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