Not just human chains, but the bodies of students!
Alireza Rahimi, the deputy minister of youth affairs from Iran’s Ministry of Sport and Youth, called for his congregate to surrounded electrical stations in the event of near-imminent military strikes on those locations.
Notably, this isn’t a coordinated military strategy from Iran, just a crazy request from an Iranian official, but it’s nuts. Their strategy isn’t to point out areas where civilians were inadvertently harmed, it’s to use civilians as human shields.
211
debbie6663 days ago
+6
I don't think that the Trump regime cares about human shields. It might actually entice them more into bombing those targets. Like, don't threaten them with a good time, kind of thing.
6
exoriparian3 days ago
+4
It's civilians standing next to a civilian structure. It's just making more explicit the threat against civilians by Trump. Many, many more civilians than that would die because of a strike on a power plant, which is a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's not a "human shield" it's just humans.
4
qwqwqw3 days ago
+12
Do you think the minister will be encouraging his own family to go then? I know Trump's a sack of shit. But so is the Iranian regime.
You're talking about a regime who has gunned down civilians before for being too vocal against the government, a regime who kidnaps civilians and kills/sends them nobody really knows where. A regime which kills victims of r*** for the crime of being raped (children, we might add!).
Maybe you're right- that's it's a powerful symbolic gestyre of a powerless victim doing all they can to stand against evil. ... But no.
12
literallymoist3 days ago
+4
Yeah when power goes out medical devices fail, food spoils and heat/cooling do not work. Targeting their power infrastructure would already cause mass casualties, the human shield just makes it more clear for people not bright enough to make that connection on their own.
4
musci122343 days ago
-56
if US starts targeting civilian infrastructure then civilians are getting harmed no matter what. You cant take out power plants and water desalination infra without killing civilians (and not just talking about civilians working there). Putting civilians directly in front of them just tells the pilots and everyone else to directly acknowledge the fact that they are killing civilians. Human shield argument applies if it is being used to protect military targets or military is hiding in civilian infra like firing rockets from hospitals.
-56
Foreign_Cable_95303 days ago
+64
There’s a very significant difference between a missile strike or debris harming civilians during a military operation and an Iranian official requesting children to explode with an electrical station so that they can claim the USA is targeting adolescent civilians.
64
musci122343 days ago
-8
Bro in today's world if you are taking out the power supply then people are dying no matter what. You think hospitals, water supply and other critical stuff runs on dreams and farts? US is targetting civilians. Do you think civilian infrastructure is a valid military target?
The cases in which it would be valid to criticise iran are:
1. They forced people to stand there
2. They used civilians as meat shield to protect their military infrastructure
3. They operated military operation from civilian infrastructure
Iran is a fucked up country but thay doesn't make targetting civilian infra ok.
-8
Designer_Professor_43 days ago
+10
Energy is provided in grids. Many countries use regional grids to contain failures, Iran uses a single decentralized grid.
Quite literally Iran's military and civilian share the exact same grid. You can't disable one without disabling the other.
10
Foreign_Cable_95303 days ago
+25
People dying is also significantly different than an Iranian official requesting children to die with the infrastructure so that Iran can claim the USA is targeting adolescent civilians.
Yes I believe that targeting electrical stations can be valid military targets, as they’re considered lawful if those stations power military bases, weapons production, air defenses, command/control centers, etc
25
lorarc3 days ago
-1
Apart from factories all those places have their own power. Destroying a power plant will affect mostly civilians and for a very long time.
-1
exoriparian3 days ago
+2
lol, you can believe that all you want, it's a f****** war crime. it is not a valid military target.
2
musci122343 days ago
-10
It is not very different. The entire difference is killing someone directly and killing someone indirectly. But I guess it is easier to tell yourself that you didn't kill civilians when it was actually lack of electricity.
If you believe that it is ok to target stuff like power plants and water desalination plants then I hope you won't complain when Iran does it because if US targets civilian infra then Iran will respond in the same way and whole situation will get much much worse.
Also how many country are there that have completely independent power infrastructure for military stuff? Is it ok to attack power infrastructure in all those countries that don't do 2 separate power infrastructure?
-10
Foreign_Cable_95303 days ago
+8
Killing someone directly with intent and killing someone indirectly are treated very differently in the United States and in the international community. Especially when one is due to a theocratic autocracy refusing to surrender after power loss and the other is due to that same authoritarian state intentionally sending their children to known military targets during an active conflict.
