By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - "Operation Epstein Fury" - US and Israel Unprovoked invasion of Iran

Eagle367 said:

 Israel flattens cities wherever it invades. Look at what they are doing in Lebanon 

https://x.com/AJEnglish/status/2030922957866840553

Always busy creating a land without people for a people without land.

It's no different from Hitler's Lebensraum nonsense, Neo Zionism and Nazism are pretty similar supremacist ideologies.


Yep Lebanon is getting pounded again, nobody even mentions the ceasefire anymore. Beirut back under fire as well.



Around the Network
Eagle367 said:
Zkuq said:

Come on, that's just dishonest. Considering the school was apparently formerly a part of the nearby military base, this seems like a mistaken strike instead of a deliberate one. They should definitely have been more careful, but at least make a distinction between intentional and accidental cruelty. Russia is guilty of largely the former, whereas the US, as far as I know, is guilty of mostly the latter. The distinction doesn't really help the victims, but personally I think deliberately striking civilians is worse than accidentally striking them - which is bad as well.

Its actually not dishonest cause US has the most advanced tech in the world so they have the capability to not miss. They have accurate tech and hit what they wanted to hit. And you are ignoring two things.

1) They have hit other schools and hospitals too. 

2) It was a double tap on the same location.  If it was a mistake,  how did it happen so accurately twice? You telling me US didn't course correct after the first hit.

And thats besides the fact of US-Israel hitting pil sites which caused the black clouds in tehran and will cause acid rains in iran, Afghanistan, pakistan, tajikistan and western china 

It's still a mistake if the mistake happens in determining the target - they hit where they intended to but not what they intended to. Regarding the double tap, based on what I could find quickly, it sounds like it was struck again so soon that the US didn't necessarily have enough information to realize it wasn't a military target after all. Please do correct me if I'm wrong though, because it was a fairly quick check.

Regarding other schools and hospital, I'd have to know more about them. I'm inclined to think the US is averse to strike them unless they think they have 'valid' targets as well. As far as I know (and I could be wrong), striking them (or at least hospitals) is illegal anyway, so it's not any better regardless of whether there are so-called valid targets in them, but at least it's still probably not bombing them to terrorize the populace. It's still very bad but not as bad as it could be.

I just don't think the US has a motive to terrorize the general populace. The US wants a regime change, and they've shown signs of wanting the people of Iran to overthrow the regime. I'm sure the US is being reckless in their strikes as always, which I really dislike, but I have no reason to believe they're striking civilian targets just because. And to be clear, I don't support the attacks against Iran, I think they're just plain wrong and should never have happened.



Zkuq said:
Eagle367 said:

Its actually not dishonest cause US has the most advanced tech in the world so they have the capability to not miss. They have accurate tech and hit what they wanted to hit. And you are ignoring two things.

1) They have hit other schools and hospitals too. 

2) It was a double tap on the same location.  If it was a mistake,  how did it happen so accurately twice? You telling me US didn't course correct after the first hit.

And thats besides the fact of US-Israel hitting pil sites which caused the black clouds in tehran and will cause acid rains in iran, Afghanistan, pakistan, tajikistan and western china 

It's still a mistake if the mistake happens in determining the target - they hit where they intended to but not what they intended to. Regarding the double tap, based on what I could find quickly, it sounds like it was struck again so soon that the US didn't necessarily have enough information to realize it wasn't a military target after all. Please do correct me if I'm wrong though, because it was a fairly quick check.

Regarding other schools and hospital, I'd have to know more about them. I'm inclined to think the US is averse to strike them unless they think they have 'valid' targets as well. As far as I know (and I could be wrong), striking them (or at least hospitals) is illegal anyway, so it's not any better regardless of whether there are so-called valid targets in them, but at least it's still probably not bombing them to terrorize the populace. It's still very bad but not as bad as it could be.

I just don't think the US has a motive to terrorize the general populace. The US wants a regime change, and they've shown signs of wanting the people of Iran to overthrow the regime. I'm sure the US is being reckless in their strikes as always, which I really dislike, but I have no reason to believe they're striking civilian targets just because. And to be clear, I don't support the attacks against Iran, I think they're just plain wrong and should never have happened.

