This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Picklebobble2 · 61-69, M
It's a normal part of warfare to knock out power grids and isolate fuel and water.
...as long as you don't deny access of same to the population.
Which means if the Iran military start transporting clearly marked trucks carrying same
, they are not legitimate targets for US engagement.
...as long as you don't deny access of same to the population.
Which means if the Iran military start transporting clearly marked trucks carrying same
, they are not legitimate targets for US engagement.
ElwoodBlues · M
@Picklebobble2 Actually, I believe the Geneva Conventions disagree with you. Lemme quote from https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2026/apr/02/seth-moulton/trump-bomb-civilian-infrastructure-war-crime/
Would attacking electricity infrastructure be a war crime?
The most directly relevant provision of international law comes from Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, specifically three portions of the agreement. They say:
● All parties to a conflict "shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants" and "shall direct their operations only against military objectives."
● "Acts or threats of violence, the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population, are prohibited."
● Attacks on military targets are those that "make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization … offers a definite military advantage."
Together, these provisions would make the bombing of civilian targets, including those in Iran, "a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law," said Milena Sterio, a Cleveland State University law professor who specializes in international law. The bombing of a civilian target "would give rise to a war crime," she said.
Would attacking electricity infrastructure be a war crime?
The most directly relevant provision of international law comes from Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, specifically three portions of the agreement. They say:
● All parties to a conflict "shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants" and "shall direct their operations only against military objectives."
● "Acts or threats of violence, the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population, are prohibited."
● Attacks on military targets are those that "make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization … offers a definite military advantage."
Together, these provisions would make the bombing of civilian targets, including those in Iran, "a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law," said Milena Sterio, a Cleveland State University law professor who specializes in international law. The bombing of a civilian target "would give rise to a war crime," she said.
Picklebobble2 · 61-69, M
@ElwoodBlues Pretty much what i said then.
And citing Cleveland University law professors commentary is not verification of either accepted norm nor international law.
You do this regularly and it's becoming annoying.
And citing Cleveland University law professors commentary is not verification of either accepted norm nor international law.
You do this regularly and it's becoming annoying.
ElwoodBlues · M
@Picklebobble2 tRump's threats against ALL bridges and ALL power plants and ALL desalination plants are CLEARLY directed against civilians and will harm civilians. As for my cited sources, at least I cited an expert in the field! Have you got any citations to support your claim??