18 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.

This means that at 06:45 Bangkok time on March 24 the deadline will have been breached.

11 hours ago, Gsxrnz said:

An amusing thread. This "war" was never about the Iranians having a potential nuclear capability. It is just a rinse and repeat version of every war that ever was - a reason to feed the Military Industrial complex, The Financial Industrial Complex, and The Corporate Industrial Complex.

Does nobody realise that we have been ruled by Fascism since at least Bretton-Woods, and that big business decides when we go to war, not puppet governments. Regular destruction of huge swathes of productive assets are periodically necessary to keep the money tree growing - usually when debt is HUGE and productivity is low. It pleases the Military, the Banks, and the Corporates.

Dollars to donuts they are already bidding on the huge contracts to rebuild Ukraine and the Middle-East - the more they can blow up in the meantime, all the better.

Not true.

Operation Epstein Fury was also about distracting from an "inconvenient truth".

So Trump's saber rattling is going to solve the "affordability hoax" how?

Apparently Trump is unaware things like oil, gas and fertilizer are commodities, so if the oil market says "$120/bbl", that is what the big oil companies will charge, and it will filter through to the cost of everything American's buy..

As I posted in another thread....

Many people say no one man could ever bring the entire world economy to its knees.

Trump: "Hold my cheeseburger".

15 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

I forgot that you need things spelled out for you. Occasionally that's effective. Here it goes. The effects of the damage inflicted on the gulf states energy infrastructure won't be confined to them alone. Not only do they export 20% of the world's oil, but a big percentage of such products as jet fuel and fertilizer. So the shortage will raise prices sharply throughout the world including the USA. It's true that thanks to the lefties, American gasoline consumption is about half of what it used to be.

Politically speaking, it's a commodity that Americans pay close attention to. So not good for the Republicans.

If it happens, we can expect a new TACO on green energy, and the MAGA will applaud it!

Just like they are now applauding the President who started no war! 😂

This is Lindsey Graham now, a person who hasn't served a day in his miserable life.

7 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

This is Lindsey Graham now, a person who hasn't served a day in his miserable life.

That is not true. He joined the Air Force in 1982 (JAG). Are you now going to argue military doctors, cooks, motor pool officers etc have never served? Now you can absolutely argue Graham is wrong on this issue, but not from a point of view that he has no experience of the military.

He has been consistant:

https://www.salon.com/2026/03/14/lindsey-graham-just-triggered-a-maga-revolt-over-iran/

Back in 2015:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/07/what-lindsey-graham-elides-about-a-war-against-iran/400148/

What he is motivated by is this idea of Christian Zionism; the fate of the US and Israel are inestricably tied up. But Chrisian Zionists can also be profoundly anti-semitic, because they believe in "convert or fry", the idea that Jews must convert to Christianity or fry in the flames of armageddon.

But these beliefs are not unusual in the southern states of the US, where you would hear people make profoundly sincere statements about all Catholics going to hell (but they are nice people), and about the jews.

One of the most popular series of fiction in the US is the Left Behind series, @ 65 million copies. The Rapture series. A lot of Americans believe in the dispensationalist interpretation of the New Testament's Book of Revelation. These people support Israel, not because of a narrative that the Jewish people suffered cruelties in Europe, or that they are people surrounded by enemies constantly trying to kill them, but because the return of the Jews is part of a prophecy that says we are in the End Times, and that this will end with the return of the Messiah. War with Iran is all part of this narrative. Which means it doesn't end with Kharg Island, for people like Graham and loons like Mike Huckabee, but ultimately it ends in Jerusalem in some sort of final Death Match.

A lot of Americans, mostly in the South, believe this crap, including members of the military. 44% of the US military are from Southern States (versus 38% of overall population), likely driven by the same reasons any one particular group is over represented in a military; poverty. The soldiers represent the communities from where they came.

23 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.

Giving no quarter as stated by Hegseth last week is also considered a war crime.