What about hitting the oil depot and desalination plant in Iran? Causing massive health issues for the general population as well as starving them from water. https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v2/rule54

Plus a mistake is still a crime under IHL. Intentional or not, failure to distinguish, proportionality, non combatents
https://casebook.icrc.org/law/principle-distinction

It was a pre-emptive strike, by definition there were no combatants yet, The entire strike was illegal.

Other schools and hospitals are mostly hit from nearby explosions with 2,000 pound bombs, those that Biden deemed illegal to use in Gaza and the only ones he blocked shipments to Israel for. Yet the oil depot was not a mistake or 'collateral' damage.

Besides being a dual-use item, it's also a huge ecological disaster.

Hitting desalination plants is pure evil.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/08/world/middleeast/desalination-plants-iran-bahrain.html



SvennoJ said:
Zkuq said:

It's still a mistake if the mistake happens in determining the target - they hit where they intended to but not what they intended to. Regarding the double tap, based on what I could find quickly, it sounds like it was struck again so soon that the US didn't necessarily have enough information to realize it wasn't a military target after all. Please do correct me if I'm wrong though, because it was a fairly quick check.

Regarding other schools and hospital, I'd have to know more about them. I'm inclined to think the US is averse to strike them unless they think they have 'valid' targets as well. As far as I know (and I could be wrong), striking them (or at least hospitals) is illegal anyway, so it's not any better regardless of whether there are so-called valid targets in them, but at least it's still probably not bombing them to terrorize the populace. It's still very bad but not as bad as it could be.

I just don't think the US has a motive to terrorize the general populace. The US wants a regime change, and they've shown signs of wanting the people of Iran to overthrow the regime. I'm sure the US is being reckless in their strikes as always, which I really dislike, but I have no reason to believe they're striking civilian targets just because. And to be clear, I don't support the attacks against Iran, I think they're just plain wrong and should never have happened.

What about hitting the oil depot and desalination plant in Iran? Causing massive health issues for the general population as well as starving them from water. https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v2/rule54

Plus a mistake is still a crime under IHL. Intentional or not, failure to distinguish, proportionality, non combatents
https://casebook.icrc.org/law/principle-distinction

It was a pre-emptive strike, by definition there were no combatants yet, The entire strike was illegal.

Other schools and hospitals are mostly hit from nearby explosions with 2,000 pound bombs, those that Biden deemed illegal to use in Gaza and the only ones he blocked shipments to Israel for. Yet the oil depot was not a mistake or 'collateral' damage.

Besides being a dual-use item, it's also a huge ecological disaster.

Hitting desalination plants is pure evil.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/08/world/middleeast/desalination-plants-iran-bahrain.html

Hey, I'm only trying to differentiate between different degrees of terrible. It's all still terrible but being terrible because you want to cause suffering and being terrible because you don't care about collateral damage are different degrees of bad to me, especially because the former probably leads to even more bad stuff happening. Like I said, I'm in no way in favour of this war and think it's terrible anyway.

The desalination plant thing sounds like it might go in the same category as 'valid' targets in a hospital, i.e. not terrorizing the populace per se but a terrible thing to do anyway.



Zkuq said:
SvennoJ said:

What about hitting the oil depot and desalination plant in Iran? Causing massive health issues for the general population as well as starving them from water. https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v2/rule54

Plus a mistake is still a crime under IHL. Intentional or not, failure to distinguish, proportionality, non combatents
https://casebook.icrc.org/law/principle-distinction

It was a pre-emptive strike, by definition there were no combatants yet, The entire strike was illegal.

Other schools and hospitals are mostly hit from nearby explosions with 2,000 pound bombs, those that Biden deemed illegal to use in Gaza and the only ones he blocked shipments to Israel for. Yet the oil depot was not a mistake or 'collateral' damage.

Besides being a dual-use item, it's also a huge ecological disaster.

Hitting desalination plants is pure evil.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/08/world/middleeast/desalination-plants-iran-bahrain.html

Hey, I'm only trying to differentiate between different degrees of terrible. It's all still terrible but being terrible because you want to cause suffering and being terrible because you don't care about collateral damage are different degrees of bad to me, especially because the former probably leads to even more bad stuff happening. Like I said, I'm in no way in favour of this war and think it's terrible anyway.

