QUESTION: And then both you and the National Security Advisor just a few minutes ago talked about this being a brazen and unacceptable escalation. But does the administration see anything that Israel has done over the course of the last three weeks as escalatory?
MR MILLER: So certainly they have done things to expand the conflict, but if you look at the actions that they have taken, they were bringing terrorists to justice, terrorists who have launched attacks on Israeli civilians. If you look at what Iran did today – we have been warning for some time about the threat posed by Iran arming and funding terrorist groups across the Middle East. And the attack today just demonstrated the danger of those actions. What you saw was Iran launching a state-on-state attack to protect and defend the terrorist groups that it has built, nurtured and that it controls. So there is a difference between the actions that we have seen Israel take to defend its civilians —
QUESTION: Okay, well I’m not suggesting that they’re —
MR MILLER: — and what we’ve – I just – and what we’ve seen Iran take.
QUESTION: I’m not trying to suggest that they are equivalent. I just wanted to make sure that you didn’t see —
MR MILLER: No, you – we have certainly seen Iran – or – we’ve certainly seen Israel expand the nature of its attacks against Hizballah, but it is a very – it is a very different type of attack than what we saw today from a state – a state actor against another state.
…
QUESTION: So given that the Secretary and the National Security Advisor just said that this attack by Iran is sort of definitively escalatory in nature. I know that State – you’ve been telling us, the Secretary even told us that for months they’ve – you’ve been encouraging the Israelis not to respond to attacks and provocations in such a way that escalates anything further. Are – is the Secretary going to offer that same advice to the Israelis now in the wake of these missile strikes?
MR MILLER: I’ll say a couple things about that. First, of course Israel has a right to defend itself, as any nation does. In terms of what Israel’s response will be, of course there must be consequences for Iran for this attack. We’ve made clear that there must be consequences. I’m not going to get into what those consequences are today.
But there are things on which we will be coordinating with our Israeli counterparts, and I think in the immediate aftermath of this attack we are going to coordinate with them on what any response might be. I think it’s important that we are able to defeat this attack through successful work with Israel and with our partners, and we will work with them on what a response might look like. But I’m not at the position, just two and a half hours after this event occurred, to offer what that might look like today.
QUESTION: The Iranian foreign ministry people have said that – now that they gave the U.S. – I don’t who – a head’s up in advance of these missile strikes today through diplomatic channels. Is that true?
MR MILLER: That is absolutely false. We had no kind of warning from the Government of Iran that they were going to launch such an attack. Yeah.
Yes, I’m aware what the position of the US State Department is. They will always defend America and it’s Allies regardless of the situation. I don’t know why you would just take them at their word instead of look for independent verification. None of this discredit my points in the previous comment, it does show how far Miller will lie about Israeli operations, which have already killed over a thousand civilians in Lebanon.
Iran telegraphed to Arab officials in the region on Monday night that it was going to launch an attack on Israel that would be similar in scale to its April attack when it launched 300 drones and ballistic and cruise missiles at Israel but caused minimal damage, according to Arab officials.
The White House warned earlier on Tuesday that Iran was poised to launch a ballistic missile attack on Israel soon, instantly ratcheting up fears of all-out war in the region.
Thank you for confirming that Iran did not tell US officials about the attack. Your sources definitely helped me reach the factual conclusion.
And I’m providing substance to the discussion. What did I say that was discrediting something? Unless something in that quote, you feel, attacks one of your points?
No, they did not directly tell the US as far as I can tell. They did so indirectly and with short notice, different from the last time when they gave a 72 hour warning.
Miller states that the Iranian strikes were targeting civilians, while Israel does not target civilians. Both of which are not true.
Notice how Miller, who is representing the US State Department here, frames all of Israel’s actions as defensive and just (despite directly bombing a Capitol, killing hundreds of civilians, and starting a ground invasion), while all the actions of any of Israel’s enemies are unjust and demands consequences (despite attacking military targets and not civilian targets). The double standards are blatant and intentional, in order to justify the US’s continued military support of Israel, despite public opinion, US Law, and International Law.
Yes I understand Iran objectively lied and never told us, directly or indirectly, based on the evidence. The rest of this sounds like your opinion. And as though mistrust should be taken towards our officials.
Well, I believe them, and I agree with their stance on Iran.
This is no longer a factual discussion, and I won’t be continuing.
And I picked up on the attempt to incorrectly frame what was said in the quote. Miller did not say all the things you’re claiming.
https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-october-1-2024/
…
Yes, I’m aware what the position of the US State Department is. They will always defend America and it’s Allies regardless of the situation. I don’t know why you would just take them at their word instead of look for independent verification. None of this discredit my points in the previous comment, it does show how far Miller will lie about Israeli operations, which have already killed over a thousand civilians in Lebanon.
https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/israel-iran-hezbollah-conflict/card/iran-gave-warning-ahead-of-attack-in-response-israel-promised-heavy-retaliation-bLNC6W0OspEIy0DwdquQ
https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/01/politics/iran-missile-attack-israel/index.html
Thank you for confirming that Iran did not tell US officials about the attack. Your sources definitely helped me reach the factual conclusion.
And I’m providing substance to the discussion. What did I say that was discrediting something? Unless something in that quote, you feel, attacks one of your points?
No, they did not directly tell the US as far as I can tell. They did so indirectly and with short notice, different from the last time when they gave a 72 hour warning.
Miller states that the Iranian strikes were targeting civilians, while Israel does not target civilians. Both of which are not true.
Notice how Miller, who is representing the US State Department here, frames all of Israel’s actions as defensive and just (despite directly bombing a Capitol, killing hundreds of civilians, and starting a ground invasion), while all the actions of any of Israel’s enemies are unjust and demands consequences (despite attacking military targets and not civilian targets). The double standards are blatant and intentional, in order to justify the US’s continued military support of Israel, despite public opinion, US Law, and International Law.
Yes I understand Iran objectively lied and never told us, directly or indirectly, based on the evidence. The rest of this sounds like your opinion. And as though mistrust should be taken towards our officials.
Well, I believe them, and I agree with their stance on Iran.
This is no longer a factual discussion, and I won’t be continuing.
And I picked up on the attempt to incorrectly frame what was said in the quote. Miller did not say all the things you’re claiming.