· 49 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events Mar 28, 2026 at 3:26 PM

G7 ministers demands an end to attacks on civilians in Iran war

Posted by Party_Setting7911

www.thebroadpost.com
BROADPOST | Insight. Analysis. Opinion.
🚩 Report this post

49 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
X211499Reddit Mar 28, 2026 +43
Oh they demanded, goodness gracious
43
TheBigCore Mar 28, 2026 +7
Like the UN, they demand and everyone just ignores them.
7
curious-flaps-2020 Mar 28, 2026 +11
Yeah, but the rest of the G7 needs to make the point that committing war crimes is wrong, to let evil people know they are evil.
11
TheBigCore Mar 28, 2026 +9
And Trump then goes, "What are you gonna do about it, nerd?" like Biff Tannen from Back to the Future, who apparently is a parody of 1980s Trump.
9
Kaffe-Mumriken Mar 28, 2026 +2
Man we have two big bullies fighting, but smacking all the nerds when throwing shit at each other. Telling teacher to sod off when they break the classroom window.
2
jops55 Mar 28, 2026 +1
That's actually a pretty accurate comparison.
1
TheBigCore Mar 28, 2026 +1
The thing is, Trump's behavior mirrors that of a bully. He keeps pushing and getting away with it because no one will stand up to him. They just sit on their hands and watch him do whatever he wants.
1
zyrzk_k Mar 28, 2026 +48
Countries with half the world’s wealth offer nothing but useless verbal demands that no one is obliged to fulfill.
48
diablosinmusica Mar 28, 2026 +9
Should they go full World War?
9
zyrzk_k Mar 28, 2026 +8
Maybe not support them with air bases and logistics?? Or this means world war
8
diablosinmusica Mar 28, 2026 -18
Yeah. That is an act of war.
-18
Callaghans_Caps Mar 28, 2026 +8
No it isn’t 
8
diablosinmusica Mar 28, 2026 -11
It is if the bases are are legally supposed to be there according to their agreement. Not allowing a government access to military bases they are legally entitled to is 100% an act of war.
-11
Silent-Worm Mar 28, 2026 -15
I mean yes? There closest ally started this war they should either help there closest ally and get this over with as soon as possible or sanction US, Israel like they did to Russia..
-15
diablosinmusica Mar 28, 2026 +2
Yup. The answer is getting more people killed in more places in the world. They changed how alliances work after WW1 because something like 20 million people died because the only answer was for everyone to go to war.
2
CreativeMuseMan Mar 28, 2026 +6
Keyboard Activism: The Diplomatic Chapter.
6
jops55 Mar 28, 2026 +1
Why not apply this to any war?
1
Baneofarius Mar 28, 2026 +11
Not sure what your point is as there is generally a complaint about civilian casualties in every war and there is a whole bunch of international law drawn up around civilian casualties.
11
unguibus_et_rostro Mar 28, 2026 +4
Germany bombed London, and the Allies in turn fire bombed Dresden and Tokyo. Was there a complaint about all the German and Japanese civilians the Allies were targeting then? The war crime on unrestricted submarine warfare they charged Dönitz with couldn't even stick because US did the same in the Pacific theatre against Japan.
4
jops55 Mar 28, 2026
Why demand something that's already law. Why not just demand that states follow the law?
0
Baneofarius Mar 28, 2026 +2
Thats what they are doing...
2
Earesth99 Mar 28, 2026 +3
They do. It’s considered a war crime
3
jops55 Mar 28, 2026
The US and Israel are not part of the ICC/ICJ
0
Earesth99 Mar 28, 2026 +2
But people who are charged can be arrested in countries that are
2
Kaffe-Mumriken Mar 28, 2026
I think they do
0
jops55 Mar 28, 2026 +2
They didn't in Gaza
2
Kaffe-Mumriken Mar 28, 2026 -1
They’ve made statements about Gaza yes.
-1
Dar-Baadargo Mar 28, 2026 +1
Does this apply to sites like munition factories?
1
AthenianVulcan Mar 28, 2026 +1
I want Bill Gates to give me 2 million dollars(I'm not greedy). My statement & G7 minister statement has equal weight.
1
ProjectNo525 Mar 28, 2026 -8
Who started this war again, and why?
-8
Hannibal_Barca_ Mar 28, 2026 +18
There have been proxy wars for decades involving Iran, Israel, and the US.
18
Consistent-Study-287 Mar 28, 2026 -15
If you can't see the difference between what has been happening for the last few decades and what has been happening for the past month, you may need to consume less propaganda.
-15
Consistent-Study-287 Mar 29, 2026 +2
