In the recent Iran–Israel ceasefire situation, both sides publicly declared agreement on a truce. Hours later, Israel claimed Iran had launched missiles, violating the deal. Iran, in turn, denied any such launch ever took place.
What strikes me is how dramatically their statements diverge — and yet neither has offered any solid proof. No satellite imagery, no intercepted communications, no verified video footage. This makes me wonder: when the technical means to confirm or disprove such claims exist (e.g. radar logs, satellite evidence), why would either side risk an outright lie that could be exposed?
Who’s lying — and more importantly, why? Is the goal simply to shape narrative momentum before facts can catch up? Are these statements made for internal audiences rather than international credibility?
I’m curious how others interpret such deliberate ambiguity. Can both sides be bluffing, or are we missing crucial pieces from third-party observers?
The Zionist entity is completely founded on lies, literally founded by a bunch of atheist Jews who claimed the Jewish God they don’t even believe in promised the land to them. It always has contempt for the truth. The compulsion towards lying is ideological at this point. They lied about a God they don’t actually believe in promising a land, so what’s a small lie like lying about a ceasefire in comparison?