> Of course, this then introduces the circular reasoning "because of a potential US attack", but of course if Iran wasn't funding Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis

I think the first step of thinking about war objectively is to consider how each side sees it. The US POV is no less circular, from Iran’s perspective - they could list any number of provocations from the US to justify arming themselves, none more obvious than the war itself.

The debate around who started the hostility is ultimately pointless, the question is what to do about. Ideally the answer isn’t “arm for obliteration because the other side started it”