The US carried out airstrikes targeting two facilities linked to Iranian-backed militias in eastern Syria on Thursday, according to a statement from Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, following a series of drone and rocket attacks against US forces in the region.
The statement said the facilities have been used by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and affiliated groups.
The strikes, carried out by a pair of F-16 fighter jets using precision-guided munitions, targeted a weapons and ammunition storage facility in Abu Kamal near the border between Syria and Iraq.
I’m just going to point out that the recent attacks should be giving us sufficient justification to launch airstrikes at a number of Iranian military-industrial targets. Which would also make it harder for them to supply attack drones to Russia.
I think you misunderstood the title. Iran did not attack anyone, it’s militants in Syria who launched attacks and where the USA did already strike back.
And if you want to argue that supporting parties in a conflict should allow airstrikes on the supporting country, that argument is a dangerous double-edged sword. As then your argument would open up strikes on western countries who support parties in a foreign conflict as well. E.g. that argument would fit into Russia’s narrative of the war, claiming all the west is fighting against them in Ukraine.
I think it’s fair to apply some blame to Iran for the actions of their Syrian proxies. It’s a question of degree of relationship.
That’s a valid point though, thank you.
Didn’t iran shoot something in the direction of the strike group? Anyway, who needs justification to invade Iran again? There is sooooo much justification. Among others, Being involved in the killing of US (and other nato members) citizens, supporting terrorists in several ways, Supplying Russia with equipment, the whole Nuke building problem and more…
But could start a regional war killing millions