I can't reply to u/onemagicmango for some reason, but he asked why I see it differently, so I'd like to give my perspective. North Korea and South Korea have been at war for the last 70+ years. If one side started bombing the other side, everyone would acknowledge that there's a difference between actively bombing each other, and what has been happening in the last 70 years. For those saying proxy wars are the same as actual wars, NATO is effectively engaged in a proxy war with Russia right now via Ukraine. If America or France started bombing Moscow, it would be a new war, and not the same war that's been happening the last 4 years.
2
Kaffe-Mumriken Mar 28, 2026 -15
Yeah but those were low key, contained, *usually* and didn’t break the entire stock market and global economy. Not even Iran wanted that, they wanted to be a ME North Korea +proxies
-15
Dauntless_Idiot Mar 28, 2026 +5
According to international law, it was an 'armed conflict' when Iran launched an unsuccessful armed attack to seize a US flagged civilian tanker transiting the Strait of Hormuz in February. With armed conflict meaning a war that we won't label a war because then you can't argue its not a war.
5
BishSlapDiplomacy Mar 28, 2026 +1
Noted.
1
DaySecure7642 Mar 28, 2026 +1
"Yes sir! Right away! Sorry I didn't know it was wrong." "Hey guys, from now on, don't attack the civilians ok?" "Copy that!" Problem solved!
1
Formal-Low6888 Mar 28, 2026 -2
Was this before or after the University of Tehram's dorms were leveled by the US?
-2
GoWest1223 Mar 28, 2026 -6
Iran war? It seemed to be US flags on those tomahawks landing on schools.
-6
POI_Harold-Finch Mar 28, 2026 -2
Primary school kids soul must be haunting some.
-2
Kaffe-Mumriken Mar 28, 2026 -3
Normalize calling it the American War
-3
Bitter_Procedure260 Mar 28, 2026 -8
American terrorism is what it is.
-8
JTBoom1 Mar 28, 2026 -6
That's a pretty broad statement that includes civilian infrastructure and diplomatic facilities. Valid statements, but it does bring into question, where is the line between civilian infrastructure and strategic targets? Schools, hospitals, etc are definitely in the category of civilian infrastructure and should never be targeted. If they are hit, transparent investigations should find out the reason why they were targeted and what can be done to prevent this in the future. The US strike on that school is horrendous. How about power generation facilities? If they provide power to military facilities, does this make them legitimate strategic targets? Most military facilities will have backup power generators, but those require fuel and upkeep which makes things more difficult for the military in question. How about oil production, processing and distribution facilities?
-6
Doppler74 Mar 28, 2026 -4
Collective punishment is a war crime so no you cant shoot power generation facilities if it is not strictly used by the military targets. If we go by the logic you written, I assume you just ask it not support this view, you can just shoot dams, farms, hospitalts, etc. as all of them are used by military in one way or another.
-4
unguibus_et_rostro Mar 28, 2026 +7
So if every structure is dual use, no structure are valid targets?
7
Doppler74 Mar 28, 2026 +5
No, according to IHL, military advantages of shooting sth should outweigh the civilian harm. It sounds ridiculous but it also makes sense. You cant shoot a power generation because the military uses a tiny bit of it and cause every civilian to suffer. If a power generator mostly (I have written strictly in the first comment but thats a mistake, sorry, English is not my native language) used by military then it is a valid military target.
5
JTBoom1 Mar 28, 2026 +1
Now you're trying to put words in my mouth, I already stated hospitals were not legitimate targets. Mentioning farms is just inane. I do not particularly think that power generation facilities are legitimate targets either, but there are ways to temporarily take down a power grid without causing major damage to generation plants or other hard and costly infrastructure.
1
Doppler74 Mar 28, 2026 +1
What? I said that I think thats not your view (to attakc power generation) and you just asked. I did not put words in your mouth, I do not think that you support shooting power facilities, thats what I written in my comment. Also, I am saying that the view you asked is very open to slippery slope. With the same justification you can shoot hospitals or farms too. Again, I am not saying you support it. If civilians wont suffer yeah power facilities can be shoot. Look for my other comment below to someone else for better clarification.
1
MikeSteamer Mar 28, 2026 -15
Yes all countries fabricate ballistic missiles in the centre of their capital or major cities. More Israeli lies to bomb civilian infrastructure such as command centres/armament fabrication/armories in/under schools, universities, sports centres, hospitals etc etc.
-15
← Back to Board