Here are different statements and perspectives about U.S. involvement in the ongoing conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran — drawn from recent verified information:
* Secretary of State Marco Rubio provided a looping justification for the US launching a war against Iran: Israel was planning to strike Iran, which would have prompted Tehran to strike the US assets in the region, requiring Washington to launch preemptive strikes on Iran.* Netanyahu says war against Iran may take ‘some time’, but not years.
Washington is seen as having outsized leverage over Israel, to which it has provided more than $300bn in military aid since 1948, including $21bn during Israel’s genocide in Gaza.
Rubio on Monday also sought to distance himself from his statements, claiming his words had been taken out of context.
* The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), meanwhile, called Rubio’s words on Monday a “stunning admission”. In a statement, it said Rubio had revealed “what was clear from the start: the United States did not attack Iran because Iran posed an imminent threat to our nation. We attacked under pressure from Israel for Israel’s benefit”. The organisation called on Congress to pass war powers resolutions to rein in Trump’s ability to wage war.
* Hegseth says US won’t get ‘bogged down’ in Iran – but doesn’t rule out sending troops
* Official U.S. Positions & Military Statements
President Trump publicly announced that the U.S. has begun major combat operations in Iran, framing them as necessary to counter threats and dismantle Iran’s nuclear and missile capabilities — while also denying that Israel pressured the U.S. into war.
* U.S. military officials stress that there are no U.S. ground troops currently engaged inside Iran, though they have not ruled out escalation or future deployment. *Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth described the air campaign as highly lethal and precise, yet left options open.
According to Israeli U.N. representatives, *U.S. and Israeli forces now control most of Iranian airspace, strengthening their air campaign significantly.
* Allied and Partner Views
Israeli leadership, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has described the joint U.S.–Israel operation as targeting an “existential threat,” and said the conflict may take some time but is not expected to last years.
* International Reactions & Criticism
Global South & critics strongly condemn the U.S. role, calling the strikes imperialistic and unlawful under international law. Countries like China, South Africa, Brazil, Turkey, and others have accused the U.S. and Israel of violating international norms and undermining global stability.
Russia labelled the joint U.S.–Israeli strikes as an unprovoked act of aggression, blaming Washington for escalating regional instability and arguing that the attacks could trigger humanitarian and economic crises.
* Statements from Iran & Regional Actors
Iran has accused the United States of supporting Israeli military actions and aims to prove its involvement in unrest and terrorist acts within Iran. Iranian officials claim Washington’s backing was crucial for recent strikes, though the U.S. denies this.
Iranian military leaders have warned that U.S. actions have altered Tehran’s defensive doctrine, indicating that future confrontations could be more direct and intense if American forces are attacked.
* Legal and Diplomatic Debate
United Nations and international legal experts argue that joint U.S.–Israeli strikes may violate the United Nations Charter because they were not authorized by the UN Security Council and do not meet the criteria for lawful self-defense.
Emergency sessions at the UN Security Council showed deep splits, with the U.S. and Israel defending their actions as necessary self-defense, while Russia and China loudly criticized them and called for ceasefire and diplomacy.
Source: AI
