Legitimate question, please, on the rules of war with regard to Trump's social media craziness

[hamsterjill]

Okay, I don't know the answer to this, so I'm hoping someone else here does.

Trump indicates in his lunatic post that he's going after power plants and bridges on Tuesday. I thought that was "illegal" (knowing full well that legal means nothing to Trump the asshole).

But what makes going after infrastructure, etc. illegal? Is it part of the Geneva Convention? Rules of War? What?

And if it is indeed against some rules in place that supersede just the US Congressional area of control, then cannot another country step in and start proceedings to stop him?

I realize this is probably some obvious concept that I should already know, but I don't. I don't think I've ever had to consider the concept before (in my defense).

Thanks.

[David__77]

1. It seems like there's a clear double standard in the West.

[unblock]

2. My understanding is that it's really only food, water, and medical that's really protected

Power plants and bridges *can* be legitimate military targets but it depends on the objective. Donnie's rants rather suggest he's doing it to make the Iranian people suffer, rather than, say, to cut off supply lines to a military front.

And we certainly have no legitimate claim to the oil he says he will steal.

[hamsterjill]

6. Certainly agreed that we have no legitimate claim to the oil, or that we should be at war.

Donnie enjoys watching suffering. He gets off to it.

Thanks for the reply.

[Starbeach]

3. See Legal Expert Letter

Legal Experts letter published this week:

https://www.justsecurity.org/135423/professors-letter-international-law-iran-war/

[hamsterjill]

7. Thank you. This is what I was looking for.

Appreciate it. I am doing Easter with family right now, but I'll look at this tonight and digest it.

[Mysterian]

12. In addition to the crimes listed in the letter

we should add the prohibition of collective punishment and reprisals against innocent people. Our insane leaders seek to inflict devastation on the civilian population because the Iranian leadership does not agree to whatever insane demands our leaders have made. This is collective punishment of the civilian population. These illegal actions for no military objective constitute a war crime.

[Klarkashton]

4. The question really is why any of this shit is even happening.

This entire war is utter bullshit

[hamsterjill]

8. No argument here.

But no one is stopping it. Makes me furious that he gets away with it.

[Mysterian]

13. Because the USA is a failed state

Due to the complete corruption of every single member of the republican party.

[eppur_se_muova]

18. And the incompetence of the made-for-trash-TV "Cabinet of Deplorables" especially. nt

[Solly Mack]

5. GC says they're protected unless used for direct military support and it is the only means to stop that support.

Also, bombing civilian power infrastructure for the purpose of terrorizing the population is a war crime.

Nuclear power sites can be destroyed/bombed but there are added rules about it due to the dangers in doing so.

If America cared about committing war crimes, it would not have tortured people under Bush and/or people would have been held accountable as evidence that it did give a fuck. No accountability, no fucks to give.

I can't see why Trump wouldn't get away with war crimes either. If you can torture people and get away with it, you can pretty much engage in any atrocity and get away with it.

Other countries can't stop Trump with rules, regulations or laws.

He'd have to respect said laws, to begin with - and the U.S. would have to be part of some sort of agreement that it actually adheres to and respects.

No simply pays lip service to, like CAT/GC, but actually respects and obeys.

[hamsterjill]

9. I'm wondering if some countries will try economic sanctions.

Agreed and stipulated that Trump doesn't give a shit, and that he is pushing the line to see what and how much he can get away with. Honestly? He's the first and only person that I know of in all my many years that I have actually wished would die. Because the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one.

But at some point, it is going to have to be stopped. Just like Hitler...at some point, there was a drop dead situation.

We may all be dead before that happens, but it will happen.

[Solly Mack]

10. I've wondered about the feasibility of economic sanctions as well.

But, yeah, something must be done and done soonest.

[Sogo]

14. I understand why what he is proposing is a war crime (all war is a crime in my book), but

I wonder why, then, what we did to Hiroshima and Nagasaki wasn't considered a war crime.

[Solly Mack]

17. I imagine it was to some people.

[WarGamer]

11. Just a note about the "rules of war"...

It's kind of an oxymoron as it's a fairly ridiculous concept.

It's a recent phenomenon. Maybe in the late 19th Century the concept of rules of war was developed... and wasn't organized until Nuremberg. (unless you count ancient Roman rituals of asking Gods for war powers)

[Disaffected]

16. Strikes me the same.

Sort of like "military intelligence" and, a conscience soother to make waging war somehow less uncivilized.

And yes, the "rules" have changed since WW2.