30
Trump: US will attack Iranian bridge, power plant for every ship targeted in Hormuz (www.reuters.com)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/world
1 comment fedilink hide all child comments

1 comment

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 5 points 3 months ago

As opposed to otherwise, where they'll just target every bridge and power plant and pre-school.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    12 comments in c/world@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 9 points 3 months ago

    Yo pedo. They're religious fanatics that hate America.

    They. Don't. Care.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 14 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Noob question: are war crimes ok if its tit for tat or is he really wanted by hague now?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    War crimes are not allowed under international law as part of a tit-for-tat.

    There is some nuance here, where some war crimes could make what would normally be a warcrime by the other side not a war crime. For instance, it is a war crime to attack medics, and it is a warcrime for combatants to pose as medics. However, if a country commits the warcrime of having combatants pose as medics, it is no longer a warcrime to attack that countries medics.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Attacking civilian infrastructure is a war crime.

    The US is obligated to prosecute Trump and any of his appointees involved in this decision.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 3 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    From a purely strategic perspective wouldn't the US be better off saying "no more attacks on shipping or we destroy Karg island entirely"?

    Karg:

    1. is a legit military target.
    2. doesn't contain any civilian housing etc.
    3. would cripple all IRGC income if destroyed.
    4. would reverse any pragmatic incentive China has to side with Iran at all. If the realistic possibility of getting oil from Iran itself drops to zero, Chinas incentive flips to simply getting and keeping the straight open to all shipping.
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    A) That is even more escalatory, and will lead Iran attacking more oil infrastructure in the region.

    B) We can only destroy Karg Island once

    C) The US had demonstrated an ability to block Iranian exports by navel power, which can be turned on and off as needed.

    D) If destructive dominance were enough to win the war, the US would have one it long ago. Just like they would have won in Afghanistan

    Iran views this war as existential, and the Strait as their most significant national defense asset. They are not going to give it up over concerns about oil revenue.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    Russia and China right now: "Stop! My penis can only get so erect!"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    8 comments in c/worldnews@lemmy.ml view that post
    [–] 15 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Wasn't it 3 months ago that he said he had won?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
    • [–] 13 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Not casually threatening war crimes!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] -1 points 3 months ago

    Sounds fair...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •