This kind of analysis is really reaching. I'm not going to adress each point but talk in more general terms. Iran is not going to play by the book, they've sho

This kind of analysis is really reaching. I'm not going to adress each point but talk in more general terms. Iran is not going to play by the book, they've shown multiple times they are willing to escalate things when it looks like deescalation is more logical choice. One of recent examples is when they shot down a US drone. What is the reason for this is unclear, it's possible that hardliners in Iran have control over parts of the military, and that they push for escalation whenever there is a situation to deescalate things with USA. Another option is that there is no divide in Iran, but that is it well orchestrated "madman" tactic to make USA willing to make bigger concessions. Rest of the analysis completely ignores the facts that Houthi's are receiving or using Iran built or Iran designed weapons, not just cruise missiles but anti air missiles as well. It is a huge leap of faith to assume that some other country in a false flag created a missile that resembles known Houthi weapons or that multiple countries created a fake narrative that fit Houthi attack. And after that, Houthi's played into that false flag narrative by taking responsibilities for the attack, even citing methods they used to do the attack (methods seem to be fake, but the point stands). This theory of a false flag attack makes no sense. It would take several countries with conflicting interests to cooperate (Houthis claiming responsibility, Saudi Arabia accepting huge material losses and faking a rocket in the desert, Israel conducting a stealthy attack far away from their borders, Iran playing along and not exposing it...)