Easy Shutdown of Power Plants

Aardvark86 said:

oh, definitely file a lawsuit in the ICC...

Click to expand...

kidmike41 said:

Pakistan Muslims must not be as crazy I guess?

I was ok with Midnight Hammer. I thought it was successful and so did the president apparently. I think there was a miscalculation that this would be a quick decapitation strike. I don’t see them folding and don’t want this to drag on. Iraq killed 500k of them in 1980 and they didn’t fold then either.

Click to expand...

baltimorened said:

Bear, I think you might be losing it...we bombed bridges, power stations and anything else that could have been used by the military during Vietnam...Democrat president, no war crimes.

Somebody else posted other "excursions" presidents have taken under the war powers act where "dual use" facilities were bombed. Here's an AI generated blurb:
Yes, American forces played a leading role in the 78-day NATO aerial bombing campaign (Operation Allied Force) against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia between March and June 1999. Aimed at halting Serbian attacks on ethnic Albanians in Kosovo, U.S. Navy and Air Force planes conducted significant sorties, targeting military infrastructure, governmernt buildings, and infrastructure across Yugoslavia.....I believe Bill Clinton was president in 1999....He's not a war criminal

The concept of dual use might be new to you but not people who plan and fight wars. You fairly, maybe, criticize others for lack of military service/knowledge, you might want to take a step back on this one.....Of course, the concept of war crimes is determined by the victor.

Israel did in fact bomb Gaza (new home of Trump city by the beach) back to the stone age. So far I haven't heard the UN or whomever pressing War crimes against them. Doesn't mean they won't, but they haven't....

boy sometimes you guys on the left get as wound up over issues feeding your biases as the guys on the right do in feeding theirs.

Click to expand...

baltimorened said:

so, from all knowing board, is putting women and children directly into the CEP of a known bombing a war crime?

Click to expand...

baltimorened said:

Not to be funny, but i wonder what would happen with a low level pass of a couple of F15s. It might seem less and less like a good idea at that point.

Click to expand...

ANEW said:

Not to the same level as Iran, IMO. Iran is way more destabilizing and an enemy of ours (and everyone elese) than Paki.

The talk of "no plan" or "miscalculation" is speculation that i disagree with. This is such a complex problem that it is literally impossible to predict exactly how it is going to go. It's not linear or semi linear with a limited set of plausible branches at various points. You plan for most likely as best as you can, we've wargamed a conflict with Iran over and over, over the years and try and plan for what that uncovered, but it is impossible to predict exactly. Who could have predicted the UK denying us basing to hit Iran? That's one example of something coming out of left field that probably wasnt' exactly wargamed for. Maybe UAE...but not the UK.

The us military has a term for this type of problem. It's called a "wicked problem" . There is an actual definition. It's what i just said about not being able to accurately predict what is going to happen. The other characteristics are that every decidsion is important and can totaly change things and cause different reactions by any of the involved parties. Finally it is also defined as having no clear end state that everyone can agree on. There won't be a flag raising and general feeling of victory. Most likely outcome is that the end state is "good enough". Use AI and dig into the military use of the term if you want a better doctrinal definition.

I think that regime change was an aspirational goal. Its really the only way to not have to go back militarily some time in the future and would be the best for everone, us included. But its not 100% required to knock back Iran's nuke program, their current military capabilities, and their ability to reconstitute militarily so that maybe we don;t have to do this again anytime soon, and hopefully it will be able to be managed by like minded regional partners or allies.

hitting leadership is great way to open up a military campaign even if regime change isn't the primary goal, so there is that.

Click to expand...

LafayetteBear said:

Didn't the North Vietnamese (Viet Cong) invade South Vietnam? Didn't Serbia invade Kosovo and Croatia and engage in genocidal killings there? We invaded (i.e., bombed) Iran. This was supposed to be a very limited incursion. Now, Trump is threatening to flatten much of Iran's civilian infrastructure if he doesn't get his way on the Strait of Hormuz because he's desperate to get crude oil prices back down.

