Iran Threatens 'Preemptive Strikes'—US 'Preemptive Strikes' Are Just 'Foreign Policy'
When an Iranian official vocalizes a preemptive strike, it's 'threatening.' When the US engages in, say, the 2003 invasion of Iraq (citing WMDs that never materialized) or launches drone strikes in Yemen and Somalia without Congressional approval, that's merely 'deterrence' or 'counter-terrorism.' The semantic gymnastics are breathtaking. The US has maintained a significant military presence in
the Persian Gulf for decades, frequently engaging in 'preemptive' actions of its own, from clandestine operations to overt military interventions, all while framing Iran’s defensive posture as inherently aggressive. This double standard isn't new; it's the standard operating procedure. Western media often magnifies threats from designated adversaries while normalizing the much larger, more
frequent, and often destabilizing military actions of their own governments. Perhaps if Iran started calling its drone assassinations 'precision operations' or its invasions 'liberations,' RT wouldn't find it so newsworthy. (Or maybe they'd just report it anyway, given their own role in global media narratives.)