Search Results
ID: jCARwcbB/pol/508680395#508689140
6/25/2025, 3:47:25 PM
>>508684560
>It's not surprising that Israel and many Jews are furious that they don't get to overturn the government of Iran and possibly enslave and genocide Iranians. In regards to whether the nuclear program was stopped or not, the USA can always bomb any new or repaired nuclear facilities. Might be a bad way of doing it, but could give one day of warning for specific facilities beforehand, bomb the specific facilities, and avoid assassinating leaders and scientists and their families and others or the Iranian military. And then encourage Iran to peacefully and without risking itself clean up its act. Eventually, Iran may get the idea that it is purely the nuclear program that is the issue, not the existence of Iranians. If Iranians become less paranoid and bellicose, and make up with Sunnis and maybe even sustain peace with Jews and Israel, maybe Jews will become less paranoid, bellicose, enslaving and genocidal. But that will probably never happen, the Bantu-Jewish core of Jews and Israel will never allow it.
NO THEY CANT!
its against the law to bomb nuclear facilities!
they better start figuring that out really quickly because presidents cannot just bomb countries to decide who gets to have nukes....
>It's not surprising that Israel and many Jews are furious that they don't get to overturn the government of Iran and possibly enslave and genocide Iranians. In regards to whether the nuclear program was stopped or not, the USA can always bomb any new or repaired nuclear facilities. Might be a bad way of doing it, but could give one day of warning for specific facilities beforehand, bomb the specific facilities, and avoid assassinating leaders and scientists and their families and others or the Iranian military. And then encourage Iran to peacefully and without risking itself clean up its act. Eventually, Iran may get the idea that it is purely the nuclear program that is the issue, not the existence of Iranians. If Iranians become less paranoid and bellicose, and make up with Sunnis and maybe even sustain peace with Jews and Israel, maybe Jews will become less paranoid, bellicose, enslaving and genocidal. But that will probably never happen, the Bantu-Jewish core of Jews and Israel will never allow it.
NO THEY CANT!
its against the law to bomb nuclear facilities!
they better start figuring that out really quickly because presidents cannot just bomb countries to decide who gets to have nukes....
ID: pNAbb5Js/pol/507850098#507860754
6/18/2025, 4:35:28 PM
>>507858123
>Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.
fine!! SHOW ME THE PAPERWORK!
YOU CANT JUST ASSASSINATE PEOPLE YOU NIGGER,THATS A WARCRIME!
YOU CANT JUST REPLACE A REGIME WITHOUT A CIVIL PROCESS!
60 day "peace talk" is not a civil process and it wasn't peace talk! in trumps words "i gave them an ultimatum" international law requires evidence! there was no evidence of an imminent attack which makes netanyahu a war criminal!
>Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.
fine!! SHOW ME THE PAPERWORK!
YOU CANT JUST ASSASSINATE PEOPLE YOU NIGGER,THATS A WARCRIME!
YOU CANT JUST REPLACE A REGIME WITHOUT A CIVIL PROCESS!
60 day "peace talk" is not a civil process and it wasn't peace talk! in trumps words "i gave them an ultimatum" international law requires evidence! there was no evidence of an imminent attack which makes netanyahu a war criminal!
ID: kOTiol3I/pol/507387597#507391433
6/14/2025, 11:52:57 PM
>>507349656
Another Israeli Act of War-Crime
Israel’s alleged June 12, 2025, missile attack on Iran, including assassinations, during peace talks, could violate international law, including the UN Charter, Geneva Conventions, and customary rules of war.
UN Charter Violations:
Article 2(4): Unlawful use of force against Iran’s sovereignty via missile strikes on nuclear/military sites without imminent threat, violating territorial integrity.
Article 51: Preemptive attack lacks evidence of an armed attack or imminent danger, failing self-defense criteria; planned strikes undermine necessity.
Threat to Peace: Strikes during US-Iran nuclear talks (June 15, 2025) destabilize diplomacy, breaching Charter’s peace objectives.
Geneva Conventions Violations:
Common Article 3/Additional Protocol I: Targeting civilians (e.g., scientists, families) or civilian objects (e.g., Tehran areas) violates distinction principle.
Article 51(3), Protocol I: Assassinations of military leaders/scientists (e.g., Bagheri, Tehranchi) may constitute extrajudicial killings if not directly participating in hostilities.
Proportionality: 200+ jets hitting 100+ targets, causing 78 deaths/320 injuries, suggests excessive civilian harm, breaching proportionality rule.
Precautions: Failure to minimize civilian casualties in densely populated areas violates obligation to take feasible precautions.
Customary International Humanitarian Law (IHL):
Sovereignty Breach: Strikes on Iranian soil (e.g., Natanz, Tehran) infringe sovereignty; use of Iraqi airspace violates Iraq’s sovereignty.
Aggression: Attack aligns with UN Resolution 3314 (1974) definition of aggression, potentially a crime under Rome Statute.
Nuclear Facility Attacks: Strikes on nuclear sites risk environmental/humanitarian harm, violating IHL’s prohibition on indiscriminate effects.
Bad Faith Diplomacy: Attacking during peace talks undermines good-faith obligations, risking broader conflict contrary to UN Charter’s preamble.
Another Israeli Act of War-Crime
Israel’s alleged June 12, 2025, missile attack on Iran, including assassinations, during peace talks, could violate international law, including the UN Charter, Geneva Conventions, and customary rules of war.
UN Charter Violations:
Article 2(4): Unlawful use of force against Iran’s sovereignty via missile strikes on nuclear/military sites without imminent threat, violating territorial integrity.
