8 Apr 2026 1:01 pm
WRONG, fool!Cannonpointer » 08 Apr 2026, 12:22 pm » wrote: ↑ You wanna talk gulls, sissy?
You just watched Iran tell trump to suck it when he gave them two days. The again when he gave them five. Then again when he gave them til midnight.
And now, you are **** stupid, that you think Trump's bluff worked, since Iran is at the table.
It never occurred to you that it was Trump who broke - Trump who put something on the table that Iran wanted - Trump whomet Iran's red lines to get them tosave him from the humiliation of either walking away, or committing war crimes and then walking away.
And yes, you preposterous, clownish stooge - deliberately targeting civilian infrastructure is a war crime.
If ANY of their infrastructure is useful to the enemy, it IS NOT a war crime to target it!
Why do I have to constantly educate you brainless idiots who happily swallow every lie that liberal losers like yourself try to promote?
Here are the facts:
Search Assist
It is not considered a war crime to destroy infrastructure used by an enemy's military if it is deemed a legitimate military target.
Now, do you care to defend your beloved Russian leader Putin for intentionally destroying bridges and power plants in Ukraine while never accusing HIM of war crimes? Or is it just something an anti-American asshole like you or Jane Fonda only see because of your insane hatred for Trump and our country?Bridge Day and the Law of War: Limits on Targeting Infrastructure
Military.com | By Haley Fuller April 06, 2026
Distinction and the Status of Bridges
Under the U.S. law of armed conflict doctrine, attacks must be directed at military objectives. The Department of Defense defines a military objective as an object that makes an effective contribution to military action and whose destruction offers a definite military advantage. Bridges are civilian objects by default, but can become lawful targets if they are used for military logistics or troop movement. The key is functional use, not category.