upvote
How is Iran anyone but Israel and USA's problem?
reply
They fund terrorism in the countries around them, all the neighboring countries there hates Iran. That is why they aren't really angry that USA is bombing Iran.
reply
I think they are kind of angry? At least they don't seem interested in participating despite being targeted by Iran themselves, I don't know how more they could express their disagreement with this operation than even accepting to be bombed without any reaction?
reply
The pan of oil on the stove is everyone's problem, but when the dumbass decides the way to deal with it is to pour water on it, it is now in everyone's interest to leave the area.
reply
> Iran is everyones problem

It was at best a regional problem until the US and israel decided to fuck things up and make it a global problem, they didn't have nukes, they were not building nukes, even if they had nukes they would not have used them for anything other than extinction level threats, so just like israel, everyone is OK with them having nukes despite being the same type of religious nutjob thecracy, strange. Iranians are very rational when it comes to escalation, more so than israel.

> Ukraine isn't part of NATO, and the US has been carrying 90% of NATO since forever

Yeah idk, maybe don't put cia bases there then? And maybe don't antagonize russia for decades and act surprised when they act like enemies.

You won't catch me defending Russia or Iran but get the fuck out of here with the "the US are the good guys and we're doing god's work by wiping out evil regimes" rhetoric lmao

> Nobody else succeeded.

Yes because that's the only thing they know and understand, bombs, if the problem cannot be solved with bombs they're useless

reply
> even if they had nukes they would not have used them for anything other than extinction level threats

I'd agree for just about any other country, but Iran have a terrorist regime that is funding terrorists everywhere. They are not like Pakistan or North Korea etc, Iran is crazy and doesn't follow normal international norms.

Even Russia and Ukraine doesn't bomb third party countries in war just for supporting the other side, that is a crazy stupid thing to do and any country behaving like that should never ever have nukes.

reply
The US has been funding terrorists for longer than the current state of Iran (or even its predecessor) has been around: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27état#Uni... and we still haven't nuked anybody in anger since 1945.
reply
Funding coups is not the same thing as funding terrorists. Terrorists attacks and kills civilians, coups just targets leaders. If Iran funded coups in nearby countries that would be a sane thing to do, funding terrorists is what makes them an insane force that you can't predict what they will do with a bomb.

Russia also funds coups, not terrorists. You didn't see a lot of suicide bombings and such in Ukraine before Russia attacked, Russia did the sane thing and sent in Russians in the Russian areas to build support etc, funding terrorism is just plain evil and serves no purpose. That is the difference.

reply
> coups just targets leaders.

This died day 1 when you bombed a fucking school and killed 168 girls. For a lot of these countries the US is a terrorist state. It doesn't matter if the explosive is strapped to a guy's chest or to a tomahawk

reply
> This died day 1 when you bombed a fucking school and killed 168 girls

I didn't bomb a school, I am not American. Americans are much more against this war than most people of the world. I know a lot of Iranians that are very happy that the regime is getting bombed.

reply
> I know a lot of Iranians that are very happy that the regime is getting bombed.

Ask them about the electrical infrastructure, or the unis, or the research enters, or the heritage sites... How did it go in Afghanistan btw? The "democracy" was delivered and well received right?

reply
> Even Russia and Ukraine doesn't bomb third party countries

Third party to who? they all host US bases lmao, a country which just attacked them without declaring war, pearl harbor style, without congress approval, against all kind of international laws, because israel was going in anyways (according to Rubio) for their holy war

Stop drinking the kool aid and plug in your brain, it's way more nuanced than you're lead to believe. No one is "crazy", they all have very rational reasons for what they're doing, the fact that you don't even try to understand them doesn't mean they don't exist.

reply
> Third party to who? they all host US bases lmao

That is no reason to bomb them. Belarus hosts Russian bases but Ukraine doesn't bomb them. International norms is that military bases that aren't actively used to attack aren't valid targets, only Iran breaks that.

> Stop drinking the kool aid and plug in your brain, it's way more nuanced than you're lead to believe. No one is "crazy", they all have very rational reasons for what they're doing, the fact that you don't even try to understand them doesn't mean they don't exist.

They are crazy, they got the entire middle east against them now with those attacks. I read all the reports from them, they aren't condemning USA about those attacks, they do however condemn Iran for launching attacks at them. Iran strategy failed fully and all they do is dig in further and launch even more attacks on these countries.

That is insane and serves no purpose.

reply
> That is no reason to bomb them.

For you, for the new leader of Iran who just lost his dad/wife/brother/son in US strikes it might sound like a very reasonable thing to do.

> That is insane and serves no purpose.

How do you qualify the original attack that started the whole thing? Iran has been pretty clear about how it retaliates and escalates, they did not attack all the targets on day 1, they gradually increased with the US/Israel strikes. They only attacked foreign infrastructure once their own equivalent had been struck first

What do you think about the US/Israel strikes on historical buildings, electrical infrastructure, schools/uni, civilian research centers? What do you think of hegseth literally saying they're here to bring death and destruction ?

I think the US got drunk on their own supply of "we can do whatever the fuck we want because we have the biggest bombs and the cultural superiority".

> I read all the reports from them, they aren't condemning USA about those attacks,

Well you clearly didn't read much outside of US/Israel propaganda

reply
> Well you clearly didn't read much outside of US/Israel propaganda

I read every update on Aljazeera, they are very representative of the views of the middle east and aren't American or Israeli propaganda. To me it seems like it is you who only read the propaganda.

reply
> they are very representative of the views of the middle east

Al Jazeera is primarily funded by the government of Qatar, an American ally and (currently) enemy of Iran. It reflects Qatar's views, not that of "the middle east" as a whole.