The desalination plant thing sounds like it might go in the same category as 'valid' targets in a hospital, i.e. not terrorizing the populace per se but a terrible thing to do anyway.

I'm not blaming you, and no doubt Trump + US army started with good intentions. They wanted another 'success' as in Venezuela which is likely how Netanyahu convinced Trump this was going to go. (Of course who knows what the long term effects are in Venezuela, Israel got what they wanted out of it, oil shipments to Israel resumed) Quick decapitation of the regime, people rise up and put the US friendly shaw in power. That's Trump's thinking.

But good intentions mean nothing in war and the first huge mistake was relying on AI + Israeli intelligence. Not doing the legwork to make sure what is targeted is really what the AI targeting says it is. 

Desalination plant (water infrastructure) is off limits just as hospitals and schools. Civilian infrastructure in general. So even though it started out as a targeting mistake, now we're on to fully fledged war crimes and Iran is paying in kind, hitting the desalination plant in Bahrain. 

Article 54(2) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides:
It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove, or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as foodstuffs, agricultural areas for the production of foodstuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies and irrigation works, for the specific purpose of denying them for their sustenance value to the civilian population or to the adverse Party, whatever the motive, whether in order to starve out civilians, to cause them to move away, or for any other motive.

How quickly escalation gets out of control :(

IHL died with Gaza, the bit that was left of it.



Around the Network

Not looking good at all sigh

• US timeline: President Donald Trump gave conflicting answers today about his Iran war strategy. At a news conference, he said US goals may be “pretty well complete” after telling House Republicans that “we haven’t won enough.”

• Downplays oil price rise: The president said the US has struck over 5,000 targets, but the military is leaving “some of the most important targets for later in case we need to do it.” Trump also claimed the war would lead to lower oil prices over the long term.

“No room” for diplomacy: A top Iranian official told CNN that Tehran is prepared for a long war and signaled that it is willing to continue attacking Persian Gulf countries.

• Stockpile: Meanwhile, recovering Iran’s remaining highly enriched uranium stockpile that is believed to be in a storage facility deep underground would require a significant number of US ground troops, seven current and former officials told CNN.

Other reports suggest that stockpile has been spread over the country by now. 

Trump goes on with his lies and fantasies, civilians pay the price. 

Last edited by SvennoJ - 2 days ago



SvennoJ said:

Sooooo...  TACO?



SanAndreasX said:

Sooooo...  TACO?

Looks like it, however it won't work this time.

You can turn tarifs back off. However Netanyahu won't let this go, he's been working 40 years to get the ME to blow up, nor Mojtabe Khamenei, the new leader of Iran whose father and family members have been blown up by the US/Israel and his country set on fire.

This is not something Trump can brush off by saying he got what he wanted and move on to Cuba. Trump opened Pandora's box for Netanyahu who is looking to blow up the entire ME so Israel can pick up the pieces after and expand Greater Israel. 

The world kept quiet about Venezuela and now here we are. Trump thought he could do it again in Iran.




Iran is now in control of this war, got the world's economy by the balls...

Iran says countries expelling Israeli and US envoys can freely transit Strait of Hormuz

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has said any Arab or European country that expels Israeli and American ambassadors from its territory will be granted unrestricted passage through the Strait of Hormuz starting Tuesday.

According to Iran’s state broadcaster IRIB, the IRGC said those countries would have the “full right and freedom” to transit the strategic waterway if they sever diplomatic ties with both Israel and the United States.

Nearly one-fifth of the world’s oil supply passes through this narrow, 21-mile-wide waterway, which is now a critical, high-risk bottleneck for global markets.

The US-Israeli war with Iran has sent oil prices higher for two primary reasons: a near shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz and a slowdown in oil production in the Middle East.


Iran signals it won't back down

Kamal Kharazi, foreign policy adviser to the office of the supreme leader, signaled Iran is willing to continue attacking Gulf countries in an effort to persuade them to convince Trump to step back from the conflict. The official ruled out diplomacy for now and told CNN the war would only end through economic pain. 



Iran plans to impose duties on tankers and ships in Persian Gulf, source tells CNN

Iran is finalizing plans to impose “security duties” in the Persian Gulf on oil tankers and commercial ships that belong to countries allied with the US, an Iranian source with knowledge of the leadership’s strategy told CNN.