8
musci122343 days ago
Bro do you still believe that if power plants are bombed there would be no deaths of civilians due to loss of power? Yes or no.
It is "I didn't kill you, the bullet did" kind of dumb logic. Iran's govt sucks but the solution isnt to bomb civilian infrastructure from the sky.
Also does your country have a separate power grid for military stuff? Because if it doesn't it would make the power grid in your country a valid target too according to your logic.
0
Foreign_Cable_95303 days ago
+6
No I’m not claiming that. I’m claiming that intent is written into international law as an important distinction for whether or not a military operation that kills civilians is justified or not.
It sounds like your idea of war is that if civilians could die then the operation is not allowed to happen. That’s a zero-risk tolerance that is not shared by the international community because writing that into law would allow an enemy state or it’s leaders to simply embed themselves among civilians to eliminate all of of your defenses.
I understand that this is morally difficult, but this is the reality of war. And yes, if my country has military power grids then those are also justified targets, even if a civilian dies in the strike or secondary to debris. Even if me, my son, and Jesus Christ are all working in the power plant that provides power to a military base and two weapons development facilities, it is still a valid military target.
If we compare to Iran but flip it around in a hypothetical, if it’s been announced that those areas are going to be targeted, so if my country decided to black out the internet like Iran and not tell me, or even worse, plan a bring-your-family-to-work-day on the day that military strikes were threatened, then the responsibility is on my country, not the one conducting the strikes.
Iran is literally trying to throw civilians under the exploding bus because they know a repressive theocratic authoritarian state cannot survive without a nuclear deterrent.
6
Hackwork893 days ago
-2
You're replying to a f****** moron. Don't bother.
-2
TrumpBad_UpvotesPls3 days ago
+1
>You're a f****** moron. Don't bother.
FTFY
1
exoriparian3 days ago
It's like you can't read. Trump has directly threatened to intentionally hit civilian structures, the power plant among them. If that happens, many more innocent cilvilians than this would die.
0
ImAjustin3 days ago
+381
Yes the ol human shield. Where have I seen this before
381
LateralEntry3 days ago
+98
All of Iran’s proxies
98
copolii3 days ago
+11
Erm ... Islamic Republic.
11
Material_Policy63273 days ago
+21
Happened in Iraq.
21
Deaftrav3 days ago
-108
*checks logs of Israel and America war crimes*
Yeah I'm not sure that's going to work.
Edit. To the downvoters, you mad that America has bombed schools and places with children? As has Israel? Come on...
-108
yosisoy3 days ago
+220
You know what IS a war crime? Putting civilians in the line of fire (literally the article you're replying to)
220
redyellowblue50313 days ago
-40
You know what is a war crime? Threatening civilian infrastructure.
Not defending Iran’s actions at all, but this is on the US. “Strongest” nation in the world actively threatening war crimes? F****** pathetic.
Edit: To the morons who for some reason still think the US can kill and destroy in Gods name or whatever, [actual experts](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/watch-live-hegseth-and-caine-hold-pentagon-briefing-as-trump-threatens-irans-infrastructure) agree it’s a war crime to do what Trumps doing by threatening in this specific way.
-40
ex0e3 days ago
+46
Unironically also calling Zelenskyy a war criminal is about what I'd expect from this level of understanding
46
CajunKush3 days ago
-3
It’s not a war crime if you win
-3
SeaworthinessSome4543 days ago
+46
These power plants are not “civilian infrastructure”, they’re dual purpose. You cant hide necessary military resources from attacks by attaching it to civilian purposes as well.
46
S10753 days ago
-31
Get the f*** out of here with that bullshit. Iran isn't hiding anything of consequence in powerplants. You can't put ballistic missiles inside a power plant building, and nothing else would be a threat to the US or the Gulf States if the US didn't start this. You cant justify systemically causing a humanitarian disaster because there are allegedly some "military equipment" in a powerplant. You don't get to commit a war crime just because you accuse the other guy first.
-31
TrumpBad_UpvotesPls3 days ago
+9
negative IQ. lmfao
9
SeaworthinessSome4543 days ago
+14
When did I say they’re hiding missiles in a power plant? Their military is using the power generated at those plants too.
14
TheTimespirit3 days ago
+5
Bwahaha. How smooth is your brain?
5
sabamba03 days ago
+1
Sucks when the law is not on your side on this one, only feelings
1
S10753 days ago
+2
Just making shit up now eh? Makes sense. I'll wait while you show me the legal justification for this war. I won't be holding my breath though.
