International Israel - Iran Conflict: PEACE DEAL CONFIRMED

[Confucamus]

This clown and his dam “death to Israel “ holocaust never happened bs really was a bad look and he wasn’t even the one calling the shots lol.

Some more reports coming out now that it was either a failed assassination or actually didn't happen at all. Don't know what to believe yet.

 

[Cartiac]

What if Iran or some actors inside Iran have access to some type of dirty bomb? This is nuts if true.

Also I haven't heard from ANYONE what the plan for Iran is moving forward. If we aren't doing boots on the ground, who is going to take control of Iran? Will they best West friendly? There is absolutely zero plan for anything other than

That is not a very realistic threat because of the US's ability to track radioactive materials.

Where have you heard any plan for regime change in Iran other than from extremist media? No one really wants to get rid of Ali Khamenei, he is well known and pretty chill all things considered. The problem is his military leaders tend to need correction every so often.

 

[Rational Poster]

Taking out civilians and their family is a war crime. I can't remember the last time this ever happened. Trump joining in on war crimes being committed, and bombing a Country without congressional approval, seems completely illegal. The fact he has people like Mike Huckabee telling him some type of holy bible end of times bullshit is even more scary.

If Americans won't hold Trump accountable for this, America will be truly fucked and citizens will seemingly have ZERO power or say so in what happens with their own Country.

If you're talking about Ahmadinejad that's just wrong. He's still a member of the government and Iranian leadership, he's just no longer the President of Iran.

He's part of a council that's appointed directly by the Supreme Leader.

 

[SurferH2O]

I think Israel is creating a complete power vacuum in Iran. This is going to get real wild... real fast.

 

[aerius]

I just don't see the Iranian regime holding up very long. They have less than 30% of the population behind them and with a bit of adversity, I can see that number shrinking rapidly. It's so bad for the Iranians right now that Israeli war jets are refueling in Iranian air space. If this is protracted with US involvement, then Trump screwed up. If we steam roll them and the world is a better place without the Iranian Regime, then Trump has a big win. I guess it's all in the results.

I have not seen a single video or any other kind of evidence to suggest that Israeli planes are flying freely in Iranian air space. If Israel had full air superiority as they claim they'd be dropping JDAMs by the hundreds right now which they aren't doing. All we've seen so far are a handful of air to ground missile strikes, as in single digit numbers per day. This means the Israelis are still launching from long range and haven't come anywhere close to taking down the air defence systems.

 

[b34stmode]

That is not a very realistic threat because of the US's ability to track radioactive materials.

Where have you heard any plan for regime change in Iran other than from extremist media? No one really wants to get rid of Ali Khamenei, he is well known and pretty chill all things considered. The problem is his military leaders tend to need correction every so often.

What? that is literally what EVERYONE is calling for currently. If not regime change, then what is their goal?

 

[A Very Serious Cat]

What leads the democrats to do the exact same thing?

I dunno, money? Blackmail? Whatever gets the non evangelical Republicans I guess

 

[b34stmode]

If you're talking about Ahmadinejad that's just wrong. He's still a member of the government and Iranian leadership, he's just no longer the President of Iran.

He's part of a council that's appointed directly by the Supreme Leader.

Wrong.

Determining whether an airstrike by Israel killing Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his family would constitute a war crime depends on international humanitarian law (IHL), primarily governed by the Geneva Conventions and customary international law. Here’s a concise analysis:

1. Civilian Status and Protection: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, as a former head of state and not an active combatant, is likely a civilian under IHL. Civilians are protected from direct attack unless they are directly participating in hostilities (Additional Protocol I, Article 51). His wife and children, assuming they are not involved in military activities, are unequivocally civilians and protected.
2. War Crime Criteria: A war crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Article 8) includes intentionally directing attacks against civilians not taking part in hostilities. If Israel deliberately targeted Ahmadinejad and his family knowing they were civilians, this could constitute a war crime. Key factors include:
   • Intent: Was the strike deliberately aimed at civilians? If Ahmadinejad was targeted due to his political status rather than military involvement, this would likely violate IHL.
   • Proportionality: Even if Ahmadinejad was a legitimate military target (e.g., actively involved in hostilities), an airstrike causing excessive civilian harm (e.g., killing his family) relative to the military advantage gained could be deemed disproportionate, constituting a war crime.
   • Distinction: IHL requires distinguishing between military and civilian targets. An airstrike on a civilian residence, knowing it would kill non-combatants, would breach this principle.
3. Context of Conflict: Whether this occurs in an international armed conflict (e.g., between Israel and Iran) or a non-international armed conflict affects the applicable legal framework, but targeting civilians remains prohibited in both.
4. Hypothetical Nuances: If Ahmadinejad was actively engaged in hostilities (e.g., directing attacks against Israel), he could lose civilian protection, but his family would not unless they were also participating. The method of attack (e.g., precision strike vs. indiscriminate bombing) and whether Israel took precautions to minimize civilian harm (e.g., warnings, as per Additional Protocol I, Article 57) would also be scrutinized.

