The American people are not enthusiastic about a possible war with Iran. Recent polls show that the vast majority of the public is opposed to a new military adventure. According to the latest data from YouGov, only 5% of the public supports war with Iran, while 85% are clearly opposed.

While support for air operations among Republican voters is limited, Democrats and independents are strongly opposed to the idea. According to a Reuters/Ipsos poll, even Republican voters who initially supported the idea are growing increasingly opposed to it over time. The American public, still bearing the legacy of the long and exhausting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, is almost collectively saying "no” to opening a new front.

The relationship between Israel and the U.S. is often described in terms of strategic partnership and the myth of Israel's being the "only democracy in the Middle East.” However, when we delve into the history of this alliance, we encounter examples of Israel occasionally trying to drag the U.S. into war for its own regional interests. Unfortunately, it is not difficult to predict that Israel will once again undermine the American people's desire for economic stability and internal peace with a false flag operation.

The Lavon Affair in 1954 and the USS Liberty attack in 1967 are among the most notable examples of this approach. In the Lavon Affair, Israel had Jewish agents in Egypt carry out sabotage against American and British targets, then blamed the radical groups in Egypt in an attempt to provoke the West into taking sides against Egypt.

The USS Liberty incident, however, was far more bloody and controversial. During the Six-Day War, Israeli warplanes bombed an American warship in international waters, killing 34 American soldiers and wounding 171 others. Israel apologized, citing an "identification error,” and paid compensation. However, sailors on board the ship stated that the attack was deliberate, that the American flag was clearly visible, and that the ship's communication systems were targeted.

These two examples show that when it comes to Israel's perception of regional threats and security doctrine, it is willing to sacrifice even its allies. This strategy is similarly evident in its current policies toward Iran. Iran's nuclear program, regional proxy forces, and ideological hostility are seen as an existential threat to Israel. However, the Tel Aviv administration considers U.S. military, diplomatic and technological support essential to engage in an all-out conflict with Iran.

In this context, the following question arises: Could Israel resort to a similar provocative action to draw the U.S. into the heart of the war against Iran? In such a scenario, for example, an Iranian-American could be made to carry out a terrorist act. Or an attack could be organized against an American trade ship in the Red Sea, with Iran being blamed for it. Cyberattacks on civilian targets could be carried out in a way that creates the impression of Iranian involvement, thereby generating public pressure.

While these are merely speculations, they are not entirely implausible given past events. The Lavon and USS Liberty incidents demonstrate that alliances are not always based on mutual trust but sometimes on strategic considerations.

Make no mistake: Israel's ultimate goal against Iran, which it views as a vital threat, is to draw the U.S. directly into the conflict. Looking at where they have dragged Donald Trump, who was elected U.S. president on the promise of "America First,” we must anticipate that they will spare no effort to turn the man who criticized the Iraq invasion into another Dick Cheney.