From my own engagement with Middle Eastern geopolitics over the years, I've come to realize that the relationships between the US, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE are deeply entangled and often contradictory. The article’s mention of secret bombing raids allegedly conducted by Saudi Arabia and the UAE against Iran touches on a critical point — these actions aren't isolated but part of a broader pattern of proxy conflicts influenced by American imperial interests. The billions of dollars reportedly frozen in Iran's accounts but released in recent times highlight how financial tools are used strategically amid these conflicts. The situation is further complicated when you consider Saudi Arabia and the UAE’s roles supporting military campaigns in Yemen, which many experts and international observers have labeled as war crimes due to the devastating humanitarian impact. What strikes me the most is how little these nuances reach everyday conversations. The media often simplifies or overlooks the grim realities of these proxy wars that have led to untold suffering in the region. As the article suggests, the US's longstanding alliances with these Gulf states benefit certain power structures while exacerbating regional instability. Moreover, the propagation of Wahhabism and support for extremist groups have significant social and political repercussions beyond direct military actions. This fuels cycles of violence and sectarian divides, which complicates peace efforts further. Understanding these dynamics underscores why supporting a better deal or improved status for such regimes without critical scrutiny is controversial. It becomes crucial to question who benefits and who bears the brunt of these policies. All this said, as observers or commentators, we should strive to provide nuanced perspectives that encompass the multi-layered nature of these conflicts, rather than accepting oversimplified narratives that might inadvertently legitimize ongoing violence and repression.