2
usesNames3 days ago
-24
Ok, which begs the question, why would asking civilians to be near critical civilian infrastructure put them in the line of fire?
-24
yosisoy3 days ago
+42
Probably because of the very direct warnings "We are going to bomb this thing"
42
CLGToady3 days ago
+23
Hmm I wonder why putting civilians in front of valuable targets puts them in danger... I wonder if it has something to do with the bombs and drones that have been flying for the past month. Where else would you like the US and Israel to target? The middle of an empty field so no one gets hurt?
23
Colonel_Cumpants3 days ago
-17
OH, maybe MILITARY TARGETS? Have you heard of those?
And NOT civilian infrastructure, which is a war crime.
That it has to be said, Jeebus!
-17
virtual_adam3 days ago
+10
Everything is dual use these days. That’s a problem on itself. Anything that even existed as military only was evacuated long ago because those are the easiest targets
It’s not just Iran. The US has troops in the ME sleeping in civilian hotels. Israel has its center base in the middle of Tel Aviv. Literally everything is dual use
If Iran would have military roads separated from civilian roads, military bridges separated, military power plants separated, well the war would have been over within a few hours
Pretty easy to destroy 100% of their military and 0% of civilian infrastructure when you plan it like that
10
drop_panda3 days ago
-17
Targeting civilian infrastructure is a war crime, typically reserved for "rogue states".
-17
saranowitz3 days ago
+22
Only if it’s exclusively used for civilian infrastructure. Quit moving the goal posts.
22
SeaworthinessSome4543 days ago
+1
There’s so many f****** odors on Listnook rn.
If a country could hide military targets by making them dual purpose or cloaking them with civilian use, and nobody could attack them bc it’d hurt civilians, then those countries would run the planet.
They’re dual use power plants. I’m glad we have them warning to try and end it before it came to this but oh well, it didn’t work, time to take them out.
1
S10753 days ago
-2
Just because they are dual use doesn't make them a valid target. You could maybe make that claim with a nuclear plant, but not gas or coal fired.
-2
SeaworthinessSome4543 days ago
+7
Why not? The military uses the power from those plants just the same whether it’s nuclear, gas, or coal.
7
SweeterThanYoohoo3 days ago
-10
maybe we just shouldn't f****** bomb anyone in the first goddamned place. Then we wouldn't have to worry about what is ok and what is not ok to f****** blow up.
-10
wronglyzorro3 days ago
+16
Someone should tell Iran and their terror proxies this.
16
nvidiastock3 days ago
-11
You're not meant to be striking civilian energy infrastructure.
-11
Deaftrav3 days ago
or critical water infrastructure
0
Deaftrav3 days ago
-44
You know what's a war crime? Bombing schools and levelling cities.
So the downvoters are totally missing my point....
Edit..it really is interesting how mad people are to be reminded of the war crimes the Americans and Israelis have done.
Where am I wrong?
-44
saranowitz3 days ago
+13
Under international law, Is a country allowed to bomb a school that is being used to house weapons?
Pick one:
Yes -> well, this is actually the answer under international law, so not a war crime.
No -> well, i can understand your moral stance on this, but consider that you’re effectively *encouraging* regimes to hide their arms in hospitals / schools since they can’t be bombed.
13
Galaghan3 days ago
-18
That's just victim blaming lol.
-18
PizzaDeliveryForMom3 days ago
+11
Accidental vs intentional. Not owning up to it is scummy but there is still a huge difference between an accident and intentional.
11
wailferret3 days ago
+60
Yes Israel and the US are forcing Iran to recruit 12 year old child soldiers and chain civilians near power plants.
60
sevargmas3 days ago
+14
War is hell. Innocents get killed. It’s extremely unfortunate. But the US is not intentionally targeting schools to kill civilians.
14
turbodan13 days ago
+18
Attacking dual use infrastructure is not necessarily a war crime. Infrastructure that contributes meaningfully to the military's operation, but is also used for civilian purposes, is considered military infrastructure.
The authors of the Geneva Convention impose responsibility for protecting civilians on all parties. When a host country refuses to abide by their responsibilities to their own citizens, the Geneva Convention offers fewer protections.
If the framework allows for one party to simultaneously refuse to conform to the Geneva Convention but at the same time demands their opponent conform, no one would follow the framework.
18
debasing_the_coinage3 days ago
-10
From the United States, in this war, just a few days ago:
[NYT: Placing US Troops in Middle East Hotels May Violate Laws of War](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/01/us/politics/troops-iran-hotels.html)
-10
ImAjustin3 days ago
+6
Yes I see the US is targeting Iranian hotels also
6
agangofoldwomen3 days ago
+85
Iranian Citizens: sounds like a plan, you first IRGC and we’ll catch up.
