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

[muhammed45]

I never said Iran was the aggressor, nor am I defending the legality of the US attack. But being morally or legally right does not automatically give you the power to dictate terms. International politics unfortunately does not work like a courtroom.

Iran had created enough leverage to bring the other side to negotiations. At that point, the logical move was to convert that leverage into an acceptable settlement. Instead, the IRGC overestimated its strength and assumed that further escalation would produce even better terms. Now Iran wants negotiations, while the other side sees no urgency to respond. That is the miscalculation I am talking about.

And saying that Iran must continue because otherwise the blood already spilled would have been “in vain” is exactly the sunk-cost thinking that prolongs wars. How many more Iranians must die before that blood is considered sufficient? The purpose of resistance should be to secure the state and its people, not to keep fighting forever merely to justify previous sacrifices.

Trump may well have acted foolishly and illegally, but your enemy’s stupidity does not excuse your own strategic mistakes. Iran had an opportunity to turn survival into a political win. The IRGC squandered it by mistaking resistance for superiority.

We are superior in our region. Persian gulf is Iran's territory.

 

[muhammed45]

More attacks on Bahrain while UAE and Qatar where the vast majority of U.S. airpower is stored in the region is sitting untouched.

The cowardice of Iran avoiding hitting these two countries will go down in history as corrupt officials have likely made $$$$ extortion deals.

Iran is not fighting to win this war, it is using it as a way to enrich the political elite like a Mafia extorting its local neighbors.

There is NO VALID REASON why US bases in UAE and Qatar have not been hit in MONTHS

@Musings

Why is this American residee allowed to spread propaganda against Iranian government/people at war times?

 

[Persian Gulf]

 

[SilentWatch]

I have a question, has Iran stopped attacking Isreal? If so why? I see attacks on GCC and Jordan nothing in Israel or am I just not following enough news ?

 

[Professor Jiang]

 

[Persian Gulf]

 

[shapurzolaktaf]

I have a question, has Iran stopped attacking Isreal? If so why? I see attacks on GCC and Jordan nothing in Israel or am I just not following enough news ?

Removing Israels "Arab shield" is the priority. Attacking "Israel" can be done in the future through collective Islamic initiatives such as OIC, Mecca Joint defence agreement.

Iran is fighting US. Weakening US is weakening "Israel". Other Muslims should share the burden and attack the fake state of "Israel" or at least topple the fake British regime of Jordan, which is a buffer/shield state for "Israel".

 

[BHAN85]

I have a question, has Iran stopped attacking Isreal? If so why? I see attacks on GCC and Jordan nothing in Israel or am I just not following enough news ?

iran is attacking to from where attacks to iran come from.

ksa is not attacking iran, so iran is not attacking ksa.

israel is not attacking iran, so iran is not attacking israel.

if gcc would reach defense pacts without usa, like ksa did, war would stop.

 

[RedRock]

Is this real or fake and was it an intercept or a hit on a US destroyer? Looks more like an intercept @Persian Gulf

 

[Flotilla]

Trump may well have acted foolishly and illegally, but your enemy’s stupidity does not excuse your own strategic mistakes. Iran had an opportunity to turn survival into a political win. The IRGC squandered it by mistaking resistance for superiority.

Aside from the legality of the US and Israeli actions, which is unquestionable, It must be judged the morality of both contenders. While Irán just answered to the attacks (It is in their DNA) US attacked inadvertently and hitting also civilian targets like bridges, universities and even desalization plants.

If the assassination of Ali Khamenei goes down in history like the German bombing of Danzig in September 1941, it must be made clear that the United States was the instigator of World War III, and that under its protection, the destruction of the Palestinian people and the international order was perpetrated by violating any international commitment that ran counter to its interests.

Let it be clear that not even Russia, when it invaded Ukraine, did so by surprise. There was a formal declaration of war, and human rights have been respected far better than by Israel or the United States in Iran.

 

[shapurzolaktaf]

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said on Wednesday that two oil tankers exploded after hitting mines in the Strait of Hormuz and warned shipping companies of further measures if they use what Tehran considers unauthorised routes through the strategic waterway.

The IRGC said in a statement that the two tankers had disembarked their crews and were handed over to personnel linked to the US military to pass through what it described as an “illegal route.”

 

[F.O.X]

Aside from the legality of the US and Israeli actions, which is unquestionable, It must be judged the morality of both contenders. While Irán just answered to the attacks (It is in their DNA) US attacked inadvertently and hitting also civilian targets like bridges, universities and even desalization plants.

If the assassination of Ali Khamenei goes down in history like the German bombing of Danzig in September 1941, it must be made clear that the United States was the instigator of World War III, and that under its protection, the destruction of the Palestinian people and the international order was perpetrated by violating any international commitment that ran counter to its interests.

Let it be clear that not even Russia, when it invaded Ukraine, did so by surprise. There was a formal declaration of war, and human rights have been respected far better than by Israel or the United States in Iran.

You are arguing about morality when my point was about strategy. The US and Israel can be the aggressors ( they are ), their attacks can be illegal (they are) and Iran can still make serious strategic mistakes in its response. These things are not mutually exclusive.

Iran had every right to defend itself. The question is whether the IRGC used that right intelligently or overestimated its position and continued escalating after Iran had already created enough leverage for a political settlement. Being the victim of aggression does not make every decision you take afterwards wise.

Russia did not formally declare war on Ukraine either. Putin announced a “special military operation” as the invasion began, just like trumpy.

Condemn the US and Israel by all means, I have no disagreement there. But turning this into a morality lecture does not answer my argument: Iran had a chance to convert survival into a political win, and the IRGC squandered it by mistaking leverage for superiority.