If Trump goes through with this wholesale bombing of civilian infrastructure, millions of Iranians will be without electricity, natural gas, and potable water. They really WILL be back in the Stone Age (or some facsimile thereof) if they do not have water or electricity. And rebuilding ordinary civilian infrastructure will be enormously expensive and time consuming. In my opinion, Trump already merits removal from office, but if he does this, many more people will join me in that opinion.

And yes, I did note that you were right there arguing "dual use" with the rest of Trump's camp followers the day after Faux News commentators commenced using the term. No coincidence there, Ned. And Israel probably IS guilty of war crimes with its indiscriminate bombing. The only thing that muddies up the picture in Gaza is that Hamas used civilian buildings to house some of its operations centers and munitions dumps.

Click to expand...

ANEW said:

Not to the same level as Iran, IMO. Iran is way more destabilizing and an enemy of ours (and everyone elese) than Paki.

The talk of "no plan" or "miscalculation" is speculation that i disagree with. This is such a complex problem that it is literally impossible to predict exactly how it is going to go. It's not linear or semi linear with a limited set of plausible branches at various points. You plan for most likely as best as you can, we've wargamed a conflict with Iran over and over, over the years and try and plan for what that uncovered, but it is impossible to predict exactly. Who could have predicted the UK denying us basing to hit Iran? That's one example of something coming out of left field that probably wasnt' exactly wargamed for. Maybe UAE...but not the UK.

The us military has a term for this type of problem. It's called a "wicked problem" . There is an actual definition. It's what i just said about not being able to accurately predict what is going to happen. The other characteristics are that every decidsion is important and can totaly change things and cause different reactions by any of the involved parties. Finally it is also defined as having no clear end state that everyone can agree on. There won't be a flag raising and general feeling of victory. Most likely outcome is that the end state is "good enough". Use AI and dig into the military use of the term if you want a better doctrinal definition.

I think that regime change was an aspirational goal. Its really the only way to not have to go back militarily some time in the future and would be the best for everone, us included. But its not 100% required to knock back Iran's nuke program, their current military capabilities, and their ability to reconstitute militarily so that maybe we don;t have to do this again anytime soon, and hopefully it will be able to be managed by like minded regional partners or allies.

hitting leadership is great way to open up a military campaign even if regime change isn't the primary goal, so there is that.

Click to expand...

LafayetteBear said:

No, but bombing of women and children certainly would be.

Click to expand...

Moogy said:

"But, juuuuudge ... they're committing a war crime to try to prevent us from committing a war crime ... and that's NOT FAIR! We REALLY want to commit ours! Why, we'll bomb this Court into another reality if we're not allowed to commit our war crime with impunity!" - Donald J. Trump, Esq.

Click to expand...

kidmike41 said:

There is reporting coming out, yes apparently from the NYT. But it is saying what many have suspected. Israeli convinced Trump that this was going to be much easier than it actually is. Rubio and CIA guy told him that was not true. Anyway now we are here.

Click to expand...

kidmike41 said:

There is reporting coming out, yes apparently from the NYT. But it is saying what many have suspected. Israeli convinced Trump that this was going to be much easier than it actually is. Rubio and CIA guy told him that was not true. Anyway now we are here.

Click to expand...

LafayetteBear said:

ANEW: You may disagree, but I think we have accomplished about as much as we can realistically hope to accomplish in Iran without the introduction of ground troops. And I do not believe that Americans have ANY appetite for the introduction of ground troops into Iran.

If that is the case, and if we hope to maintain SOME degree of connection and affinity with the Iranian populace, we should be endeavoring to find some way other than bombing Iran's civilian infrastructure in order to get the Strait of Hormuz reopened. If it is true that Asian countries like China and India depend more on Middle Eastern crude oil than we do, then perhaps those countries will, as their need for oil imports deepens, get involved in applying pressure on Iran to open the Strait. Iran's primary source of wealth drives from crude oil exports, no? So it is in Iran's interest to get the Strait opened as well. Particularly if closure of the Strait no longer needs to be threatened as a way to persuade the U.S. to cease its bombardment.

Click to expand...

