Countries like the UAE and Saudi Arabia are ambivalent about US military action. Their primary fear is not a full-scale war, but a limited 'hit-and-run' strike where the US attacks and then diverts attention, leaving them 'naked and vulnerable' to Iranian retaliation without a long-term American security presence.

The US military action, especially the blockade of the Straits of Hormuz, is harming Gulf nations economically. Instead of strengthening an anti-Iran coalition, this 'half-baked' approach is eroding goodwill and pushing these crucial partners away, undermining the primary strategic benefit of the operation.

While currently aligned, the long-term interests of Israel and the US in a war with Iran could split. Israel seeks total elimination of Iran's missile threat, implying a prolonged conflict. The US, however, may have less tolerance for a drawn-out war due to concerns about its impact on global energy prices and the economy.

Israel's initial war plan was a targeted campaign against Iran's ballistic missile project. The conflict escalated into a broader, less attainable mission of regime change after the Trump administration joined, demonstrating how a powerful ally's involvement can lead to strategic "mission creep."

While the war highlights the danger of the US partnership, Gulf states are counterintuitively forced to deepen their reliance on American military support for immediate defense. This creates a strategic paradox: they need the US for short-term survival but see the alliance as a long-term liability.

The primary concern for Gulf nations is the "day after" a US-led conflict. They fear a scenario where the US declares victory and departs, leaving them to deal with a weakened but still dangerous and vengeful Iranian regime, similar to Saddam Hussein's Iraq after 1991.

The main driver for US action against Iran is to stabilize the Gulf region to secure over $2 trillion in investment deals with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE. These deals are the centerpiece of Trump's economic agenda, making the threat from Iran an existential economic one.

Iran's attempt to sow regional instability by attacking nine Arab countries backfired. Instead of creating chaos, these militarily insignificant 'pinprick' attacks eliminated neutrality and pushed Gulf states to fully support the US-Israeli mission against Iran, viewing it as a necessary response.

Despite a united military front against Iran, the US and Israel have divergent long-term goals. The Trump administration aims for a "Venezuela outcome"—a controlled regime ensuring oil flow—while Netanyahu's government is focused on total regime change, creating potential for a future strategic clash.