IRGC: …
85
Key-Rough-83463 days ago
+16
So if they go outside to the power plants, they get blown up. If they protest the IRGC for making them do it, the IRGC shoots them. Seems they die either way. Which action is more likely to get them better results?
16
copolii3 days ago
+4
Literally, except for the brainwashed regime idiots who stayed silent, cheered, or mocked as the regime massacred 40,000+ protesters.
4
KrawhithamNZ3 days ago
How can you in insult those that didn't attend the protests?
When was the last time you attended a protest where there was a realistic chance of being shot?
0
copolii3 days ago
+2
Insult those who didn't attend?
I said absolutely nothing about attendance. You should get your eyes checked.
2
KrawhithamNZ3 days ago
You called them 'brainwashed regime idiots'
On a second reading I can see that you probably meant just the inner circle of the regime but your writing left it open to misunderstanding
0
copolii3 days ago
+2
Keep in mind, these are my people. The only ones I disrespect are the ones in bed with that satanic regime. And yes there are plenty of brainwashed idiots (via religion) who think this regime is the best thing for Iran (solely because it's Islamic) despite the clusterfuck that they've created in Iran. They've looted, massacred, stolen, abandoned, and in every way possible betrayed the people of Iran. If you look into the actual origins of the regime heads, you'll see that a large number of them are Iraqi. This is not an Iranian government, it's an occupying regime.
2
Living_Cash10373 days ago
+68
This isnt some eco group protecting a tree. The US isnt going to care.
68
Ultra_Metal3 days ago
+54
Also, the Islamic Republic is responsible for anything that happens to those people. Using human shields is a war crime.
54
Okay-Crickets5453 days ago
+3
Human shields around non-military targets? Isn’t that just every human anywhere? Targeting civilian infrastructure and calling the civilians you’re targeting human shields is some wild mental gymnastics.
3
[deleted]3 days ago
-23
[deleted]
-23
fury4203 days ago
+12
Power plants are rarely exclusively civilian, they are considered dual use objects and can potentially be valid military targets.
12
Ultra_Metal3 days ago
+27
Power plants are legitimate military targets because they are used by the military. They are dual use. You don't know what you're talking about.
27
NowGoodbyeForever3 days ago
-20
Even if a power plant is used by the military, attacking them is a war crime if it results in "excessive civilian harm." There are civilians in the proximity, and taking out power will naturally lead to many more dead in hospitals and due to exposure.
You don't know what you're talking about. Stop carrying water for a f****** war crime.
-20
TrumpBad_UpvotesPls3 days ago
+4
Stop making shit up.
4
Ultra_Metal3 days ago
+10
False, it is not a war crime. What you are doing is defending the Islamic Republic, one of the worst war criminal regimes in the world.
10
S10753 days ago
-11
Arguing there should be limits on what constitutes a valid military target is not defending Iran. What a f****** disingenuous bunch of bullshit. I bet you call people anti-semites because they oppose the actions of the Israel's government too.
-11
Ultra_Metal3 days ago
+5
I bet you have no clue what you're talking about.
5
Aethericseraphim3 days ago
+2
Generally the best response to war crimes isn't to commit war crimes of your own.
Just sayin
2
off_by_two3 days ago
+1
What is deliberately bombing civilian infrastructure, bridges, housing, schools again?
1
spaceninjaking3 days ago
+4
Bridges and general infrastructure can absolutely be classified under valid military targets, but should be evaluated on a case by case basis.
Housing and schools generally fall outside of legitimate targets. They could feasibly become a target should the civilian population be evacuated, but there is still a risk civilians remain.
4
_Cultivating_Mass_3 days ago
I care
0
DiscipleOfYeshua3 days ago
+15
“IRGC calls…” not “Iran calls…”
This is the same as when these micron-deep news networks call every Israeli a settler and every settler a terrorist, when anyone with 2g of sense knows each is a fraction of each.
Iranians are mostly wise and ethical. IRGC, is terrorizing them, and the rest of us.
15
Squish_the_android3 days ago
+51
I don't know why they think this would stop the US.
51
TheDuchessofQuim3 days ago
+52
They don’t think this, nor do they care about these civilians.
They want to use the image of dead civilians to their benefit in the war of public opinion.