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/03/18/iran-war-qatar-ras-laffan-na...

reply
> I read every update on Aljazeera

It's a newspaper not analysts reports. Did you read one of the pro israeli op-ed by any chance, I can't find anything stating Iran is "crazy"

> Analysts say US threat of ‘no quarter’ for Iran violates international law

> The US-Israeli war on Iran is illegal and goes against the interests of the American people.

> Iran war updates: Israel refinery bombed as >>> retaliatory <<< strikes reverberate

> Iran has ratcheted up the pressure on several Gulf nations by attacking their energy facilities in >>> retaliation <<< for an Israeli strike on its South Pars gasfield

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/14/analysts-say-us-thr...

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2026/3/8/we-the-american-...

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2026/3/19/iran-war-l...

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/19/wrap-iran-ratchets-...

reply
> Even Russia and Ukraine doesn't bomb third party countries in war just for supporting the other side, that is a crazy stupid thing to do and any country behaving like that should never ever have nukes.

To the extent this might be true, it seems like it would be even more true of the two countries that unprovokedly bombed a third party country to start the war in the first place.

reply
> two countries that unprovokedly

It isn't unprovoked, Iran current regime has chanted "Death to America" since its founding. USA has plenty of reasons to attack here which is why you don't see more international outcry or support for Iran. Iran are on their own.

reply
> USA has plenty of reasons to attack

Yet none have been provided, remember the anthrax scam at the united nations? At least they put some efforts into it

reply
They don't need to provide a reason, its probably related to greed etc, but greed is still a rational reason. Iran attacking their neighbors is not rational here, it just makes the middle east hate them more.

I am not talking about international laws here, just the norms everyone follows in wars. Everyone breaks the international laws, but the norms of not attacking third parties etc are there for rational reasons, since you don't gain anything for doing so its just stupid and causes damage and strife and hurts you for doing it.

reply
> They don't need to provide a reason

Of course, since they did not ask for the congress approval, which is already against their own constitution. That's exactly the kind of things you do when you're a good guy doing the right thing

> but the norms of not attacking third parties etc are there for rational reasons, since you don't gain anything for doing so its just stupid and causes damage and strife and hurts you for doing it.

What norms? No wars = no rules of war, they started something they can't control anymore

They gain plenty from doing it in term of leverage, nobody attacked Iran in such way until now because it was well understood that this is exactly how it would play out

reply
Seems the US and israel have been at least as unfriendly recently.

In any case, somebody chanting a thing isn't causus belli, nor is publicly wanting someone to die.

> why you don't see more international outcry or support for Iran

What you don't see is international support for the USA or israel's war on Iran, hence why the strait of hormuz is effectively closed right now.

reply
What actual terrorism they funded that was actually deadlier than what US created in Iraq with ISIS (created as a result of pretty much the same, let's get some country stripped by force of some [imagined] WMDs, US adventure)?
reply
deleted
reply
Generally, the one who causes the problem should fix it. Especially when the problem they caused is hurting their friends.

It takes a really good friend to not only accept and forgive the hurt caused, but to help fix the problem, too. Usually an apology from the problem-causer must come first.

I think what we're seeing is that the USA has un-good-friended so many countries that it has no good friends left with the military capabilities to help. It has allies maybe, but nobody who would do such a favor after being victimized by the asker and the problems they caused, without even so much as an apology.

It certainly doesn't help that the USA is asking for help, but probably wants to boss around anybody who volunteers, and it is doing none of the work itself. Sounds like a toxic team.

> Iran is everyones problem

Iran is not everyone's problem. The effects of israel and the USA's war of choice on Iran are everyone's problem. What we're seeing now is not a result of anything Iran did, but rather something the USA and israel did. The worse the effects get, the more blame will be heaped upon the USA and israel. To that end, most countries are likely of the attitude that they have already incurred enough costs from the USA and israel's war, and that the USA and israel had better fix the problem they caused ASAP.

reply
there are no friends at the global scale just alliances. If Europe doesn't want to help then there's no forcing them to. Conversely, if the US manages to get the strait open and oil flowing there's no stopping them from requiring Europe to pay a little extra for the trouble. Fair or not, who's going to stop the other side? You can't exactly ask to speak to the manager.
reply
If the USA manages to get the strait open and oil flowing, then allies might be satisfied with the harms the USA caused, even if there is no apology, much less restitution. At that point, we will be back to the status quo.

If, at that point, the USA perpetrates any sort of further economic attacks on allies, then of course they will respond appropriately.

reply
>Ukraine isn't part of NATO, and the US has been carrying 90% of NATO since forever.

This has always been the stupidest take.

Do you know how Europe always planned to pay their part of NATO?

Blood.

Go look at war plans if things ever got hot with the soviets. Germany would be gone. The plan was always hundreds of thousands of dead Europeans while the US geared up to come save the day. America's plan for NATO was the same as it's contribution to the first two world wars: Sell all the guns, ammo, fuel, and food required to keep Europe alive while their territory was wiped clean by war.

Compare US casualties in either World War with European casualties. That was always the plan.

Europe's contribution was the graveyards they would have to plow after the war.

Complaining about some budgeting is insane. That was always just a bonus kickback.

So, exactly how things go with Ukraine. They die, we profit, maybe their country survives after, US remains basically untouched, though that part is no longer reality.

reply
Again, how should the UK use the Navy here?
reply