> which country started this whole mess?

what has already started, is already started -- I agree on Trump being dick, but does that make iran's "making new enemies" a wise move?

> NATO already told trump no, other countries won't give different answers.

of course it said no BEFORE IRAN started the $2M toll (and other countries don't like trump due to tariff-for-everyone)

if the current iran regime was strategically wise, iran should have fired everything it got to Israel, and make the missile interception rate down to 40%. That would have actually showed it's power.

now, with even UAE's missile interception rate of 96%, iran actually showed its missiles are nuisances, not some existential threat.

600,000 men and 300,000 in reserve -- well that would have mattered a lot in medieval wars... "they have an airforce" -- well do they actually have planes? "have a working intelligence network" -- hmm...

no you're way way way over-estimating iran

the only strategic move for iran was selecting one specific target (israel) and focusing all its might, not becoming a rambo

Their win condition isn't destroying Israel, its outlasting the American will for the war until a leadership change happens. They aren't the attackers in this war. They need to just defend until America and Israel give up because it is too costly at home.

> iran's "making new enemies"

Those countries were already enemies of Iran by virtue of housing US bases, military installations, etc.

> what has already started, is already started -- I agree on Trump being dick, but does that make iran's "making new enemies" a wise move?

There is no downside on making the Gulf states enemies. Quite to the contrary: they might lobby the USA to end this madness. It's a serious damage to the importance of the USA in the region if it can't or doesn't want to open the strait again, either by force or by making a deal.