· 36 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events Apr 2, 2026 at 5:29 PM

Iran's two largest steel plants shut down due to strikes, companies say

Posted by Crossstoney

Iran's two largest steel plants shut down due to air strikes, companies say
www.bbc.com
Iran's two largest steel plants shut down due to air strikes, companies say
The strikes, which Iran says were first launched by Israel in co-ordination with the US last week, could cause major damage to the Iranian economy.
🚩 Report this post

36 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
bleedingoutlaw28 Apr 2, 2026 +78
oh lord, I thought they were having a contract dispute when I read the title. I was like, "really guys, NOW???"
78
jakeStacktrace Apr 2, 2026 +5
Me too I'm all for unions but come on guys not now, read the room
5
Maleficent-Stormbee Apr 2, 2026 +1
i did the exact same. like, are they staging a walkout over pay?
1
Royal-Hunter3892 Apr 2, 2026 +40
Iran's civilian infrastructure has now started to come under attack . Iran's largest bridge B1 was struck.
40
IntelArtiGen Apr 2, 2026 +21
> now started They've all been targeted infrastructure like that since the beginning tbf. Refineries, oil depots, ships etc. Many facilities have dual uses and the [proportionality](https://casebook.icrc.org/a_to_z/glossary/proportionality) can be hard to check in some cases. (not in all cases).
21
kymri Apr 2, 2026 +2
> Many facilities have dual uses This is the thing that's tricky; lots of condemnation of Russia striking Ukranian power plants (and, you know, f*** Russia for sure) -- but as bad as that goes for the civilians, that's just "bonus cruelty" since the Russians' real goal is to cripple war production and the like. Where do the factories get their power in many cases? The same power grid that keeps houses heated and the lights on for civilian populations.
2
IntelArtiGen Apr 2, 2026 +10
> since the Russians' real goal is to cripple war production The whole debate is there for Russia v Ukraine. Power plants are valid targets IF the goal is to have an impact on soldiers / arm production etc. etc. Which is what you're saying and I agree. BUT, Russia is not only saying that. They also said they wanted ukrainians to freeze to death during winter. (1) They said it (2) they destroyed the plants (3) ukrainian civilians did suffer a lot during winter. This can constitute a war crime. https://www.businessinsider.com/russias-ex-president-ukraine-might-not-even-exist-on-the-world-map-in-2-years-2022-6 > Dmitry Medvedev "Ukraine might not exist in two years" https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/death-by-cold-russia-is-attempting-to-freeze-millions-of-ukrainian-civilians/ > Russian officials and media personalities have praised the destruction of civilian infrastructure and the suffering this inflicts. https://www.justsecurity.org/81789/russias-eliminationist-rhetoric-against-ukraine-a-collection/ > State Duma Deputy Speaker Boris Chernyshov, for example, claimed that Russian retaliatory strikes were “an expression of our hatred, our holy hatred. They’ll be sitting without gas, without light, and without everything else. If the Kyiv regime chose the path of war criminals, they have to freeze and rot over there.” These statements, among others, demonstrate that Russian officials “knew and intended the attacks to cause civilian harm and death,” according to IHRC and IPHR. It's the problem with Russia targeting power plants in Ukraine. Without these statements (and what they did in Bucha etc.) it would be different. And obviously we can see that in many wars. Targeting power plants, steel plants can be ok. Bridges... maybe, it depends, could be ok, may not be. But saying "possibly even desalination plants", that's a big no typically.
10
Anemicwolf14 Apr 2, 2026 +33
dual use** infrastructure
33
nosfer82 Apr 2, 2026 +7
The bridge was under construction. Not connected yet .
7
the-other_one Apr 2, 2026 -18
I frequently see US military vehicles being transported on the highway, does that give the ok for the destruction of roads and bridges in America since the military uses them too?
-18
wompical Apr 2, 2026 +78
Yes. If a country were in a serious war with USA and could strike our highways then they likely would. The interstate system was built for the reason of moving large amounts of military assets across the continent quickly.
78
topdownyeti Apr 2, 2026 +18
I’d be so mad if my last moments were spent in traffic on the 91 in Corona, California
18
JD0x0 Apr 2, 2026 +32
