Iran FM Slams US "War of Choice" for Israel as Rubio Defends Strikes

Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi has accused the United States of entering a "war of choice" on Israel's behalf, asserting there was never a genuine Iranian threat. His comments follow US Secretary of State Marco Rubio's defense of recent military action aimed at eliminating Iran's short-range ballistic missiles and naval capabilities. Rubio justified the preemptive strikes, stating they were necessary to prevent higher American casualties from an expected Iranian retaliation. He also expressed support for a potential overthrow of the Iranian government while stressing the immediate mission is to disarm Tehran.

Key Points: Iran FM Accuses US of "War of Choice" for Israel

  • Iran denies posing any threat
  • US aims to destroy Iran's missile, naval power
  • Rubio cites preemptive action to avoid US casualties
  • US supports potential regime change in Iran
  • Tensions escalate over West Asia security
3 min read

"There was never any so-called Iranian 'threat' ": Iranian FM Araghchi slams Washington as Rubio defends Iran operation

Iranian FM Araghchi says US entered a war for Israel, denying any Iranian threat, as US Secretary Rubio defends military strikes on Iran's capabilities.

"Rubio admitted what we all knew: U.S. has entered a war of choice on behalf of Israel. - Seyed Abbas Araghchi"

Tehran, March 3

Amid escalating tensions in West Asia, Iranian Foreign Affairs Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi accused the United States of entering a "war of choice" on behalf of Israel, following remarks by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio defending recent American military action against Iran and emphasised on the made up 'threat' of Iran by the US.

In a post on X, Araghchi said on Tuesday, "Rubio admitted what we all knew: U.S. has entered a war of choice on behalf of Israel. There was never any so-called Iranian 'threat'."

He further stated, "Shedding of both American and Iranian blood is thus on Israel Firsters. The American people deserve better and should take back their country."

Araghchi's remarks came after Rubio said the US military operation against Iran was aimed at "eliminating" threats posed by Iran's short-range ballistic missiles and its naval capabilities, particularly concerning risks to global shipping routes.

Speaking to the press on Capitol Hill on Monday (local time), Rubio made it clear that the primary goal of the operation was to neutralise Iran's ballistic missile and naval threats.

"That is the clear objective of this mission," Rubio said and added that the focus was on preventing a potential threat to the US and its allies.

"Our mission and our focus is the destruction of their ballistic missile capabilities and their ability to manufacture them, as well as the threat posed by their Navy to global shipping," he said.

The Secretary of State also said that they knew Iran would retaliate to military action.

"The imminent threat was that we knew that if Iran was attacked,... they would immediately come after us, and we were not going to sit there and absorb a blow before we responded," Rubio explained.

Further speaking on preemptive action, Rubio said, "We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action. We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces, and we knew that if we didn't preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties."

He added that a delay in responding would result in "much higher casualties."

Rubio also stated that allowing Iran to continue developing its short-range ballistic missiles was an "unacceptable risk" and insisted that the military operation had to take place while Tehran was at its "weakest point."

He reiterated the US's stance on Iran, saying, "Our mission and our focus is the destruction of their ballistic missile capabilities and their ability to manufacture them, as well as the threat posed by their Navy to global shipping."

"The United States would not deliberately target a school. Our objectives are missiles, both the ability to manufacture them and the ability to launch them, and the one-way attractor. That would be our focus. We would have no interest in targeting civilian infrastructure. The Iranians are, on the other hand, targeting civilian infrastructure. They are deliberately targeting civilians because they are a terroristic regime. They sponsor terrorism, and they participate in terrorism," he added.

He also expressed support for a potential regime change in Iran. "We hope that the Iranian people can overthrow this government and establish a new future for that country."

However, he stressed that the immediate goal was to ensure that Iran no longer had the weapons that could threaten the US and its regional allies. "We would love to see this regime be replaced... The objective of this mission is to make sure they don't have these weapons that can threaten us and our allies in the region," Rubio added.

- ANI

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priya S
Very complex situation. While Iran's support for groups like Hezbollah is problematic, the US openly talking about regime change is a violation of sovereignty. This escalation is bad for the whole region, and it will impact global oil prices. Not good for our economy at all! 📈
R
Rohit P
Both sides are playing a dangerous game. The US acts as world police, and Iran's rhetoric isn't helping de-escalation. As an Indian, I'm more concerned about the safety of our diaspora in the Gulf and the Chabahar port project. Hope our diplomats are working overtime on this.
S
Sarah B
Respectfully, I think the article presents a very one-sided view by focusing on the Iranian FM's statement. Secretary Rubio's points about ballistic missiles targeting shipping lanes are a legitimate security concern for many nations, including those who rely on those trade routes. The situation is not black and white.
V
Vikram M
The "war of choice" phrase hits hard. America fights wars far from home that disrupt the world. We in India feel the ripple effects—inflation, uncertainty. Time for Global South countries to have a stronger united voice for peace. Jai Hind.
K
Karthik V
The US says "preemptive action" to avoid higher casualties. Isn't that the same logic every aggressor uses? This is how forever wars start. Hope our government continues its balanced approach, maintaining ties with all sides for national interest. 🙏

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50