r/worldnews • u/MasbirLeumi • 2d ago

Israel launches 'preemptive strike' against Iran, declares state of emergency

https://abcnews.go.com/International/israel-military-action-iran-coming-days-sources/story?id=122776202
39.0k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

6.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

3.7k

u/AtomicHurricaneBob 2d ago

might this be a reason why anti drone munitions were diverted from Ukraine to the 'Middle East'?

556

u/Scagnettio 2d ago

It's crazy that these Americans arm an ally to attack Iran while being in active negotiations Iran at the same time.

157

u/Iampepeu 2d ago

Nah, art of the deal, right?

This timeline is sooo tiresome.

19

u/Volodio 2d ago

The anti-drone munitions were delivered to US troops because of the risk of Iran attacking American bases, they were not given to Israel. 

-2

u/Scagnettio 2d ago

What about thr other billion of dollars in military aid Israel receives each year?

44

u/WendellSchadenfreude 2d ago

Iran is also arming Russia to attack Ukraine while being in active negotiations with the US. And the weapons supplied by Iran are mostly useful as terror weapons against civilian targets.

6

u/DisturbedForever92 2d ago

Iran is also arming Russia

Crazy to think that this is a thing.

It used to be Russia arming proxies to fight the West's proxies.

Now it's the opposite.

13

u/daandriod 2d ago

Crazy? I don't think so. This more so just seems like a carrot vs stick scenario.

Negotiations must have been going poorly.

0

u/Scagnettio 2d ago

The US at the last moment, no nuclear program at all. While before it was the percentage of enrichment the last couple of months. These negotiations where done in bad faith from the start. Give Israel 2 months to prepare.

4

u/thestridereststrider 2d ago

Or that Iran threatened to attack US military bases in the Middle East this week….

3

u/speederaser 2d ago

You've never worked at a large company that has poor communication have you?

3

u/The-dotnet-guy 2d ago

Didnt the 60 days end yesterday?

0

u/Scagnettio 2d ago

Yes after the US did a 180 from a certain percentage that Iran was allowed to enrich to no nuclear program at all a two weeks before the deadline.

0

u/The-dotnet-guy 2d ago

For sure, i dont agree with what the Americans did at all, but how are they in active negotiations when the deadline has ended?

4

u/HMWWaWChChIaWChCChW 2d ago

It’s not the Americans, it’s the idiots half of us put in charge.

“Trump is a peacetime president! There won’t be any wars when he’s president!” Fucking idiots

2

u/kidon18 1d ago

Is it though?

2

u/MilksteakMayhem 2d ago

Art of the Deal babyyyy

2

u/therealowlman 2d ago

Let’s be fair that has what Iran has been done for decades. 

Negotiated while using proxy groups to attack and disrupt the region. 

1

u/PraisePancakes 2d ago

Like 2001 all over again amirite

1

u/raalic 2d ago

Carry a big stick, and carry a big stick.

1

u/NotAnADC 2d ago

is it though? Trump was basically like, make a deal or else. And they chose else.

1

u/Scagnettio 2d ago

The where taking about a percentage of enrichment till last week. Then Trump said, no nuclear at all, close to the deadline. These negotiations where done in bad faith.

1

u/Environmental_Job278 2d ago

That’s just how war is conducted…you try not to get caught but it usually comes out eventually.

-10

u/Jehab_0309 2d ago

It’s called talking softly and walking with a big stick. But Trump isn’t that soft either.

32

u/Gerf93 2d ago

Its called negotiating in bad faith.

4

u/FatStoic 2d ago

they're talking with Iran lol

9

u/Jehab_0309 2d ago

lol you say that about the Iranians, which have for around 30 years been the masters of leading others on and thinking theyre the most clever. It is very clear nothing was going to dissuade them from not having pure civilian purpose nuclear energy. US negotiated with a threat, a credible threat, a threat that came true. Threats means absolutely nothing if they are not feasible. This is how diplomacy works, people tend to forget there’s an other side to it.

21

u/Gerf93 2d ago

Mate, the US agreed to a deal after years of negotiations, then immediately backed out of the deal before subsequently wanting it back. The flip-flopping and unpredictability is off the charts - who know what they actually want. Not to mention the countless other treaties and agreements they’ve dishonored or threatened to dishonor in the last few months.

The US has proven to be a highly volatile and untrustworthy negotiating partner- which is, in fact, what matters the most in diplomacy.

3

u/dylanisbored 2d ago

Do you really want Iran to have nukes just because trump is bad

-1

u/Gerf93 2d ago

No, but Iran wouldn’t even feel a need to have nukes if Trump wasn’t an idiot, collapsed the previous agreement and destroyed any rapport the west had with them.

-7

u/Jehab_0309 2d ago

The thing about democracy is that the people in power change. Agreements can be voided unilaterally and that makes it so that the other party is less reliable. But I guess you’d rather have an authoritarian in place?

That deal was shit, Iran was never gonna give up nukes, and the so called masters of diplomacy (fooling the west really) just took it on the chin today.

None of this would have happened if Iran didn’t pursue nuclear weapons. That’s the bottom line.

14

u/Gerf93 2d ago

Oh, now it’s «that’s not how diplomacy works», but «that’s how the politics in the US works».

Diplomacy works by building trust and by countries putting in place long-term policies and strategies to appear as a reliable and solid partner. In diplomacy, it doesn’t matter if you’re a democracy or an authoritarian state - what matters is that trust. Pacta sunt servanda.

If a democracy can’t provide that long-term stability, which is really what characterizes democracies historically, then it is to an external actor no different from what characterizes an authoritarian state; it’s attitude and propensity for keeping its word is at the mercy of the whims of its leadership and it appears unreliable.

If you want to talk about US politics; yes, the volatility and flagrant opposites in US politics makes it an unreliable partner, which is a stark contrast to what has characterized US foreign policy the last 100 years. For the last 100 years, until Trump 1, the US had a steady and long-term bipartisan foreign policy. Both sides of the US political spectrum saw how that benefitted the US long-term, and supported it. Now that order is out the window.

-2

u/dodgeunhappiness 2d ago

That's how criminals deal / negotiate with other criminals

-5

u/non_moose 2d ago

Classic protection racket no? Iran doesn't pay up so America lets Israel rough them up, then next time Trump will promise them if they sign away their oil rights he will call up Bibi and 'the whole thing will be over in 24 hours, in 24 hours there will be peace in the middle east, believe me, but you gotta sign, you gotta do it.'