[_djo_]

Iran attacked countries that played absolutely no role in the US and Israel’s attack on it, including some (like Oman) that have been fairly closely allied to the regime.

That goes far beyond what’s permissible in international law in response to an attack.

In my view the US and Israeli attacks on Iran were illegal, reprehensible, and deeply stupid. But that doesn’t mean Iran is allowed to do whatever it wants afterward, especially to countries not directly involved in hostilities. In this case Iran has also broken international law.

[CrzyLngPwd]

That's very naive.

Iran attacked US forces and bases all across the Gulf, which played pivotal roles in the USA/Israel attacks.

Radars, airfields, HIMARS installations, airports used for refuelling US tankers, and anywhere that hosted the aggressors in any way were and are fair game.

You can't say Iran attacked innocent and peaceful Kuwait whilst ignoring the US forces firing HIMARS into Iran from Kuwait. Iran has every right to attack those US forces wherever they are parked.

[_djo_]

If Iran had limited its strikes to US facilities in the Gulf I might have agreed with you. But it didn’t, it hit civilian targets too, all which had nothing to do with the American and Israeli campaign.

I see you snuck in ‘airports used for refuelling US tankers’ there, but Iran hit passenger terminals and other civilian-only parts of airports. That’s not permitted under international law.

Moreover, none of the Gulf countries allowed US forces to strike Iran from their territory, such as HIMARS firings, until after they were first attacked by Iran.

Being sceptical of US and Israeli motives is one thing, but that shouldn’t cause you to give Iran a free pass to break international law with impunity.

[CrzyLngPwd]

Iran quite naturally hit anything of significant use to the US, or that might hurt the US war effort, and some of those civilian objects were housing US forces who fled their bases in those countries.

One man's civilian object is another man's barracks.

Also, mistakes happen, as demonstrated by the US targeting of a school.

Those Gulf states also got involved by shooting down Iranian drones, planes and missiles. Heck, the UAE even directly attacked Iran during the active phase of the US/Israel coalition attack, so they cannot pretend they were innocent.

I'm surprised that Iran didn't render the region uninhabitable by destroying desalination plants.

[_djo_]

At this point you’re just making excuses for war crimes, inventing explanations that don’t match the facts.

None of the civilian structures and facilities hit by Iran in neighbouring Gulf countries were hosting US forces. Again, that might have been justifiable depending on proportionality and the selectivity of targeting, but it didn’t happen.

Nor did Iran disclaim the attacks as mistakes. It only did so in one case, claiming over-eager local commanders, but didn’t indicate what it had done to prevent a recurrence.

There was nothing wrong with Gulf states shooting down Iranian drones, planes, and missiles being launched at them, that’s basic self-defence. Similarly, the UAE launched strikes on Iranian launchers only after first being hit, which is also basic self-defence in terms of international law.

By excusing Iran’s own illegal actions and war crimes you’re no better than the cheerleaders of the US and Israel’s illegal actions and war crimes.

Iran hitting the region’s desalination plants would’ve been a nuclear option, which would almost certainly have invited a wider global response to it and resulted in the end of the regime.

[CrzyLngPwd]

Is any of that true, or did you hear about it through the BBC?