Conclusion: If Israel knowingly targeted Ahmadinejad and his family as civilians in an airstrike, or failed to take precautions to avoid disproportionate civilian harm, it would likely constitute a war crime under IHL. Specific evidence of intent, target status, and proportionality would be critical in a legal determination. If you have a specific scenario or context in mind (e.g., location, military activity), I can refine the analysis further.
Disclaimer: Grok is not a lawyer; please consult one. Don't share information that can identify you.

 

[A Very Serious Cat]

Wrong.

Determining whether an airstrike by Israel killing Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his family would constitute a war crime depends on international humanitarian law (IHL), primarily governed by the Geneva Conventions and customary international law. Here’s a concise analysis:

1. Civilian Status and Protection: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, as a former head of state and not an active combatant, is likely a civilian under IHL. Civilians are protected from direct attack unless they are directly participating in hostilities (Additional Protocol I, Article 51). His wife and children, assuming they are not involved in military activities, are unequivocally civilians and protected.
2. War Crime Criteria: A war crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Article 8) includes intentionally directing attacks against civilians not taking part in hostilities. If Israel deliberately targeted Ahmadinejad and his family knowing they were civilians, this could constitute a war crime. Key factors include:
   • Intent: Was the strike deliberately aimed at civilians? If Ahmadinejad was targeted due to his political status rather than military involvement, this would likely violate IHL.
   • Proportionality: Even if Ahmadinejad was a legitimate military target (e.g., actively involved in hostilities), an airstrike causing excessive civilian harm (e.g., killing his family) relative to the military advantage gained could be deemed disproportionate, constituting a war crime.
   • Distinction: IHL requires distinguishing between military and civilian targets. An airstrike on a civilian residence, knowing it would kill non-combatants, would breach this principle.
3. Context of Conflict: Whether this occurs in an international armed conflict (e.g., between Israel and Iran) or a non-international armed conflict affects the applicable legal framework, but targeting civilians remains prohibited in both.
4. Hypothetical Nuances: If Ahmadinejad was actively engaged in hostilities (e.g., directing attacks against Israel), he could lose civilian protection, but his family would not unless they were also participating. The method of attack (e.g., precision strike vs. indiscriminate bombing) and whether Israel took precautions to minimize civilian harm (e.g., warnings, as per Additional Protocol I, Article 57) would also be scrutinized.

Conclusion: If Israel knowingly targeted Ahmadinejad and his family as civilians in an airstrike, or failed to take precautions to avoid disproportionate civilian harm, it would likely constitute a war crime under IHL. Specific evidence of intent, target status, and proportionality would be critical in a legal determination. If you have a specific scenario or context in mind (e.g., location, military activity), I can refine the analysis further.
Disclaimer: Grok is not a lawyer; please consult one. Don't share information that can identify you.

This is entirely academic as America would never allow bibi to be prosecuted for war crimes

 

[Rational Poster]

Wrong.

