Despite Israel’s patience and precautions and Iran’s brazenness, much of the international media framed Israel’s actions as destabilizing.By Rachel O’Donoghue, HonestReportingIn the early hours of Friday, June 13, Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, a sweeping, coordinated offensive against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and the officials overseeing it.The operation marked a decisive move against the Islamic Republic’s military capabilities, unfolding as a bold, surgical campaign whose execution appears to have been years in the making, with final preparations reportedly completed during the past eight months.The IDF, Mossad, and Israel’s defense industries collaborated on a meticulously synchronized, three-pronged assault deep inside Iranian territory.First, covert Mossad units had pre-positioned accurately targeted guided munitions in open terrain near key surface-to-air missile installations. These were remotely triggered at the onset of the aerial phase, neutralizing Iran’s air defenses with near-total precision.Second, mobile strike systems concealed within civilian vehicles were activated from inside Iran. These advanced platforms disabled radar and anti-aircraft systems, clearing a corridor for Israeli fighter jets to operate with impunity.Third, a drone launch site, covertly constructed near Tehran by Mossad operatives, unleashed a wave of explosive-laden UAVs.These targeted the Asfajaabad missile base, one of the regime’s most dangerous strategic assets, known to house medium- and long-range surface-to-surface missiles aimed at Israel.Simultaneously, a separate wave of precision airstrikes eliminated senior figures in Iran’s nuclear weapons program, including IRGC officers and top atomic scientists, using intelligence gathered over months by Israel’s security establishment.In the hours before the strike, global media fixated on rising tensions following a damning report from the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), confirming Iran’s violation of key non-proliferation obligations.In defiance, Tehran responded not with restraint, but with escalation, announcing a new uranium enrichment facility and the activation of advanced centrifuges designed to accelerate weapons-grade production.Despite Israel’s patience and precautions and Iran’s brazenness, much of the international media framed Israel’s actions as destabilizing.Media Briefings, Misdirection, and a Green LightThe media’s false judgment of Israel relied on reports that U.S. President Donald Trump had urged Israeli restraint in the days leading up to the assault, preferring renewed nuclear diplomacy.CNN reported that Trump had warned Prime Minister Netanyahu to “stop Iran threats,” claiming the U.S. was “ramping up pressure” on Israel to hold off on any military action.The New York Times echoed this, framing Israel as “ready to attack Iran” in a move that could, they claimed, “further inflame” the region and derail U.S. diplomacy.The Washington Post ran with the headline “Fears of an Israeli Strike on Iran,” citing unnamed U.S. intelligence officials who were “increasingly concerned” that Israel would act “without the consent of the United States,” a move they claimed would doom diplomatic efforts and provoke Iranian retaliation against U.S. assets in the region.Oddly, those same outlets also reported Iranian threats, including a warning by Defense Minister Aziz Nasirzadeh to strike U.S. bases if talks collapsed—yet these were treated with far less alarm.What none of the reporting made clear at the time, but has since been confirmed, is that these supposed leaks and briefings about U.S. reluctance were part of a coordinated misdirection campaign designed to mislead Tehran.In an interview with Reuters on Friday, President Trump pulled back the curtain: “We knew everything,” he said, calling the Israeli strikes “excellent” and “very successful.”Israeli officials confirmed the U.S. had been briefed in advance and had given quiet approval, though it withheld direct military support.Friday, June 13: Media Cries ‘Rogue Israel’ Before Iran Responds by Targeting CiviliansDespite the confirmation from Trump, much of the media clung to the narrative of a defiant, unilateral Israel.CNN’s Kevin Liptak, for example, published an analysis claiming Israel had “ignored direct warnings” from Trump and acted without U.S. involvement, describing the strikes as “against the president’s publicly stated wishes.”The irony, of course, is that these “publicly stated wishes” were never meant to reflect the truth—they were part of the ruse. Liptak, like many others, appeared to mistake strategic misdirection for a diplomatic breakdown.The Conversation published a breathless analysis accusing Israel of “defying Trump” and “risking a major war.” One is left to wonder: What exactly does The Conversation consider a risk?Iran stockpiling enriched uranium, threatening regional annihilation, and publicly vowing to strike Israel apparently doesn’t meet their threshold. Only Israel’s preemptive attempt to stop it does.Bloomberg took a similar line, claiming Israel had “expressly disregarded the wishes of Trump”—even as Trump himself, just hours later, confirmed U.S. foreknowledge and praised the mission’s success.At approximately 9:00 p.m. Friday, Iran responded, not with a measured military reply, but with indiscriminate missile barrages targeting civilian centers.And yet, media coverage remained locked on the same refrain: that Israel was the destabilizing party, even as missiles rained down on apartment buildings, while the regime responsible for launching them was portrayed as merely the victim of someone else’s war.Saturday, June 14 – Sunday, June 15: Israel Continues, and Iranian Missiles Kill More CiviliansOperation Rising Lion continued through Saturday, with U.S. officials reportedly assessing the strike on Iran’s Natanz nuclear facility as “extremely effective.”On June 14, Israel expanded its campaign, targeting weapons sites and critical energy infrastructure, aiming to degrade Iran’s ability to fund, fuel, and sustain its nuclear and military operations.Once again, the Iranian regime responded not with military countermeasures, but with another wave of indiscriminate missile attacks on Israeli population centers – Bat Yam, Rishon Lezion, and Haifa.And yet, this simple fact—this fundamental asymmetry—has been ignored, downplayed, or erased by many in the global media.This is not a war between two belligerent nations targeting one another’s cities.It is a preemptive strike by a democracy against the world’s most prolific state sponsor of terrorism, and the inevitable response from that regime: the mass targeting of Israeli civilians, just as it has always promised to do.The New York Times, which has devoted entire front pages to Gazan casualty figures, often sourced solely from Hamas, could not find space for a single headline acknowledging Israeli deaths.Not one. An entire homepage dedicated to the war, and no room for Israeli victims.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});10 Israelis are dead. 200 are injured.But you won't see that in any @nytimes headlines today.Because Israeli casualties evidently don't count for The New York Times. pic.twitter.com/56jpVqwhAz— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) June 15, 2025The Washington Post, The Guardian, and wire services like AFP have leaned heavily on the language of equivalency—describing “trading strikes,” “tit-for-tat attacks,” and an “exchange of missiles.”What they omit is that one side is striking military targets. The other is deliberately targeting children in their homes.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});This is not two sides "trading strikes."While Israel targets the Iranian regime, the Islamic Republic fires its missiles at Israeli civilians.Enough with the moral equivalence, @washingtonpost. pic.twitter.com/cUxjPJP8ZX— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) June 15, 2025(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});No, @France24_en, these are not "tit-for-tat attacks." : Preemptively striking regime & nuclear targets. : Deliberately targeting Israeli civilians.They are not the same. pic.twitter.com/Zim4PYvNCb— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) June 15, 2025The Guardian even speculated that Israel might expand its operations “beyond” the nuclear program, ignoring that Israel has been transparent about its objectives and precise in how it has carried them out.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});The suggestion that Israel has any other motive other than defending itself and the West from a regime that wants its total destruction is despicable.Instead, @guardian is doing mental gymnastics on how to fault Israel and paint the Islamic regime as a victim. pic.twitter.com/BxlCxI3q22— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) June 15, 2025Newsweek accused Israel of “escalating” the conflict for conducting precision strikes on underground nuclear facilities and weapons depots— not Iran, which launched ballistic missiles at apartment buildings.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});Because the Islamic Republic launching hundreds of ballistic missiles targeting Israeli civilians isn't already an escalation, @Newsweek? pic.twitter.com/hNAVYVL2gA— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) June 15, 2025The Context MattersYes, Israel struck first—but this was a preemptive strike against a regime that has made no secret of its ambition to destroy the Jewish state.Just two days before Israel acted, the United Nations confirmed Iran was violating its nuclear obligations and moving closer to weapons-grade enrichment. Tehran responded by threatening to attack U.S. forces in the region.This is the same regime that funds and arms terrorist proxies across the Middle East: Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis—all of which have escalated attacks on Israel since October 7, 2023, and all of which are also openly committed to Israel’s destruction.It is also the same regime that has targeted Western civilians. In 2022, the head of the UK’s MI5 revealed that British authorities had foiled more than 20 Iranian-backed plots targeting UK citizens.These plots, he said, frequently involved Iran’s use of international criminals as proxies—a tactic seen across Europe.The Bottom LineThis war was not inevitable. It was engineered by a regime that has spent decades plotting Israel’s destruction, funding terror across the region, and defying every international safeguard against nuclear proliferation.Israel’s strike was not reckless. It was necessary, strategic, and aimed entirely at military infrastructure and personnel. Iran’s response, true to form, has been to fire missiles indiscriminately at Israeli civilian centers.Yet much of the global news media has recast this as a clash between moral equals, drawing a false equivalence that erases the line between aggression and defense, between terrorism and counterterrorism.The world’s most dangerous regime is watching closely to see whether its atrocities will be condemned—or excused. And thanks to too many in the media, it may already have its answer.The post Iran rains missiles on Israeli cities after targeted strikes on nuclear sites — media calls it ‘tit-for-tat’ appeared first on World Israel News.