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.

3 hours 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.

The US is not a state party to the Rome statute, so he doesn't care.

3 hours ago, ravip said:

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.

What would you do?

Not what you would have done previously what would you do now?

3 hours 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.

Who will enforce this ' unlawful ' nonsense?

12 minutes ago, candide said:

The US is not a state party to the Rome statute, so he doesn't care.

1 minute ago, emptypockets said:

Who will enforce this ' unlawful ' nonsense?

The US doesn’t need to be a signatory for it to be binding.

If the ICC issues an arrest warrant, all signatories are obliged to arrest him if they can.

Just now, JBChiangRai said:

The US doesn’t need to be a signatory for it to be binding.

If the ICC issues an arrest warrant, all signatories are obliged to arrest him if they can.

So go and arrest him. Good luck with that.

Toothless tigers.

It’s more likely to make it impossible for him to travel internationally after his presidency ends.

Many, many countries would be only too delighted to arrest him then. Starting with Denmark.

The semi-retarded Pete shoots his mouth off again. Listen up Persian Gulf states, and all Muslim countries everywhere.

Here's a list taken from Gemini of Israel's eletric power plants and the % that they contribute to the whole - if Trump does go full tonto they had better hope that Iran doen't have any nasty surprises in store. That said the Irainian FM has said this is afight to the finish now tehre can be no negotation with Trump.

9 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Here's a list taken from Gemini of Israel's eletric power plants and the % that they contribute to the whole - if Trump does go full tonto they had better hope that Iran doen't have any nasty surprises in store. That said the Irainian FM has said this is afight to the finish now tehre can be no negotation with Trump.

You need to use artificial intelligence to formulate an opinion. Very sad.

5 minutes ago, emptypockets said:

You need to use artificial intelligence to formulate an opinion. Very sad.

You prefer opinions that are not based on evidence? So you just make up your mind on an issue based on what exactly? Feelings? Premonitions? Coin tosses?

6 minutes ago, emptypockets said:

You need to use artificial intelligence to formulate an opinion. Very sad.

Hardly it's a google search basically and the inference is mine, grandad using electrickery from that wonderful Mr Edison.

2 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

You prefer opinions that are not based on evidence? So you just make up your mind on an issue based on what exactly? Feelings? Premonitions? Coin tosses?

Like his username his pockets are empty of anything useful, very sad.

Just now, Alan Zweibel said:

You prefer opinions that are not based on evidence? So you just make up your mind on an issue based on what exactly? Feelings? Premonitions? Coin tosses?

Where is AI evidence? Even Google warns AI answer may not be accurate.

My opinions are made up from what I see and read filtered through my own intelligence and experience.

Obliterate is my new favorite word

2 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Hardly it's a google search basically and the inference is mine, grandad using electrickery from that wonderful Mr Edison.

You need to do more research about electickery. It was discovered a long time before Edison. But I guess that is what AI does for people without their own intelligence.

5 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

Obliterate is my new favorite word

When we can understand what it means perhaps its one of these alternate facts we used to hear about

1 minute ago, emptypockets said:

Where is AI evidence? Even Google warns AI answer may not be accurate.

My opinions are made up from what I see and read filtered through my own intelligence and experience.

So your problem isn't that AI was used, but that it wasn't fact-checked? And given that I don't see you backing up your opinions with any evidence,I guess that's the way you prefer to go.

2 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

So your problem isn't that AI was used, but that it wasn't fact-checked? And given that I don't see you backing up your opinions with any evidence,I guess that's the way you prefer to go.

That doesn't make much sense. My opinion is my opinion.

8 minutes ago, emptypockets said:

You need to do more research about electickery. It was discovered a long time before Edison. But I guess that is what AI does for people without their own intelligence.

Maybe you should look up the history of electricity as a public power source. It's not at all unlikely that his grandad got his electricity thanks to Thomas Edison. His comment wasn't about the discovery of electricity. It was about an ancestor's access to it.

3 minutes ago, emptypockets said:

That doesn't make much sense. My opinion is my opinion.

Offering an opinion without evidence to back it up, is just emptiness.

Just now, Alan Zweibel said:

Offering an opinion without evidence to back it up, is just emptiness.

No, it's an opinion. An opinion doesn't require any further measure.

5 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

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.

The power plants are what is helping to keep the Iranian regime going. They are providing the HVAC and power to operate missile and drone launch centers and to manufacture the equipment. This makes them a legitimate military target.

Iran has the option of agreeing to stop its nuclear weapons program, stop trying to overthrow the Gulf Arab governments and to stop funding international terrorism. As soon as they do that, the intervention can and will cease.

5 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

The power plants are what is helping to keep the Iranian regime going. Iran has the option of agreeing to stop its nuclear weapons program, stop trying to overthrow the Gulf Arab governments and to stop funding international terrorism. As soon as they do that, the intervention can and will cease.

Yep. Up to them. Say stop, actually stop, and the beatings will cease. Until then, well the Germans and Japanese crawled out from the rubble, hopefully the Iranians are as good.

5 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

The power plants are what is helping to keep the Iranian regime going. They are providing the HVAC and power to operate missile and drone launch centers and to manufacture the equipment. This makes them a legitimate military target.

Iran has the option of agreeing to stop its nuclear weapons program, stop trying to overthrow the Gulf Arab governments and to stop funding international terrorism. As soon as they do that, the intervention can and will cease.

Will it? Trump has demanded unconditional surrender.

And if those power plants are as important as you say, it seems likely that when the first bomb strikes, Iran won't hesitate to inflict massive damage upon the energy infrastructure of the Gulf states. I suspect that prospect may finally be sinking into that erratic quantity otherwise known as Trump's mind. Although given its essential randomness, no one can say that his mind has absorbed any lessons from this excursion.

2 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Yep. Up to them. Say stop, actually stop, and the beatings will cease. Until then, well the Germans and Japanese crawled out from the rubble, hopefully the Iranians are as good.

The problem is, of course, that it won't just be Iran that will suffer. Already Qatar says the 17% of its gas production is out of commission for the next 3 to 5 years.

3 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Will it? Trump has demanded unconditional surrender.

And if those power plants are as important as you say, it seems likely that when the first bomb strikes, Iran won't hesitate to inflict massive damage upon the energy infrastructure of the Gulf states. I suspect that prospect may finally be sinking into that erratic quantity otherwise known as Trump's mind. Although given its essential randomness, no one can say that his mind has absorbed any lessons from this excursion.

If Iran offers some sort of conciliatory gesture, it will be enough to get Trump to back off. I know that few people will agree with me, but I believe that trump genuinely wants to avoid escalation and would dearly like to give the Iranians an off ramp. However, if the Iranians go after the Gulf Arab assets, the GCC will be ruthless in their vengeance. They'll lay waste to much of Iran's industrial base and drive the regime out of the country and into Yemen. The Saudis have been waiting patiently to settle accounts with the Shiites of Iran. They will be joined by other Arab nations, especially Iraq which has long suffered because of the Iranian incitement of shiites in the country.