• No Stopping Rule: There is no point where a solution is definitively reached; the problem is only managed or re-solved over time.
• Interdependence: Each wicked problem is a symptom of another problem, and attempts to solve one part often create new, unforeseen issues elsewhere.
• Uniqueness: Because they are shaped by specific social, political, and cultural contexts, no two wicked problems are exactly alike, making past "templates" for success unreliable.
• Subjectivity: Solutions are not strictly right or wrong, but rather "better" or "worse" based on the perspectives and biases of the stakeholders involved.
  

dpic73 said:

I previously said I understand the technical definition but what he's threatening goes far beyond that line. This was a war of choice that we started and now that we've killed thousands of their citizens, the entire leadership, bombed 13,000 locations and caused the war to spread to neighboring countries, we need to dial back on the N Korean style saber rattling and work on a diplomatic end to this hostility that has already gone too far. The people there have suffered enough and don't have the resources to take back their country on their own. Bombing them into the Stone Age does not help them and should never be on the menu, even if it's rhetoric.

Click to expand...

Aardvark86 said:

you left out shipping lanes.

In all seriousness, I'm really not into whataboutism, but this just underscores that combatants routinely invoke international conflict law when, and only when, it suits them.

Click to expand...

LafayetteBear said:

No, but bombing of women and children certainly would be.

Click to expand...

LafayetteBear said:

Didn't the North Vietnamese (Viet Cong) invade South Vietnam? Didn't Serbia invade Kosovo and Croatia and engage in genocidal killings there? We invaded (i.e., bombed) Iran. This was supposed to be a very limited incursion. Now, Trump is threatening to flatten much of Iran's civilian infrastructure if he doesn't get his way on the Strait of Hormuz because he's desperate to get crude oil prices back down.

If Trump goes through with this wholesale bombing of civilian infrastructure, millions of Iranians will be without electricity, natural gas, and potable water. They really WILL be back in the Stone Age (or some facsimile thereof) if they do not have water or electricity. And rebuilding ordinary civilian infrastructure will be enormously expensive and time consuming. In my opinion, Trump already merits removal from office, but if he does this, many more people will join me in that opinion.

And yes, I did note that you were right there arguing "dual use" with the rest of Trump's camp followers the day after Faux News commentators commenced using the term. No coincidence there, Ned. And Israel probably IS guilty of war crimes with its indiscriminate bombing. The only thing that muddies up the picture in Gaza is that Hamas used civilian buildings to house some of its operations centers and munitions dumps.

Click to expand...

Aardvark86 said:

Whether Israel or us intel was giving that read is sort of beside the point. Those sorts of predictions by guys who draw geopolitical lines and arrows on maps are seldom right.

btw, what’s the pentagon pizza meter reading about now?

Click to expand...

ANEW said:

Hey man, you won't hear me saying that it's not possible. The more we do the better it is for Israel. That is 100% true.

Iran is of a size geographically and had such a stockpile of missiles / drones that Israel trying to go it alone would be a last resort option for them with big casualties as Iran's missiles would overwhelm their defenses. Israel just doesn' t have the same capabilities as we do or the quantity.

Click to expand...

Moogy said:

Translation: PalmettoTiger1 is pro war crime. I'm sure your god will be pleased that you are terrorizing a foreign population via war crimes. You seem like a good person, and not an awful criminal.

Click to expand...

ANEW said:

I may disagree around the edges but probably not as much as you woudl think.

. This bombing campaign is really in it's infancy. If we use serbia 1999 for an example, that was a 78 day campaign to produce the result everyone was looking for. So it stands to reason airpower would take longer than that against a regime of true believing islamo-crazies. The power structure in Iran is different than a traditional dictatorship that can easily crumble if the top couple people /family members are taken out.

Personally i think we shoud just keep bombing stuff for another month or two and give it a chance in conjunction with whaever covert/clandestine activites might be going on, but I dont' see that happening. I think we're wanting to get this to some sort of stopping point.

Ground troops could make this move faster but as you say long-term commitment of ground troups for regime change is not what anyone wants. I don't think Trump wants to do that either. I think a large, non-special operations force on the ground would not be green lighted easily and if employed it woudl be for a limited purpose, not regime change. The american people won't like it, but i think that if the it's deemed necessary, the admin will ok it.

