This is merely a bullet point on the main article, but seems more-significant to me than the article’s main title, and has now been cited on a number of other news sites:
Iranian source tells Al Jazeera Iran sent a message to the US via Qatar saying that it does not seek regional war but adding that “the phase of unilateral self-restraint has ended”. It also warned any Israeli attack would be met with an “unconventional response” that includes targeting Israeli infrastructure.
Israel and the U.S. and Israel have been pushing for conflict with Iran for almost a decade and while I’m no fan of the Iranian regime, they have shown extreme restraint considering the saber rattling the west and Israel have done. The militia groups are a direct result of U.S. Israeli aggression toward Palestinians, Lebanese, and Iran directly.
Edit: Minor to opening sentence.
What can they really do after all, Israel hast the biggest military behind it
It’s hard to admit, but I find myself really hoping their read on the situation is right and that the US won’t
absolutely steamroller themget involved in this on Israel’s behalf. Fuck, I just want to not be involved in a mideast war at some point during my life. Stability isn’t worth much when its foundation is laid on the bones of children.In point of fact, an intervention in support of Israel would be destabilizing. Israel is warmongering like a motherfucker right now. They were before, too, but they especially are now.
Bibi doesn’t want to go to prison.
Instability is founded on the bones of children as well. There’s no ‘clean hands’ option.
The issue is that backing Israel at this point is a contribution to instability.
Netanyahu desperately wants to drag the US into a war on Israel’s behalf. It would shore up his crumbling position at home and complete reframe the narrative in the West away from the genocide in Gaza, recasting Isreal as an embattled ally once more.
That’s a weird statement for a country that’s been actively supporting multiple militias in the region for decades.
In what world would a country in a similar situation not support groups that try to counter an invading force? What about the assassinations inside Iran? The terrorist attacks orchestrated by the west? The sabotage of their nuclear facilities? How is it that those things can go on for decades, and then when Iran finally reacts, people go “oh look what these maniacs did, how dare they!”
Do you not care that Iran was on the receiving end of these things, or were you simply not aware?
Iran has been notoriously docile because it knows the US had been looking for an excuse to attack it. Just like Wesley Clarke stated.
Calling it unilateral restraint is absurd though. It’s like bragging about cutting out Coke from your diet while drinking a Pepsi.
I don’t know if it is that off-base to be honest, restraint does not mean that they practiced pacifism, just that the response was disproportionately small.
Just the kind of thing psychopathic old men that think they’re chosen by god would say.
Wait until you find out about the zionist militias that the usa has been supporting for 75+ years.
An unconventional response? Like, giving a load of idiots by the world’s most used shipping lane weapons to blow up shipping whenever they want?
Absolutely they’ve been doing this for ages. Fuck them and fuck netanyahu
Yeah are they talking about themselves? Someone else? No one in the region is restraining themselves whatsoever.