And if US soldiers operated out of schools and hospitals, those likely would get bombed, too. And if this were the case, this technically would not be a war crime to bomb them, as these buildings lose their protected status once they're being used for military purposes.
32
BadgerDC1 Apr 2, 2026 +10
Exactly. If the US army had soldiers shelter in schools then id probably blame them for any deaths at those schools, and not whoever was attacking us. But this is to an extent that the enemy had reasonable knowledge of the school and did so at a time of day to avoid unnecessary civilian casualties. It wouldnt be reasonable to bomb all schools because some soldiers were using one different school, or bombing a school during a school day if soldiers are there at night when kids arent around, etc....
10
Ijnefvijefnvifdjvkm Apr 2, 2026 -9
Yes, and the US military just housed soldiers in hotels to hide from Iranian drones. War crime.
-9
Ijnefvijefnvifdjvkm Apr 2, 2026 -14
That was a cold war excuse.
-14
wompical Apr 2, 2026 +13
What? Why would there be an excuse? You think countries aren't allowed to build highways?
13
WhoSaidWhatNow2026 Apr 2, 2026 +73
It's weird that you people think that in the event of a substantial war that pretty much everything is off limits, like the war will go on around you while you just go about your daily errands unaffected. It's a very western mindset.
73
wompical Apr 2, 2026 +30
It is so naive. People need to read about the bombing of Dresden and Toyko in WW2. This is war.
30
iuuznxr Apr 2, 2026 -8
Area bombings served no purpose and would have been war crimes by today's standards. Even LeMay said he would be tried as a war criminal if he had lost. McNamara - later architect of the Vietnam war - agreed. Strategic bombing of bridges, railways, or factories is another story.
-8
wompical Apr 2, 2026 +14
Yeap and nobody is going to care about war crimes, UN, treaties, ect when total war comes up again.
14
KodaiClub Apr 2, 2026 -21
I get that this is realism versus idealism but like… f*** us for having ideals I guess? 
-21
WhoSaidWhatNow2026 Apr 2, 2026 +13
It's a completely self serving ideal. It's designed to foster a mindset that detaches citizens from the actions of their government, allowing them go to about their daily lives while ignoring what their government and military are doing elsewhere. Since you should never have to be involved because you're a civilian, there's no reason for you to worry about it beyond complaining on the internet.
13
Mitamarin Apr 2, 2026 -4
Well, the trump government fucks everyone with ideals. So what's one more?
-4
yosisoy Apr 2, 2026 +18
I mean attacking bridges is pretty standard in wars
18
IntelArtiGen Apr 2, 2026 +16
It's not about "giving the ok", it's about assessing "proportionality" in the law of war: https://casebook.icrc.org/a_to_z/glossary/proportionality I wouldn't consider that targeting steel plants like that is weird in a war, considering steel is highly required to build missiles for example.
16
Covert_Cuttlefish Apr 2, 2026 +6
Part of the reason the interstate system was build in the USA was to move military goods / people. Of course it would be a target.
6
IntroductionAgile372 Apr 2, 2026 +7
If we get in a war yes everything is gonna be targeted. But I'm not sure why I'm replying to what is likely a Chinese or Iranian bot
7
ProteinFarts_ Apr 2, 2026 +5
Yeah, if we were being invaded and our roads and bridgers were being used for military transport, it would be 100% "ok" (acceptable) per global consensus to destroy them
5
[deleted] Apr 2, 2026 -1
[deleted]
-1
jamie9910 Apr 2, 2026 +5
Iran is going to lose everything if they don't surrender.
5
killerkingbee9 Apr 2, 2026 +20
We can only hope the IRGC surrenders soon. 
20
Reasonable-Froyo-984 Apr 2, 2026 -8
The loving human being know as Trump truly achieved the liberation of the Iranian people. Liberation of water, gas, electricity, healthcare systems, and natural resources.  Papa Trump truly cares about the freedom of the world's people.
-8
Kuiriel Apr 3, 2026 +2
Might be good for the water supply at least. Maybe Isfahan can have a river again. If there is some replenishment of the water table and the dams let it through, maybe something good can come of this for ordinary folk. 
2
DarkCommercial5200 Apr 3, 2026 +2
NA, IRGC will find a way to fuckem
2
Ohthatsnotgood Apr 3, 2026 -2
“Iran is the 10th biggest producer of steel globally, according to data from the World Steel Association. In addition to using steel domestically for construction and manufacturing, it exports the material across the world.” I don’t think it’ll be a massive hit to the rest of the world as they produce less than 2% of global steel but certainly not good for them domestically.
-2
← Back to Board