Society & Politics
1 h

Is “retaliation” the correct word for Iran’s attacks on other countries?

1, A true story. When i was in high school a bully pushed a nerd. the nerd hit back but hit me. I was upset but it was unintentional (called "collateral") while trying to defend against enemy. trying to hit bully.

People complained for me, blaming the nerd, he hit "me, not the bully" so it is just a new hit. that is how we see it. Until iran did it.

2, The picture is u. s. "initiated war" as if iran did not do any violent provoked. When we bomb iran, then "shooting back" would be at us, the attacker.

Instead iran bombs ships of various countries in the strait.

That is not shooting back. Not retaliation. Like the story of high school students above. Various countries, iran did violent terrorism method.

3, news said Iran "retaliated" bombing its muslim neighbors. Hotels and cities etc. That is not retaliation. Is it?

4, jordan, Kuwait and qatar had not bombed iran. They are the ones who would be "retaliating" if they fired rockets at iran. But they are scared of the big bully. WIth our help kuwait and qatar flew jets to retaliate on iran. That is "retalition" against the one who bombed them. But they should not have risked their pilots.

5, Jordan and others could retaliate with rockets. Why don't they?

6, And why when iran bombed jordan etc. Each a third party who did not attack yet, the news pretends it is justified "retaliation" but jordan etc. Had not shot at iran. Why do they use wrong word?

7, Isn't it the wrong word like the school story?

Is “retaliation” the correct word for Iran’s attacks on other countries?
Post Opinion