There is a chance tha the "bridges and power plants" focus is a strategic deception and wer're going to do something different. But also it could be the beginning of the end. We decide that we're done with major combat ops. Maybe covert/cladestine stuff continues. Maybe Israel continues to play whack-a-jihadi but we're going to wind things down. We take out a bunch of infrastructure to make them getting their miiltary reconstituted all that much more difficult adn then we turn the problem over to Israel, the Gulf States and europe to keep things policed up.

So many variables here.

Iran= Wicked Problem
AI:

In US joint military doctrine, a wicked problem—often referred to as an ill-structured problem—is defined as a complex challenge that has no definitive formulation, no clear end state, and no perfect solution.

Instead of a binary "win" or "solve" outcome, planners must seek a "good enough" or sustainable state. These problems are characterized by several key factors:

• No Stopping Rule: There is no point where a solution is definitively reached; the problem is only managed or re-solved over time.
• Interdependence: Each wicked problem is a symptom of another problem, and attempts to solve one part often create new, unforeseen issues elsewhere.
• Uniqueness: Because they are shaped by specific social, political, and cultural contexts, no two wicked problems are exactly alike, making past "templates" for success unreliable.
• Subjectivity: Solutions are not strictly right or wrong, but rather "better" or "worse" based on the perspectives and biases of the stakeholders involved.

Click to expand...

TigerRagRob said:

Obama bombed a restaurant killing a number of civilians including an American citizen in a country that we werent at war with and the left defended that. He did that to kill the American citizen. A citizen that hadnt been arrested,charged, or found guilty of any crime. The left defended that so spare me the crocodile tears...

Click to expand...

dpic73 said:

BREAKING: Iran is organizing nationwide human chains of youth, athletes, and artists at every power plant in the country at 2 PM Tehran time tomorrow, per Iran's Ministry of Sports and Youth.

The campaign is named "Human Chain of Iranian Youth for a Bright Future." Its slogan: "attacking public infrastructure is a war crime."

International signage will be displayed for global media coverage. At least 2,000 NGO members are confirmed. The chains form 13 hours before Trump's 8 PM ET strike deadline.

Iran is gathering civilians at the exact infrastructure the US has threatened, and televising it to the world.

Click to expand...

LafayetteBear said:

Do you honestly think that would be funny?

Click to expand...

kidmike41 said:

Just to clarify we aren’t technically at war here either.

Click to expand...

LafayetteBear said:

Palmetto:: I think the overall death toll in Iran is something more like 5,000.

And although I think it's clear that bombing civilian infrastructure constitutes a war crime, let's forget for a moment about the whole war crime issue and focus on the practical realities here. The Iranian population is supposed to be our friends. We started this whole "excursion" with Trump himself exhorting the Iranian population to rise up and get rid of the real enemy, the mullahs. We took out Iran's remaining nuclear facilities with this round of bombing, eliminated much of their air force and navy, exhausted much of their supply of missiles, and decimated most of their theocratic and military leadership. At this point, if we continue to bomb Iran, and most especially its civilian infrastructure, all we will be doing is alienating what little constituency we have there.

The wisest course of action would be to privately acknowledge we cannot effect regime change via a bombing campaign, and get the hell out of there before introducing soldiers and turning this into a much bigger fiasco than it is so far. Israel can and should handle it from here. And actually, Israel should be encouraged (strongly) to cease the bombing as well.

It is in Iran's interest, as well as ours and everyone else's. to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and have crude oil, fertilizer and other trade flowing through there unabated. It's a shame that Trump doesn't understand something this simple, and that he is unwilling to listen to people who do.

Click to expand...

baltimorened said:

as I posted previously, you might want to take just maybe a half step back on all this military stuff. You haven't been right since before the camouflaged underwear...

Click to expand...

kidmike41 said:

Can you provide some examples of this because I can’t actually find any.

Click to expand...

Israel should be wiped off map, says Iran's president

Iran's new president created a sense of outrage in the west yesterday by describing Israel as a "disgraceful blot" that should be "wiped off the face of the earth". Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who is more hardline than his predecessor, told students in Tehran that a new wave of Palestinian attacks would...

www.theguardian.com

Taking Iran's Threats of Genocide Against Israel Seriously

Taking Iran’s Incitement to Commit Genocide Against Israel Seriously Testimony before the Subcommittee on International Human Rights of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development of the Parliament of Canada By Professor Gregory H. Stanton1 5 May 2009 German...

www.genocidewatch.com

Iran: We will change nuclear doctrine if threatened by Israel

"If the Zionist regime dares to damage Iran's nuclear facilities, our level of deterrence will be different."

www.jns.org

kidmike41 said:

Did you even read the list you sent?