Determining whether an airstrike by Israel killing Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his family would constitute a war crime depends on international humanitarian law (IHL), primarily governed by the Geneva Conventions and customary international law. Here’s a concise analysis:

1. Civilian Status and Protection: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, as a former head of state and not an active combatant, is likely a civilian under IHL. Civilians are protected from direct attack unless they are directly participating in hostilities (Additional Protocol I, Article 51). His wife and children, assuming they are not involved in military activities, are unequivocally civilians and protected.
2. War Crime Criteria: A war crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Article 8) includes intentionally directing attacks against civilians not taking part in hostilities. If Israel deliberately targeted Ahmadinejad and his family knowing they were civilians, this could constitute a war crime. Key factors include:
   • Intent: Was the strike deliberately aimed at civilians? If Ahmadinejad was targeted due to his political status rather than military involvement, this would likely violate IHL.
   • Proportionality: Even if Ahmadinejad was a legitimate military target (e.g., actively involved in hostilities), an airstrike causing excessive civilian harm (e.g., killing his family) relative to the military advantage gained could be deemed disproportionate, constituting a war crime.
   • Distinction: IHL requires distinguishing between military and civilian targets. An airstrike on a civilian residence, knowing it would kill non-combatants, would breach this principle.
3. Context of Conflict: Whether this occurs in an international armed conflict (e.g., between Israel and Iran) or a non-international armed conflict affects the applicable legal framework, but targeting civilians remains prohibited in both.
4. Hypothetical Nuances: If Ahmadinejad was actively engaged in hostilities (e.g., directing attacks against Israel), he could lose civilian protection, but his family would not unless they were also participating. The method of attack (e.g., precision strike vs. indiscriminate bombing) and whether Israel took precautions to minimize civilian harm (e.g., warnings, as per Additional Protocol I, Article 57) would also be scrutinized.

Conclusion: If Israel knowingly targeted Ahmadinejad and his family as civilians in an airstrike, or failed to take precautions to avoid disproportionate civilian harm, it would likely constitute a war crime under IHL. Specific evidence of intent, target status, and proportionality would be critical in a legal determination. If you have a specific scenario or context in mind (e.g., location, military activity), I can refine the analysis further.
Disclaimer: Grok is not a lawyer; please consult one. Don't share information that can identify you.

lmao nice AI response. I'm not reading that shit.

 

[TribalDrumz]

I think Israel is creating a complete power vacuum in Iran. This is going to get real wild... real fast.

MAGA is getting excited for bomb bomb
Bomb Iran guys.

 

[b34stmode]

lmao nice AI response. I'm not reading that shit.

AI compiles facts from different sources online. Do you have any sources stating otherwise?

 

[Rob Battisti]

This was one of the most predictable outcomes of a Republican administration that has ever existed besides cutting taxes for the ultra wealthy.

I know @Rob Battisti 's guy Zeihan called this out as a thing to expect during this administration right after the election.

PZ is right every now and then

 

[Rational Poster]

AI compiles facts from different sources online. Do you have any sources stating otherwise?

AI is like asking a child to google shit for you. An intelligent prompter can get AI to return anything they want.

 

[Rational Poster]

PZ is right every now and then

IIRC, this was one of his predictions for Trump's administration he was most confident about.

 

[PEB]

Well Mike Huckabee tried to get US citizens to move out of Israel and Netanyahu shot it down. This will increase the likelihood of US involvement according to people around the team. I don't know who but they are hinting that Netanyahu using them for bargaining.

 

[Islam Imamate]

lmao at Marvel Super hero war analysis here guys . Holy shit quality entertainment

i know when I want cutting edge political analysis I ask adult fans of children's media for their take.

 

[Koya]

Well Mike Huckabee tried to get US citizens to move out of Israel and Netanyahu shot it down. This will increase the likelihood of US involvement according to people around the team. I don't know who but they are hinting that Netanyahu using them for bargaining.

LMAO Netanyahu is holding American citizens hostages hoping they get killed in strikes so he can force the US hand to get involved in this war.

Israel has the USA by the balls so tightly and still many Americans will defend them. It's so sad.

 

[Cartiac]

What? that is literally what EVERYONE is calling for currently. If not regime change, then what is their goal?

Who is this EVERYONE? It doesn't matter what your leftist nutjob buddies say,. No world leader is calling for it. If Israel or the US wanted that they would do it, but they don't. He is a well known, predictable leader that presents no threat and would certainly be replaced with a much more hardlined military leader if he was taken out.

The goal is to once again kill their crazy military leader, destroy the military capabilities they have rebuilt since the last time, and blow ip their nuclear facilities to push back that possibility again, with the biggest question being how far we go.

 

[San Marino]

They would probably need to use a couple, but very high probability that it would render the site useless.

Well, we will have to see. They could also bounce off the granite one after the other.
It is designed to penetrate ground (earth, not rock) and concrete structures. Granite is whole different animal.