• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Ed Israel/US Attacks Iran /Yet Another Country/Iran

The US is currently bombing civilian infrastructure in Iran after directly targeting them - how is that not terrorism?
 
Last edited:
The Great Zaganza said:
Feel free to quote your sources
Click to expand...
I did. See above.
The Great Zaganza said:
The US is currently bombing civilian infrastructure in Iran - how is that not terrorism?
Click to expand...
Because it doesn't meet the definition of terrorism. Hitting infrastructure is a pretty common and basic form of warfare, including infrastructure that is used by civilians. I don't recall you bitching about Ukraine hitting the Kursk Strait Bridge. Nor should you. That's a legitimate target, even though it's also civilian infrastructure. If the purpose isn't to terrorize, but rather to disable some military capability (including industrial or logistics capacity), then that's not terrorism. It's just war.

All your standards are post-hoc rationalizations, nothing more.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Sure, why not pay the mafia protection?
Click to expand...
Yeah? If the US is fine with it, why not us? You break it, you don't own it. Europe should use the time to divest itself even quicker away from fossil fuels and start re-arming like hell. Rheinmetall is already going full blast and I can tell from Finland that our ammunition production is exploding, pardon the pun :) The US can't be trusted any longer, they are rather stabbing us in the back with Greenland and their brotherly ties with Russia (which is busily helping Iran with intelligence). Rogue states all around, beggars can't be choosers.
 
The Atheist said:
But, but, but... they're our allies!
Click to expand...
Yeah, they used to be - created and led alliances etc. Now it's almost bloody sieg heil the way things are going, Lindbergh come again. Weird to say but our best hope in Europe is the (very far fetched) idea of Germany and France finally finding their backbone. The UK should be there too but god how those roubles were well spent. In Finland our trust is with our Nordic brothers, the Balts, Poland and (Farage free) UK. At the moment they are not able to come here: our huge forests, swamps and lakes are nothing like the steppe, we have the largest artillery in Western Europe, large reserves, bomb shelters for all the urban inhabitants plus most of the countryside population etc. And hoping that our new F-35s will get delivered, that decision to buy them would most likely now go differently in these crazy times. Bloody evil bastards in power there - they are not just destroying the Western alliance but themselves too. And I used to be pro-American:

The Once Arsenal of Democracy

stockholmslender.blogspot.com stockholmslender.blogspot.com
 
Last edited:
Terrorists with a criminal leader.

Donald J. Trump
@realDonald Trump
Our Military, the greatest and most powerful (by far!) anywhere in the World, hasn't even started destroying what's left in Iran. Bridges next, then Electric Power Plants! New Regime leadership knows what has to be done, and has to be done, FAST! President DONALD J. TRUMP
 
Ziggurat said:
Because it doesn't meet the definition of terrorism. Hitting infrastructure is a pretty common and basic form of warfare, including infrastructure that is used by civilians. I don't recall you bitching about Ukraine hitting the Kursk Strait Bridge. Nor should you. That's a legitimate target, even though it's also civilian infrastructure. If the purpose isn't to terrorize, but rather to disable some military capability (including industrial or logistics capacity), then that's not terrorism. It's just war.
Click to expand...
The Karaj B1 bridge was still under construction and not open. How was this a legitimate military target?

“But, if for any reason a deal is not shortly reached, which it probably will be, and if the Hormuz Strait is not immediately ‘Open for Business,’ we will conclude our lovely ‘stay’ in Iran by blowing up and completely obliterating all of their Electric Generating Plants, Oil Wells and Kharg Island (and possibly all desalinization plants!)" - DJT

This isn't to disable military capability, it's terrorism. But hey, if it's OK for the US to do it then it's OK for Iran to respond in kind. Trump's the best deal-maker in the world so I'm sure Iran will capitulate shortly - not. Which means further escalation.

What will you say when the US has flattened most of Iran killing millions of civilians outright and leaving millions more to die due to lack of power, water, and shelter etc? That they should have heeded his warnings and made a deal to avoid being 'bombed back into the stone age'? That's the definition of terrorism. The US is now officially the biggest terrorist organization in the world. Hope you are proud!
 
