What an absolutely “brilliant” way to rescue struggling Iranians from their oppressive leadership. Truly, more nations should line up and invite the US to “liberate” their citizens.

It seems the labels “developed country” and “first world” have taken on entirely new meanings. One has to wonder—have basic human ethics simply gone out of fashion?

President Donald Trump issued Iran with a 48-hour deadline to re-open the Strait of Hormuz, after which he says the US will "obliterate" Iranian power plants.

In peacetime, around 20% of the world's oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) shipments passes through the strait, making it critical for global energy supplies.

Trump posted on his Truth Social platform at 23:44 GMT on 21 March, meaning Iran has until 23:44 GMT on 23 March (03:14 in Tehran on 24 March), to meet the US president's demand.

BBC News

Trump says US will ‘obliterate’ Iran’s power plants if St...

Tehran warns it will retaliate against US-linked energy infrastructure in the Middle East if its power plants are attacked.

Perhaps Trump has the same intention with Iran as Israel did with Gaza, just obliterate all the infrastructure and reduce the country to rubble.

Good work Don, it is a great way to make friends and influence people.

Trump needs to be careful.

Destroying civilian power plants can be unlawful.

Front the net…

Attacks become unlawful — and potentially war crimes — in several common scenarios involving power infrastructure:

1.  The power plant/grid is a civilian object — If it does not make an effective contribution to military action (or if there is doubt, it must be presumed civilian), attacking it violates the prohibition on directing attacks against civilian objects (Additional Protocol I, Article 52; customary Rule 7). This is a war crime under the Rome Statute (Article 8(2)(b)(ii)).

2.  Disproportionate harm — Even if it is a military objective, the expected incidental loss of civilian life, injury, or damage to civilian objects (hospitals, water supply, heating in winter, etc.) must not be excessive relative to the concrete and direct military advantage (Additional Protocol I, Article 51(5)(b); customary Rule 14). Widespread blackouts causing severe civilian suffering (e.g., lack of heat, water pumping, medical care) often fail this test. This can be a war crime (Rome Statute Article 8(2)(b)(iv)).

3.  Primary purpose is to terrorize civilians — Attacks whose main aim is spreading terror among the civilian population are prohibited (Additional Protocol I, Article 51(2); customary Rule 2).

4.  Starvation or denial of essential services — If the intent is to destroy/deny objects indispensable to civilian survival (not just military denial), it may violate rules against starvation as a method of warfare (Additional Protocol I, Article 54; customary Rule 54). Power infrastructure isn’t explicitly listed like food/water, but widespread, long-term deprivation of electricity (affecting water, heating, hospitals) can cross into this territory, especially if systematic.

5.  Special case: nuclear power plants — These (and dams/dykes) have extra protection as “works containing dangerous forces” (Additional Protocol I, Article 56; customary Rule 42). They generally cannot be attacked even if military objectives, if it risks releasing dangerous forces and severe civilian losses. Violating this is a grave breach/war crime in many cases.

11 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

Trump needs to be careful.

Destroying civilian power plants can be unlawful.

Front the net…

Attacks become unlawful — and potentially war crimes — in several common scenarios involving power infrastructure:

1.  The power plant/grid is a civilian object — If it does not make an effective contribution to military action (or if there is doubt, it must be presumed civilian), attacking it violates the prohibition on directing attacks against civilian objects (Additional Protocol I, Article 52; customary Rule 7). This is a war crime under the Rome Statute (Article 8(2)(b)(ii)).

2.  Disproportionate harm — Even if it is a military objective, the expected incidental loss of civilian life, injury, or damage to civilian objects (hospitals, water supply, heating in winter, etc.) must not be excessive relative to the concrete and direct military advantage (Additional Protocol I, Article 51(5)(b); customary Rule 14). Widespread blackouts causing severe civilian suffering (e.g., lack of heat, water pumping, medical care) often fail this test. This can be a war crime (Rome Statute Article 8(2)(b)(iv)).

3.  Primary purpose is to terrorize civilians — Attacks whose main aim is spreading terror among the civilian population are prohibited (Additional Protocol I, Article 51(2); customary Rule 2).

4.  Starvation or denial of essential services — If the intent is to destroy/deny objects indispensable to civilian survival (not just military denial), it may violate rules against starvation as a method of warfare (Additional Protocol I, Article 54; customary Rule 54). Power infrastructure isn’t explicitly listed like food/water, but widespread, long-term deprivation of electricity (affecting water, heating, hospitals) can cross into this territory, especially if systematic.

5.  Special case: nuclear power plants — These (and dams/dykes) have extra protection as “works containing dangerous forces” (Additional Protocol I, Article 56; customary Rule 42). They generally cannot be attacked even if military objectives, if it risks releasing dangerous forces and severe civilian losses. Violating this is a grave breach/war crime in many cases.

To be brutally honest, if Donald Trump were ever going to be “cooked,” he’s already served up more than enough material to warrant a full deep fry by now.

Shame the kitchen seems to be missing something as basic as functioning law enforcement.