In a recent discourse, readers reflect on various critical issues, particularly the bombardments in Iran. The commentary emphasizes a disturbing trend of binary thinking, where nuanced discussions are overshadowed by extreme positions. Specifically, it points out the challenge of condemning both Iran's oppressive theocratic regime and the military actions led by Israel and the United States without being accused of inconsistency.

The author underscores the condemnation faced by Spain for not allowing U.S. military operations on its soil, reflecting a resistance to being used as a base for imperialistic ambitions. This raises questions about the role of international legality and Spain's position amidst criticisms of supporting the Iranian regime. The narrative argues that adhering to international laws and treaties should not be considered an exception but rather a fundamental stance against militarism driven by personal or national interests.

Overall, the piece calls for a return to critical thinking and civil discourse as essential tools for preventing violence and conflict. The fear of a polarized debate highlights the urgency for reflection in society, where discussions about legality and morality should prevail over simplistic dichotomies.