The source insisted that the Strait of Hormuz is “closed” even if US President Donald Trump says it is open.

“We hold the screw of the global oil price in our hands and for a long time the US will have to wait for our actions to control the price. Energy prices have become unstable and we will continue to fight until Trump declares defeat,” the source said.



Trump says "certain oil-related sanctions" will be waived

President Donald Trump said Monday his administration would be “waiving certain oil-related sanctions to reduce prices.”

This comes as oil prices have surged since the US and Israel struck Iran and as consumers are starting to pay more at the pump. Trump didn’t specify which sanctions would be lifted, saying only, “We have sanctions on some countries. We’re going to take those sanctions off until this straightens out.”

Iran and Russia are two of the most heavily sanctioned countries, both of which are oil-rich nations. Trump recently granted India a waiver to import more oil from Russia after the US and India entered a trade agreement that hinged on India cutting off oil purchases from there.

So Russian oil to the rescue?...




Fresh wave of strikes and energy supply fears. Here's the latest

  • Heavy overnight strikes: CNN’s team in Tehran felt heavy aerial bombardment overnight and rescue teams raced to save people trapped in what Iranian state media said was a residential building. Israel had earlier said it launched a “broad wave” of strikes in Tehran.
  • Lebanon: Israel issued a further mass evacuation order in southern Lebanon, after it said it had struck a Hezbollah-controlled financial institution. Hezbollah said it launched rockets into northern Israel just after midnight on Tuesday.
  • Energy supply anxiety: Even though oil prices fell below $100 per barrel today, concerns over their volatility are reaching far beyond the Middle East. Pakistan announced a series of austerity measures. China is falling back on Russian imports to ease its shortfall, though analysts say even that might not be enough.
  • Saudi Arabia’s Aramco, the world’s top oil exporter, warned there could be “catastrophic consequences” for global oil markets if disruption continues.
  • Geopolitical ripples: Local media in South Korea suggested US forces were moving Patriot missile systems based in the country for possible shipping to the Middle East. South Korean President Lee Jae Myung said he cannot stop the US from redeploying its weapons but added that the move wouldn’t impact deterrence against North Korea. US Forces in Korea said it did not comment on military logistics.
  • Separately, Turkey said a US Patriot air defense system was deployed to a southeastern province there.


And over 1,700 dead so far, I guess that's not important to CNN. The news from the US propaganda outlet is doing its best to downplay the reality of what is happening yet between the lines you can read the panic setting in.

Actually China is in the best position with reportedly over 200 days of oil reserve, Australia is already running out, India only had 7 days reserve, already getting oil from Russia, Pakistan is shutting down and Europe is going to feel the hurt as well.
https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Europes-Gas-Prices-Continue-to-Soar-as-War-Resets-Supply-Routes.html

Emergency releases won’t fix oil crisis

Investors rattled by the war in Iran have sent oil prices skyrocketing – and global governments have noticed. The world’s biggest economies are now considering emergency releases of millions of barrels of oil into the market.

But while that might sound like a lot, experts say even tens of millions of barrels are more like a drop in the bucket when it comes to global oil needs.

That’s because the world, and the US, uses so much oil every single day that even a relatively large one-time release won’t be able to offset the continued closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a key waterway for global oil shipments that’s been effectively shut down by the war.

After Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine drove up oil prices, the G7 coordinated a release of 240 million barrels from their own holdings, including 180 million barrels from the US SPR. Gas prices did come down from their $5-a-gallon peak in June 2022, but experts say the G7 oil release helped only marginally. An analysis by the Treasury Department in July 2022 found that it only lowered gas prices by 17 cents to 42 cents a gallon.


Production went down by 1/5th with the closure of the straight of Hormuz

The Strait of Hormuz is a critical global energy chokepoint, with oil flows averaging roughly 20 to 21 million barrels per day (mb/d) in 2025–2026, representing about 20%–25% of global petroleum liquids consumption and seaborne oil trade.

Trump probably thought, it's mostly for Asian markets, not my problem. That's not how global markets work, prices rise, supply and demand. Or maybe his 'advisers' said they could take the straight of Hormuz and protect it.