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

[Musings]

You are showing your bias. Why should Iran not hit back at Americans who use GCC soil to hit Iran. Or going on GCC territory gives them a shield?

I agree with you - they are legitimate targets bro

 

[Falcon29]

Israeli terrorists announce more attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure on Iran :

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Anatolia]

High volume in first few days is necessary to send message and address the high volume of missile defense and interceptors deployed in region that were designed to buy lots more time for US and allies but has not worked as intended thanks to Iranian intense retailation in early phase. Allowing Iran to continue defense at proportionate pace now

I am just glad this war lasted more than 12-days this time.

 

[Mav3rick]

Iran is not dictating to Saudis who they they should have a military alliance with. Iran is simply saying that if Saudis or any GCC country (or petrol stations) allow their country to host people who are attacking Iran then Iran has the right to self defence and hit them back. I think that is entirely reasonable

There is tons of evidence available that attacks are being made from GCC on Iran. You cant say GCC were not warned.

Rather than asking Iran to stop we should be asking GCC to stop attacks from their soil on Iran

There should absolutely be NO attacks on Iran from US bases in GCC countries. The GCC should have made that abundantly clear as otherwise they would have been legitimate targets.

But my concern is that only Iran is making that statement, that some attacks on Iran have been initiated from GCC states. There is no evidence of this at all. What would the GCC states gain by allowing the US to use the bases in GCC countries to attack Iran and thus invite Iranian attack back on GCC countries? Moreover, GCC countries have repeatedly stated that US bases in their countries are NOT being used to attack Iran and are only used to defend against attacks by Iran (shooting down drones and missiles etc.).

 

[j_hungary]

But

But I read in this thread about another island with 100 km long. I think if they really want to attack, that island would be a bigger choice than the kharg island

That wouldn't do much tho..........Kharg is the key to iranian oil.

 

[Mav3rick]

You are showing your bias. Why should Iran not hit back at Americans who use GCC soil to hit Iran. Or going on GCC territory gives them a shield?

If US bases in GCC countries are being used to attack Iran then they are legitimate targets. I have repeatedly written this.

But, so far I have seen no evidence that that is the case.

 

[Falcon29]

Al Arabiya correspondent: Most of the ships that were heading to Gulf ports have been redirected to Red Sea ports #AlArabiya_Breaking

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[UKBengali]

So the Saudis should listen to dictation of Iran on whom the Saudis can have a Military alliance with? They should not even have soverign authority within their own borders? Fact is, Iran is attacking countries which are not attacking Iran and this needs to stop somewhere. That is, unless it can be established that attacks on Iran, atleast some, have been initiated from some of those bases, which would then make those bases legitimate targets by Iran.

They are providing their territory freely to attack Iran and defend that bastard Zionist entity.

Yes Iran will tell these puppets that they cannot invite foreigners onto their lands to oppress the natives.

Iran has actually been very lenient on these puppet regimes.

 

[Anatolia]

If US bases in GCC countries are being used to attack Iran then they are legitimate targets. I have repeatedly written this.

But, so far I have seen no evidence that that is the case.

Correct me if I am wrong, so far only US bases been attacked yes? Then there's nothing much wrong Iran did/doing.
The GCC Arabs will simply just rebuild again when the wars over.

 

[Falcon29]

I am just glad this war lasted more than 12-days this time.

That's fine, but they will start messing with your country through Syria afterwards.

Hope you have a plan

 

[Hassan Al-Somal]

View attachment 185938

Israel says it still has thousands of targets in Iran, as Trump and Starmer discuss Strait of Hormuz - follow live

Meanwhile, Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi says the country has not "asked for a ceasefire" after Trump said it had wanted a deal.

www.bbc.com

Motherland should protect father figure.

That declaration from Iranian military carries several messages: 1) They targeted him and checking if he survived from that attack; 2) knowing the coward psychopath he is, the new threat to take him will forever haunt him and put huge psychological pressure on him.

Realistically looking at the last video that they attributed to him, something is fishy about his absence. How can a leader whose country is at war be absent from appearing in public to his people?

 

[Falcon29]

Tasnim Agency: Foiling separatist movements on the western borders #العربية_عاجل

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[SolarWarden]

I agree with you - they are legitimate targets bro

Completely agree. I don't care what country you are or who started it if you allow another country to use not just your land but airspace you are a participant.

Now if they are using/overflying your airspace but don't have the means to physically stop them that's another story.

 

[PakFactor]

Completely agree. I don't care what country you are or who started it if you allow another country to use not just your land but airspace you are a participant.

Now if they are using/overflying your airspace but don't have the means to physically stop them that's another story.

They allow it; several times, tankers were caught taking off from an airbase in Saudi Arabia with transponders on and then turning them off. A refueling tanker is an auxiliary used in the current campaign targeting Iran.

At times, other assets of the assisting country can be targeted as reprisal.

Thus, in the rules of engagement, Iran is well within its rights to target.

Regarding Pakistan getting involved if the Saudis activate this defense pact, of which no one knows what's written, I wouldn't doubt the Pakistanis missing a chance to lift Saudi's balls for a bag of cash; at this point, it's in their DNA.

 

[Master Chief]

So the Saudis should listen to dictation of Iran on whom the Saudis can have a Military alliance with? They should not even have soverign authority within their own borders? Fact is, Iran is attacking countries which are not attacking Iran and this needs to stop somewhere. That is, unless it can be established that attacks on Iran, atleast some, have been initiated from some of those bases, which would then make those bases legitimate targets by Iran.

Fascinating and novel interpretation of events.

Saudi can choose whomever it desires as its military patron. With that choice, the patron's rival may indeed respond, in the event of war, against their assets in Saudi. If Saudi is neutral, it is not at risk. This is all rather simpler than folks realise.