TEHRAN – Recent remarks by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu suggesting that Tehran is preparing to attack U.S. soil has alarmed American citizens — though probably not for the reasons the Israeli leader had hoped for. 

Netanyahu told a well-known American Zionist during an interview published Monday that Iran can “blackmail” any American city. “Iran is developing intercontinental ballistic missiles for 8,000 km range,” he told Ben Shapiro. “Add another 3,000 km and they’ve got New York City, Washington, Boston, Miami — even Mar-a-Lago — under their atomic guns. That’s a really big danger.”

Shapiro was one of the conservative influencers who fully backed Israel’s 12-day war against Iran in June. Sources told the Tehran Times that Israel relied on American intelligence and assets from day one. Netanyahu eventually persuaded Washington to directly intervene and strike Iranian nuclear sites in the final days of the war in an effort to bail Israel out of the devastation wrought in the occupied territories by Iranian missile salvos, sources add. 

The Trump administration’s backing of Israel’s war against Iran, however, was harshly criticized by many influential republican figures and strategists. Steve Bannon, the former Trump chief strategist who now hosts the MAGA podcast War Room, was at the forefront of a growing rift within the MAGA coalition over Washington’s involvement in the war. Netanyahu’s recent remarks also drew a reaction from him. “They (Israelis) trumped up bull-face lies about the Persians,” he said in a recent episode of his podcast. “They don’t care if they suck the United States into a 20 or 30-year war.” Bannon added that if Israel wants to go to war with Iran, it should do it on its own. 

American citizens who reacted to Netanyahu’s recent interview on social media were of the same mind as Bannon. Many shared videos of Netanyahu’s 2002 testimony to the U.S. Congress, in which he told lawmakers that an invasion of Iraq would have “enormous positive reverberations in the region.” He also said that if Washington toppled Saddam, it would pave the way for a future overthrow of the Iranian government.

“How many more times are we going to get fooled by Netanyahu,” asked one U.S. citizen on X. “He made us go to war with Iraq for weapons of mass destruction that didn’t exist. America lost thousands of its soldiers and $2 trillion to make this killer happy.” 

In his remarks to Shapiro, Netanyahu offered no evidence that Iran is increasing the range of its missiles or planning to attack U.S. cities. Nor did he present evidence when he defended Israel’s strikes on the country back in June, claiming they were carried out to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, which he said it was very “close” to producing. The Director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafael Grossi, recently stated there was never any evidence Tehran intended to build nuclear weapons, and that his reports have never suggested otherwise.

As Netanyahu’s interview continues to draw backlash, it appears that American jitters have not really extended to Iran. An analyst of American affairs told the Tehran Times that Iranians never believed the war with Israel and the U.S. ended after the ceasefire on June 25.

“Here in Iran the consensus is that another war is very likely. The lies Netanyahu comes up with to justify a new confrontation do not really matter,” said Amir-Ali Abolfath, adding that the goals Israel and the U.S. set for themselves were not achieved during the 12-day war. 

The expert identified three main goals: dismantling Iran’s nuclear and missile programs, creating public unrest, and forcing Iran to abandon its support for Resistance groups. “Given Washington’s current domestic challenges and its feuds with Russia and China, a second attack on Iran does not seem logical now, but it certainly did not the first time either,” he explained. “Whether Americans wrongly believe they can achieve their goals this time or find themselves unable to resist pressure from Israel, a new attack on Iran remains very likely, even if it serves no U.S. interests.”