52
SadDiver91243 days ago
+4
Expected strategy from the IRGC. It worked wonders to fabricate outrage for Gaza
4
NiFiGaS3 days ago
-9
Like americans in 9/11.
-9
squirlz3333 days ago
+2
Stop Trump's cabinet* the US doesn't want this outside of those crazy fucks.
2
Polandgod753 days ago
-1
In fact with maga, they see this as a plus. I mean more iranian they can kill
-1
kwangqengelele3 days ago
-6
More Iranian children, specifically. The glee that conservatives expressed at the school being bombed proves they'll treat more schoolchildren being murdered as an all around win.
-6
Gold-Cantaloupe60473 days ago
+111
the terrorist Iranian government who funds Hamas terrorists that use human shield tactics use human shield tactics themselves, how surprising
111
DisastrousAcshin3 days ago
-61
The terrorists in this case are the people attacking civilian infrustructure while claiming it's to save civilians
-61
GuaranteedCougher3 days ago
+19
Sometimes there are two terrorists fighting each other. The US, Iran and Israel have all committed terrorism
19
Wanna_make_cash3 days ago
+9
Both parties are terrorists. It's two evil groups fighting it out and nobody is a w*****
9
Mofoman30193 days ago
+17
Begin Operation Human Shield.
17
pepe_acct3 days ago
+7
Where in the article does it says this?
7
whoooodatt3 days ago
+5
People giving the popcorn awards for this shit make me sick
5
Nonhinged3 days ago
+14
Need human shield but also need to call it something else...
CHAIN!
14
Chokycorgi3 days ago
+14
If it’s one thing this regime has, it’s the audacity.
14
Material_Policy63273 days ago
+3
Yeah that’s f****** idiotic…
3
Ultra_Metal3 days ago
+12
Using human shields is a war crime. This means that the Islamic Republic is 100% responsible for anything that happens to the people it uses as human shields.
12
mordehuezer3 days ago
+16
That is absolutely pathetic. I don't know much about the validity of this war but one thing is for certain, Iran is not good.
16
BasesJuicedNoOuts3 days ago
+6
I thought I had seen it all until I see people in the comments defending Iran here lmao
6
Sweaty_Librarian_2933 days ago
+2
Why does the article not talk about the title? I’m assuming it’s in the video but kind of weird. Also very convenient as we are ramping up attacks on civilian locations Iran is “using human shields”. Def not just people living and working around things like trains bridges and power plants. Literal the exact excuse Russia used during the initial invasion btw.
2
vessel_for_the_soul3 days ago
+3
Cruelty is the point.
3
giboauja3 days ago
+3
We're going to do warcrimes... well how about I raise you a warcrime.
3
slayermcb3 days ago
+1
They're already recruiting children for the Army. There will be no way to have a war with Iran and not have warcrimes. Course you could also just not start a war with Iran...
1
QDSchro3 days ago
+3
An unsurprising move by a regime that has never and will never give a f*** about Iranian people. The 30k protesters is just what people decided to pay attention to while ignoring decades with someone deemed a butcher…..
Foolish and cruel.
3
ThatsItImOverThis3 days ago
+3
Some Iranians will die, but that is a sacrifice their leadership is more than willing to make, while they stay safe in bunkers.
3
Unlucky_Accountant713 days ago
+4
The Islamic listnook, I mean Revolutionary guard corps are some of the most vile evil people ever.
4
metalgtr843 days ago
+1
The article doesn’t say anything about human shields. Is there an actual source because it sounds like propaganda.
1
Street_Anon3 days ago
+2
I really doubt anyone will be willingly to do this in Iran.and you know the regime is dying if they asking people to do this
2
Dark_World_Blues3 days ago
+4
Some will do, but definitely not a huge number.
4
Street_Anon3 days ago
Let's see how many schools are in these power plants
0
squirlz3333 days ago
+3
Irans leaders should lead by example
3
Leather_rebelion3 days ago
+2
Wow this is going to get so bad
2
Remote-Cause7553 days ago
+2
While I would not put this past them, where does it say this in the article?
2
Tango6US3 days ago
+1
Uh don't they know terrorists might attack? Sounds dangerous.
1
ToastyTheDragon3 days ago
+1
Okay but the article makes no mention of "human chains"? Why does this post go to a different article than what you posted as the headline?
