement was signed after the Israeli aggression on Gaza and is meant to defend Arabs against Israel.

 

[Persian Gulf]

The Ministry of Defense of the Saudi backed regime in Yemen announced the death of Saghir bin Aziz, the head of the joint staff of the Saudi mercenaries, in the recent missile attacks by the Yemeni armed forces.

 

[Ali_Baba]

Here's the truth: While some people in Pakistan, mainly civilians and sometimes people in your parliament, are friendly towards Iran, the bulk of the Pakistani system is pro-Saudi and you cannot be pro-Saudi and friendly towards Iran at the same time. Period.

I think it is possible to be both Pro-Saudi, and Pro-Iran at the same time. Pakistan has done well to navigate this as best it can.

If we are really to get into "this conversation", then we really would have to start talking about Iran's support for India, its basing of terrorist groups that attack Pakistan under Indian sponsorship, allowing RAW to operate freely in areas next to Pakistan, launching of ballistic missiles into Pakistani, etc. The list of Iranian infractions against Pakistan are long, very long. That is a separate conversation entirely. You start your statement from a false premise unfortunately and is outside the scope of this thread.

 

[ShapurII]

I think it is possible to be both Pro-Saudi, and Pro-Iran at the same time. Pakistan has done well to navigate this as best it can.

Then it is possible to be both Pro-India and Pro-Pakistan and Iran has done well to navigate this as best it can.

It is also possible to be both Pro-Palestine and Pro-Israel and the United States has done well to navigate this as best it can.

If we are really to get into "this conversation", then we really would have to start talking about Iran's support for India, its basing of terrorist groups that attack Pakistan under Indian sponsorship, allowing RAW to operate freely in areas next to Pakistan, launching of ballistic missiles into Pakistani, etc. That is a separate conversation entirely. You start your statement from a false premise unfortunately.

Pakistan has long been a safe haven for terrorism inside Iran since at least 90s, at the request of Saudi Arabia. If it weren't for Imran Khan, we would still have these regular Baluch insurgency issues with Pakistan.

 

[shapurzolaktaf]

This statement by you is an outright lie ... Prove there was two different versions.


Both Saudi and Kuwait alongside Qatar, UAE and Bahrain have been stupid enough to allow Americans to setup actual American bases in their countries which have attacked Iran, yes. And Iran has rightly attacked those specific bases and has the legal right to continue to attack those bases.

And yes, Saudi and Kuwait alongside Qatar, UAE and Bahrain were all collectively stupid to spend tens to hundreds of billions of dollars to defend the Americans.

However, the treaty does not cover this "use case", Iran is still free to attack the military American presence in those countries.

And once this war is over, Saudi and Kuwait alongside Qatar, UAE and Bahrain will have to rethink and ideally close down all these American bases and join the new Makkah accords. This is in the strategic interest of Iran to have no American presence in the region.

This ill-conceived Makka Accord appears to have been deliberately introduced at an extremely sensitive moment. The region is already engulfed in war: Iran is demanding compensation for U.S.-Israeli aggression against Iran, while Israel is pushing for the destruction of Iranian infrastructure.

At the same time, Pakistan and Turkey have stated that an attack on Saudi Arabia would be considered an attack against all of them.

In this context, the treaty appears to align closely with regional American objectives: Iran must be weakened or even destroyed, but it should be prevented from retaliating against those responsible for the aggression through the threat of invoking the Makka Accord.

The reality is Iran will not care about the concerns of some energy-starved regional countries. We are fighting a hyperpower.

The GCC states have a substantial bill to settle, accumulated from the 1980s to the present. Iran will not allow anyone to intervene while we pursue what we are owed. What a foolish accord and timing.