Article 51: Preemptive attack lacks evidence of an armed attack or imminent danger, failing self-defense criteria; planned strikes undermine necessity.
Threat to Peace: Strikes during US-Iran nuclear talks (June 15, 2025) destabilize diplomacy, breaching Charter’s peace objectives.
Geneva Conventions Violations:
Common Article 3/Additional Protocol I: Targeting civilians (e.g., scientists, families) or civilian objects (e.g., Tehran areas) violates distinction principle.
Article 51(3), Protocol I: Assassinations of military leaders/scientists (e.g., Bagheri, Tehranchi) may constitute extrajudicial killings if not directly participating in hostilities.
Proportionality: 200+ jets hitting 100+ targets, causing 78 deaths/320 injuries, suggests excessive civilian harm, breaching proportionality rule.
Precautions: Failure to minimize civilian casualties in densely populated areas violates obligation to take feasible precautions.
Customary International Humanitarian Law (IHL):
Sovereignty Breach: Strikes on Iranian soil (e.g., Natanz, Tehran) infringe sovereignty; use of Iraqi airspace violates Iraq’s sovereignty.
Aggression: Attack aligns with UN Resolution 3314 (1974) definition of aggression, potentially a crime under Rome Statute.
Nuclear Facility Attacks: Strikes on nuclear sites risk environmental/humanitarian harm, violating IHL’s prohibition on indiscriminate effects.
Bad Faith Diplomacy: Attacking during peace talks undermines good-faith obligations, risking broader conflict contrary to UN Charter’s preamble.
ID: Qeq+rrZN/pol/507345604#507350852
6/14/2025, 5:44:13 PM
>>507349656
Another Israeli Act of War-Crime
Israel’s alleged June 12, 2025, missile attack on Iran, including assassinations, during peace talks, could violate international law, including the UN Charter, Geneva Conventions, and customary rules of war. Below
UN Charter Violations:
Article 2(4): Unlawful use of force against Iran’s sovereignty via missile strikes on nuclear/military sites without imminent threat, violating territorial integrity.
Article 51: Preemptive attack lacks evidence of an armed attack or imminent danger, failing self-defense criteria; planned strikes undermine necessity.
Threat to Peace: Strikes during US-Iran nuclear talks (June 15, 2025) destabilize diplomacy, breaching Charter’s peace objectives.
Geneva Conventions Violations:
Common Article 3/Additional Protocol I: Targeting civilians (e.g., scientists, families) or civilian objects (e.g., Tehran areas) violates distinction principle.
Article 51(3), Protocol I: Assassinations of military leaders/scientists (e.g., Bagheri, Tehranchi) may constitute extrajudicial killings if not directly participating in hostilities.
Proportionality: 200+ jets hitting 100+ targets, causing 78 deaths/320 injuries, suggests excessive civilian harm, breaching proportionality rule.
Precautions: Failure to minimize civilian casualties in densely populated areas violates obligation to take feasible precautions.
Customary International Humanitarian Law (IHL):
Sovereignty Breach: Strikes on Iranian soil (e.g., Natanz, Tehran) infringe sovereignty; use of Iraqi airspace violates Iraq’s sovereignty.
Aggression: Attack aligns with UN Resolution 3314 (1974) definition of aggression, potentially a crime under Rome Statute.
Nuclear Facility Attacks: Strikes on nuclear sites risk environmental/humanitarian harm, violating IHL’s prohibition on indiscriminate effects.
Bad Faith Diplomacy: Attacking during peace talks undermines good-faith obligations, risking broader conflict contrary to UN Charter’s preamble.
Another Israeli Act of War-Crime
Israel’s alleged June 12, 2025, missile attack on Iran, including assassinations, during peace talks, could violate international law, including the UN Charter, Geneva Conventions, and customary rules of war. Below
UN Charter Violations:
Article 2(4): Unlawful use of force against Iran’s sovereignty via missile strikes on nuclear/military sites without imminent threat, violating territorial integrity.
Article 51: Preemptive attack lacks evidence of an armed attack or imminent danger, failing self-defense criteria; planned strikes undermine necessity.
Threat to Peace: Strikes during US-Iran nuclear talks (June 15, 2025) destabilize diplomacy, breaching Charter’s peace objectives.
Geneva Conventions Violations:
Common Article 3/Additional Protocol I: Targeting civilians (e.g., scientists, families) or civilian objects (e.g., Tehran areas) violates distinction principle.
Article 51(3), Protocol I: Assassinations of military leaders/scientists (e.g., Bagheri, Tehranchi) may constitute extrajudicial killings if not directly participating in hostilities.
Proportionality: 200+ jets hitting 100+ targets, causing 78 deaths/320 injuries, suggests excessive civilian harm, breaching proportionality rule.
Precautions: Failure to minimize civilian casualties in densely populated areas violates obligation to take feasible precautions.
Customary International Humanitarian Law (IHL):
Sovereignty Breach: Strikes on Iranian soil (e.g., Natanz, Tehran) infringe sovereignty; use of Iraqi airspace violates Iraq’s sovereignty.
Aggression: Attack aligns with UN Resolution 3314 (1974) definition of aggression, potentially a crime under Rome Statute.
Nuclear Facility Attacks: Strikes on nuclear sites risk environmental/humanitarian harm, violating IHL’s prohibition on indiscriminate effects.
Bad Faith Diplomacy: Attacking during peace talks undermines good-faith obligations, risking broader conflict contrary to UN Charter’s preamble.
Page 1