1
ToastyTheDragon3 days ago
+1
Okay I've traced the claim back to an AP News Article, and correspondant Charles de Ledesma claims that Iranian president Masoud Pezeshkian called for "human chains" to be formed around power plants and oil infrastructure, on Tuesday (today), on X. I scrolled through Pezeshkian's x profile and ran what he was tweeting through a translator app and found *no* mention of human chains anywhere on his profile.
https://apnews.com/article/iran-us-israel-trump-lebanon-april-7-2026-421ee64fdc9a5c26460df8119c7d1b3f
https://x.com/drpezeshkian
1
XenoRyet3 days ago
+1
Holy hell. Two war crimes don't make a legitimate action.
1
getridofwires3 days ago
+1
Sadly that will not stop Trump or Hegseth, they will do whatever they want unless stopped.
1
Kritnc3 days ago
+1
For anyone who thinks there's a coherent strategy here — read his own words day by day.
March 14: "Please help us."
March 16: "We don't need any help at all."
March 16: "I was just testing to see who's listening to me."
Full timeline with 36 days of quotes: [https://thestraitwatch.com/](https://thestraitwatch.com/)
1
Blahblahman233 days ago
Literal baby vs. hydrogen bomb moment
0
Emergency_Pop37083 days ago
+2
What an evil regime . I have no sympathy for this regime and the people who support the regime
2
iamagermanpotato3 days ago
+1
Target practise, as the USofA and Israel call it....
1
hiricinee3 days ago
+1
Just make sure they're all irgc members Iran.
1
Mammoth-Garden-8043 days ago
+3
I don’t think your human chain is going to slow down numerous bombs. Keep stacking bodies though.
3
Greener-dayz3 days ago
+2
The IRGC are such pieces of shit. How about negotiating a cease fire?
2
pete_683 days ago
+1
No worries. TACO TACOed.
1
OptiPath3 days ago
+2
It’s evil…I doubt Iran “calls” for human chains…they will probably force people to form the human chains
Pray for peace 🙏.
2
glitterlok3 days ago
+1
There is *nothing* good coming out of this conflict. Not a single thing. It's a net negative for the entire world.
1
Grogon23 days ago
I mean thats obviously what was very likely going to happen. They voted for trump and knew he loves war.
0
glitterlok3 days ago
+4
I feel like you might have responded to the wrong comment.
4
olosen3 days ago
+1
Ah yes, the good ole' die for your 'god' gaslight islam is known for
1
Rich-Instruction-3273 days ago
+1
How can anyone looking at this and think letting Iran accumulate missiles and build nukes would have been a good plan.
The same people who stand where a bomb is scheduled to land or suicide bomb a market would just as easily ignore MAD and use a nuke.
1
Western-Corner-4313 days ago
-2
Trump doesn’t care. Hegseth doesn’t care. What is this going to do except kill more kids?
-2
musci122343 days ago
Hegseth and Trump don't fly the planes except in AI videos.
0
Western-Corner-4313 days ago
-3
What’s your point? Do you think I’m saying they are personally leading the attack? We already know that they are issuing illegal orders and the military is following illegal orders.
-3
yosisoy3 days ago
+1
I'm sure the military has lawyers, but feel free to keep talking, it's a free country
1
Western-Corner-4313 days ago
How many fishing boats have been blown up and people murdered on Trumps illegal orders in the Caribbean? Illegal orders are being followed
0
Cruelopolis_3 days ago
+1
You mean the same military lawyers that got sidelined by Trump's own cabinet when they were launching attacks at drug boats instead of capturing them.
1
esther_lamonte3 days ago
-10
And yet America is STILL the unprovoked aggressor committing and threatening more war crimes. This is what electing monstrous fascists who openly declare their intent to wage holy war and ignore international law gets you. There is no moral high ground to hold now. There is no amount of these articles that will make a difference in light of a maniac pedophile threatening nuclear war. Sorry, but this is the consequence of Trump. America is THE BAD GUY in the world right now. That’s just the reality in this moment.
-10
lorarc3 days ago
-1
No, this is what you get when you create a system where one guy has so much power. To stop things like this from happening in future you need real democracy and not the parody that americans have.
-1
Myrdraall3 days ago
+1
He only has as much power as people let him have.
1
Available_Finger_5133 days ago
-3
Was the deadline in 4 hours like 16 hours ago?
-3
TrumpBad_UpvotesPls3 days ago
+7
Average listnookor reading comprehension
7
Ezekiel_29_123 days ago
+6
When he mentioned four hours, he was saying that once the deadline passed it would only take four hours to destroy all the power plants.
6
hornetjockey3 days ago
-5
I don’t think I’d make that bet. They already bombed children.
147 Comments