 

[Hayabusa]

Calling an argument “AI generated” is an easy way to avoid answering it.

Yes, the US walked away from the JCPOA. That is exactly why any new agreement would require phased implementation, verification and reciprocal compliance, not blind trust. Negotiations between enemies are never based on trust.

And Iran retaliating last night does not prove it has rejected negotiations. Countries fight and negotiate at the same time. Pezeshkian has explicitly said Iran remains open to negotiations and will reciprocate if the US honours its commitments. So your claim is contradicted by Iran’s own president

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/irans-president-says-tehran-will-reciprocate-if-us-honours-interim-deal-2026-09-01/

And if agreements with the US are completely pointless, then what the hell was Iran doing signing an MoU with them in the first place? Why is its leadership now practically begging to return to negotiations? You cannot claim that negotiations are useless while Iran itself keeps pursuing them.

My point remains the same. Iran had a much stronger hand earlier and squandered it by overestimating its position. It is now trying to obtain similar terms after losing much of its leverage. Whether the US can be trusted is a separate question and does not make the IRGC’s miscalculation just disappear much like its leadership.

Nope it is not. Your whole argument is just long and is completely out of the whole point of my topic. Sounds AI, but feel free to make it out however you want.

You frame your whole argument based on Iran, sticking on peace rather than engaging in further conflict.

You use the argument of Iran signing the MOU. But isn't that what Iran always was avoiding? Conflict? You frame it in such a way that Iran should remain quiet and accept its fate. Well unfortunately for you, Iran made a right choice because either way, US is going to use these time to rearm and restrategize. It's obvious.

Iran has always advocated for peace, but also put a disclaimer that it will retaliate. That is a smart way of balancing diplomacy and deterrence. Continue using deterrence and other people will starting hating you. That's international relations 101. So just because they are willing to negotiate, doesn't mean it's weak and accepting its position.

Oh. And to answer your final question. Iran will always have the leverage and it doesn't need time to lessen or increase it. Strait of Hormuz is just right by its side. It has a huge land. It has never squandered off any opportunity. In fact, they have avoided falling into US trap. They have done well. They also have time on their end, Trump and less than 2 months left to bring this war to a conclusion. Doesn't sound like Iran is in a disadvantageous position.

 

[F.O.X]

Nope it is not. Your whole argument is just long and is completely out of the whole point of my topic. Sounds AI, but feel free to make it out however you want.

You frame your whole argument based on Iran, sticking on peace rather than engaging in further conflict.

You use the argument of Iran signing the MOU. But isn't that what Iran always was avoiding? Conflict? You frame it in such a way that Iran should remain quiet and accept its fate. Well unfortunately for you, Iran made a right choice because either way, US is going to use these time to rearm and restrategize. It's obvious.

Iran has always advocated for peace, but also put a disclaimer that it will retaliate. That is a smart way of balancing diplomacy and deterrence. Continue using deterrence and other people will starting hating you. That's international relations 101. So just because they are willing to negotiate, doesn't mean it's weak and accepting its position.

Oh. And to answer your final question. Iran will always have the leverage and it doesn't need time to lessen or increase it. Strait of Hormuz is just right by its side. It has a huge land. It has never squandered off any opportunity. In fact, they have avoided falling into US trap. They have done well. They also have time on their end, Trump and less than 2 months left to bring this war to a conclusion. Doesn't sound like Iran is in a disadvantageous position.

You are still arguing against a point I never made. I never said Iran should remain quiet or abandon deterrence. My point is that Iran failed to convert its strongest moment of leverage into a favourable political outcome.

And no, Iran’s leverage is not permanent just because the Strait of Hormuz is beside it. The US is now intercepting tankers and choking Iranian exports while Iran can do little but watch. So much for leverage that apparently never increases or decreases.

The US could use a ceasefire to rearm, but so could Iran. If negotiations were pointless, why did Iran sign the MoU, and why is Pezeshkian still offering reciprocal compliance?

Iran successfully avoided immediate surrender. The IRGC then mistook survival for superiority and squandered the advantage it had created.

 

[BananaRepublic]

You are still arguing against a point I never made. I never said Iran should remain quiet or abandon deterrence. My point is that Iran failed to convert its strongest moment of leverage into a favourable political outcome.

And no, Iran’s leverage is not permanent just because the Strait of Hormuz is beside it. The US is now intercepting tankers and choking Iranian exports while Iran can do little but watch. So much for leverage that apparently never increases or decreases.

The US could use a ceasefire to rearm, but so could Iran. If negotiations were pointless, why did Iran sign the MoU, and why is Pezeshkian still offering reciprocal compliance?

Iran successfully avoided immediate surrender. The IRGC then mistook survival for superiority and squandered the advantage it had created.

This “war” is proceeding exactly the way it can.

1. Iran has no choice but to take part in negotiations to keep Russia and China on side.

2. Trump doesn’t even honour treaties with allies so it’s naive to think he would against Iran. So, there’s no path to a negotiated settlement.

3. Iran’s only path is outlasting Trump. This may involve fake MoUs and cease fires to provide economic relief.

Those who think Iran should fight fire with fire don’t seem to understand the impact of massive disparities between military spending.

And Trump would not hesitate to use nukes if Iran escalated. He is a narcissist who doesn’t care about the long term impact on USA. His ego and self interest Trumps everything.

No other US leader would continue this war because they know the long term consequences on USA. And that’s why no leader even contemplated a war with Iran.

Hence Iran needs to find a way to outlast Trump.