>>507701529
>And who's paying for schizophrenic kikes to bomb whoever the fuck they feel like whenever the fuck they want?

at least with iraq,there were court orders to use force and attack him!

with netanyahu,theres no paperwork,just bully trump into war crimes!

they aren't after nukes, they are replacing irans regime!

MEDIA BLACKOUT!

IMPEACH TRUMP!

I AM NO LONGER A TRUMP SUPPORTER!

NETANYAHU IS NO LONGER PROTECTING TRUMP!

TRUMP IS A CRIMINAL!

TRUMP PROTECTS CRIMINALS!

IMPEACH TRUMP!

International law, primarily governed by the UN Charter, prohibits the use of force against a state's territorial integrity or political independence under Article 2(4), except in self-defense (Article 51) or with UN Security Council authorization. Israel's recent military strikes on Iran, targeting its nuclear capabilities without a court sanction or UN approval, appear to lack a clear legal basis. For self-defense to be lawful, there must be an imminent or ongoing armed attack, but no evidence suggests Iran was actively attacking Israel at the time. Israel's preemptive action, based on perceived future threats like Iran's potential nuclear weapons, does not meet the strict threshold for lawful self-defense under international law, as noted by UN experts and legal analyses on X.
There is no indication of a court-ordered sanction or UN Security Council resolution permitting Israel’s surprise attack on Iran. Negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program were ongoing, further weakening the case for unilateral action. The UN and IAEA have condemned attacks on nuclear facilities due to risks of radioactive contamination and escalation, labeling them threats to global peace. Some legal perspectives classify such actions as potential "crimes of aggression" or violations of the right to life, especially if civilians were harmed, though this requires investigation by bodies like the ICC, which has not yet ruled.
Whether this constitutes a war crime depends on specifics—e.g., targeting civilians or causing disproportionate harm—violating the Geneva Conventions. Reports of civilian casualties in Iran raise concerns, but no formal legal judgment exists as of June 16, 2025. No court order authorizes Israel to diminish Iran’s nuclear capabilities. Thus, under current international law, Israel’s actions seem unlawful without UN approval or proof of an imminent threat, sparking debate about potential war crime status, though no definitive ruling has been made.

International law, primarily governed by the UN Charter, prohibits the use of force against a state's territorial integrity or political independence under Article 2(4), except in self-defense (Article 51) or with UN Security Council authorization. Israel's recent military strikes on Iran, targeting its nuclear capabilities without a court sanction or UN approval, appear to lack a clear legal basis. For self-defense to be lawful, there must be an imminent or ongoing armed attack, but no evidence suggests Iran was actively attacking Israel at the time. Israel's preemptive action, based on perceived future threats like Iran's potential nuclear weapons, does not meet the strict threshold for lawful self-defense under international law, as noted by UN experts and legal analyses on X.
There is no indication of a court-ordered sanction or UN Security Council resolution permitting Israel’s surprise attack on Iran. Negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program were ongoing, further weakening the case for unilateral action. The UN and IAEA have condemned attacks on nuclear facilities due to risks of radioactive contamination and escalation, labeling them threats to global peace. Some legal perspectives classify such actions as potential "crimes of aggression" or violations of the right to life, especially if civilians were harmed, though this requires investigation by bodies like the ICC, which has not yet ruled.
Whether this constitutes a war crime depends on specifics—e.g., targeting civilians or causing disproportionate harm—violating the Geneva Conventions. Reports of civilian casualties in Iran raise concerns, but no formal legal judgment exists as of June 16, 2025. No court order authorizes Israel to diminish Iran’s nuclear capabilities. Thus, under current international law, Israel’s actions seem unlawful without UN approval or proof of an imminent threat, sparking debate about potential war crime status, though no definitive ruling has been made.