“Would the U.S. respond?” ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Mary Bruce asked repeatedly as the president walked away after the end of an unrelated event. He paused, thought for a moment and then returned to the lectern.

“We are devoted to the defense of Israel. We will support Israel. We will help defend Israel and Iran will not succeed,” he said.

According to one U.S. defense official, the assets being moved to the region include both “ships and aircraft.”

  • @LinkerbaanOP
    link
    18
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Iran did not attack israel this is twisting facts.

    Has America attacked Russia by supplying Ukraine?

    An embrassy is not a valid military target to begin with. it’s a blatant direct attack.

    • @kescusay
      link
      -9
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Umm, that’s just factually wrong.

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/iranian-forces-fire-rockets-at-israeli-military-in-first-direct-attack-ever-israeli-army-says/2018/05/09/62e3a526-52f7-11e8-a6d4-ca1d035642ce_story.html

      That was in 2018. Things have been tense between the countries ever since.

      Edit: Look, I’m not trying to defend Israel, here, I’m just pointing out the truth. Truth is all too often a victim of war, and if we pretend Iran has no history of violence directed at Israel, we do ourselves a disservice.

      • @Ensign_Crab
        link
        English
        16
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        So this is in retaliation for something that happened 5 years ago? What took them so long?

        • @kescusay
          link
          -7
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Linkerbaan said Iran didn’t attack Israel. I was just pointing out that Iran actually has a history of attacking Israel, and that Linkerbaan is factually incorrect.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            18 months ago

            A pretty arbitrary line to draw around ‘factually incorrect.’

            You could’ve gone on about Lebanon and Hezbollah too and easily gone back to 2006 without a hiccup, too.

            But in this discussion it’s pretty obvious the scope is well within the current events of the embassy being struck this month.

            • @kescusay
              link
              18 months ago

              Yes, but that was in response to Iran sponsoring groups like the Houthis that have been committing terrorist attacks.

              Which, yes, was probably in response to earlier actions by Israel. Which were in response to earlier actions by Iran. Which were…

              I mean, you can probably see where that goes. There are no innocent parties in this, and it’s intellectually dishonest to pretend that there are.

      • @SulaymanF
        link
        59 months ago

        Embassy staff in the diplomatic service ARE civilian casualties.

        I’m sure Israel thinks breaking international laws are worth it but there’s consequences.

        • @disguy_ovahea
          link
          0
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          I only read of the seven IRGC military casualties. If there were more, I didn’t know about them.

          • @SulaymanF
            link
            49 months ago

            That’s all the media focused on but it wasn’t an empty embassy on a workday. It’s like how the world media focused on the WCK workers killed in Gaza but ignored the Palestinian drivers who also were killed.

            • @disguy_ovahea
              link
              39 months ago

              I just read more, and you’re right. I’ll delete my comments. Thank you for prompting me to look for more information.