They were not inching towards nukes though, were they? And why is the threat calculus here their fault when the Israelis attacked Iran unprovoked? This top-voted comment is consent-manufacturing tripe.

▲

mcv 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Israel's attack wasn't entirely unprovoked; Iran frequently calls for attacks on Israel, wiping them from the face of the earth, and funding organizations that attack Israel. The fear that they might use nuclear weapons offensively against Israel is very real.

Note that I'm not a fan of Israel, condemn their genocide in Gaza, and consider Netanyahu a war criminal. I'm also not a fan of this attack on Iran and prefer a peaceful and democratic overthrow of that regime. But calling the attack unprovoked is not entirely correct; Iran spends a lot of time provoking Israel.

▲

ngcazz 6 hours ago | parent [-]

If you are familiar with how Israel came to be founded, and how Iran became an Islamic republic, you'll see how that is a naive narrative.

For one, Balfour's illegal concession of Palestine to the Israelis had the clear strategic purpose of keeping pan-Arabism at bay. The ensuing establishment of Israel - by the UNSCOP, in contravention of international law - had the side effect of turbocharging settler colonialist violence (1948 and ongoing) and expansionism (e.g. 1967 annexations).

That was the background to the 1953 CIA coup, and the eventual Islamic revolution in 1979. Sure, it's not the liberal democratic outcome Iranians would've liked, but it reclaimed sovereignty lost, and they are aware of the historic role of Israel and their strategic and moral position in relation to it, regardless of their regime.

Bottom line, if we look closely at who really is threatening whom, the reactions of the Iranians are probably quite understandable

	▲	mcv 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		As far as I'm aware, the background of the 1953 coup was oil. The democratic government of Iran want to nationalize the oil industry, and western oil companies did like that. On top of that, Iran was willing to do business with the USSR. That's why US and UK secret services conspired with the ayatollahs to overthrow the democratic government and replace it with the shah. No shit the result of 1979 is not what the Iranians wanted; there have been frequent democratic uprisings since then. Most Iranians didn't really care one way or the other about Israel, although you can't really blame them for not liking the US. And Israel has never really had an issue with Iran. But it's the ayatollahs who have been extremely hostile towards Israel, and have spent decades funding Hezbollah attacks against Israel. I'm not going to defend Israel; they've committed plenty of crimes. And war crimes. But almost entirely against the Palestinians, not against Iran. The Middle East is complex, and there's no simply good vs evil there, but the ayatollahs are definitely not on the side of good.