Click to expand...

kidmike41 said:

I’m seriously not trolling. Kharg island is just an export hub it doesn’t actually have any oil. They pump the oil over there. If we wanted to stop them exporting oil couldn’t we just strike ships or threaten too if they go to Kharg island? Seems like a lot lower risk.

Click to expand...

TigerRagRob said:

Israel should be wiped off map, says Iran's president

Iran's new president created a sense of outrage in the west yesterday by describing Israel as a "disgraceful blot" that should be "wiped off the face of the earth". Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who is more hardline than his predecessor, told students in Tehran that a new wave of Palestinian attacks would...

www.theguardian.com

https://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/27/world/africa/wipe-israel-off-the-map-iranian-says.html

Taking Iran's Threats of Genocide Against Israel Seriously

Taking Iran’s Incitement to Commit Genocide Against Israel Seriously Testimony before the Subcommittee on International Human Rights of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development of the Parliament of Canada By Professor Gregory H. Stanton1 5 May 2009 German...

www.genocidewatch.com

Iran: We will change nuclear doctrine if threatened by Israel

"If the Zionist regime dares to damage Iran's nuclear facilities, our level of deterrence will be different."

www.jns.org

Click to expand...

TigerRagRob said:

The fact that Israel exist is a threat to them according to them......

Click to expand...

fatpiggy said:

Can we control the flow already? Why does Trump keep saying open the ******* strait?

Click to expand...

kidmike41 said:

How could you possibly know that would have used them? I just don’t see that happening and apparently neither did the UK reps at the negotiations

Click to expand...

kidmike41 said:

Britain declared war on Germany before Germany ever attack Britain. You know that right?

this is no defense on Germany, just a fact

Click to expand...

kidmike41 said:

We have been operating on this logic ever since ww2 and honestly it doesn’t appear to have worked well. Vietnam and Iraq were started under these premises. Huge wastes of blood and treasure. I am tired of it. We are in $40 trillion of debt. Let’s get our house in order and stop worrying about the Middle East.

Click to expand...

Hotshoe said:

It's astonishing that both of of them are denying threats from Iran. Are they living under rocks? They just killed 47 of our innocent citizens in 2023. They threaten America on a weekly basis. They'll stop at nothing as long as it's get Trump.

Click to expand...

Hotshoe said:

Iran has already proven you wrong due to their closing the Straight. It's literally why all of you short term thinkers are angry. So, Iran is nothing to us? Really? I suppose, since China has so many needed resources we use, yet is not at war with us, they doesn't affect us either?

Click to expand...

kidmike41 said:

I voted for Trump. I wanted no new wars. Sorry to burst your bubble on that.

Click to expand...

kidmike41 said:

It’s amazing how other countries don’t have this problem. No one is going to attack us.

Click to expand...

TigerRagRob said:

Obama bombed a restaurant killing a number of civilians including an American citizen in a country that we werent at war with and the left defended that. He did that to kill the American citizen. A citizen that hadnt been arrested,charged, or found guilty of any crime. The left defended that so spare me the crocodile tears...

Click to expand...

baltimorened said:

I think it would test the dedication of the people lined up on the bridge....Oh and to just reinforce my statement in another post about dual use terminology.... A dual-use target in warfare is infrastructure, technology, or a facility designed for civilian use that also provides support to military operations. Common examples include power grids, bridges, communication networks, transportation hubs, and factories. While traditionally protected under international law, they become legitimate targets if they contribute to military action, though this often sparks legal debates over proportionality and civilian harm.


So in spite of what your first impression, dual use terminology has been around since you became a lawyer..at least

Click to expand...

UrHuckleberry said:

I know a lot of the "left" still dislike Obama to this day due to his drone strikes, including that one. But I know over generalizing and painting everyone with the same brush is sort of your thing these days.

Click to expand...