Ziggurat said:
First off, that's not true. For example:

Iranian diplomat terror plot trial - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
That isn't the only case either.

Second, why doesn't Iranian terrorism elsewhere matter?
Click to expand...
Although the crimes included terrorism, they weren't a terrorist attack on Belgium. The planned target was a meeting of an anti-Iranian terrorist group which is in part funded by Israel. If the US used a Reaper drone to hit the commanders of an anti-US terror group this wouldn't be called terrorism. Israel regularly bombs the commanders and in other ways kills those persons abroad who it considers enemies of Israel, but we don't see that called terrorism. So I think this isn't a case of a terrorist attack on Belgium, neither the Belgium government nor Belgium citizens were the targets. A better term would be targeted assassination. I entirely accept the Iranian government almost certainly carries out targeted assassinations of Iranian dissidents. So does Saudi, the US, Israel. I think this is different from terrorism. I also think these are criminals acts and wrong. Those who order and carry out targeted assassinations round the world should be tried for murder.
 
Roger Ramjets said:
The Karaj B1 bridge was still under construction and not open. How was this a legitimate military target?

“But, if for any reason a deal is not shortly reached, which it probably will be, and if the Hormuz Strait is not immediately ‘Open for Business,’ we will conclude our lovely ‘stay’ in Iran by blowing up and completely obliterating all of their Electric Generating Plants, Oil Wells and Kharg Island (and possibly all desalinization plants!)" - DJT

This isn't to disable military capability, it's terrorism. But hey, if it's OK for the US to do it then it's OK for Iran to respond in kind. Trump's the best deal-maker in the world so I'm sure Iran will capitulate shortly - not. Which means further escalation.

What will you say when the US has flattened most of Iran killing millions of civilians outright and leaving millions more to die due to lack of power, water, and shelter etc? That they should have heeded his warnings and made a deal to avoid being 'bombed back into the stone age'? That's the definition of terrorism. The US is now officially the biggest terrorist organization in the world. Hope you are proud!
Click to expand...
Any bridge that can be used for military traffic is a legitimate military target.
You seem to think that only actual military units are ligitmate targets,
Trump is insane, of course, but the bridge was a legit target.
You don't seem to know much about modern warfare.
 
Last edited:
UN to vote on resolution to use force to reopen the straits of Hormuz.
This is why the idea of paying Iran to reopen the straits is such a bad idea. Any tinhorn dictator near a maritime choke point will demand payment.
 
The US bombed pharmaceutical plants producing medicine with no claim that they produced anything else.
These are war crimes.

Of course, the entire war is illegal under intentional law, with the US and Israel being the aggressors and Iran being entitled to defend itself.
 
dudalb said:
UN to vote on resolution to use force to reopen the straits of Hormuz.
This is why the idea of paying Iran to reopen the straits is such a bad idea. Any tinhorn dictator near a maritime choke point will demand payment.
Click to expand...
And they never did that until the US and Israel started attacking.
Looks like the way to open the Strait is to stop bombing Iran.

But it's interesting that you suddenly care what the UN says.
 
USS Gerald Ford ordered back into the fight after less than a week of resupply without fixing the toilet mayhem or the burned-out bunks. Guess hundreds of crew will have to continue to sleep in the mess hall for years to come
 
The Great Zaganza said:
USS Gerald Ford ordered back into the fight after less than a week of resupply without fixing the toilet mayhem or the burned-out bunks. Guess hundreds of crew will have to continue to sleep in the mess hall for years to come
Click to expand...
Come on, they are alpha male warfighters. They can ◊◊◊◊ anywhere and let others clean up their mess...
 
Iran were not 2 weeks away from having a nuclear weapon. Israel wanted to destroy the pipeline of funds from Iran to groups it considers pose existential threats. They persuaded the USA to join them. The fact that the USA didn't have the correct forces already in place and made the necessary arrangements with other countries shows this was not a planned war for the USA. Israel targeting the targets it did outside of Iran at the start of the war shows they had planned this. Only two countries are responsible for all of this. Not one consequence should have been unexpected to either of those countries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom