Trumps attack on Iran - 2026 edition

[King Billy]

The one handed house bound technophobe foreign agitator yet again swerves a simple way to prove me wrong and reverts to abuse instead.
At least whilst willy is spending time making up excuses and swerving me that it is not stirring up trouble on this site.

I have no need to prove you wrong, you are wrong until you can prove your hypothesis is right.
As for reverting to abuse, you've accused me of being a foreign agitator, how is that not lying accusatory abuse?
In any legal sense or scenario it would be serious libel.
How is lying abusive, potentially libelous abuse not "making trouble on this site"?
What fantasy world do you inhabit?

You've been proven to be a deceitful abusive liar, who thinks he can demand that other members prove their locality.

Jogon on, eejit.

 

[King Billy]

I don't believe King Billy is a foreign agent, but I do believe you are an anti-British Reform type.

And an inveterate abusive liar to boot.

 

[King Billy]

Let's hpoe Big don and the ***'s have the balls to finnish it and wipe the tea towel heads of the face of the earth

Is this an islamophobic comment:

 

[IT Minion]

The school that was hit was due to ***s poor intel

It was a former rev guard military building

Similar thing happened in Iraq when a bomb shelter full of civilians was hit

Four year old intel is not good enough to be used for targeting. Using it is a failure of due diligence. Especially when they know there are medical and educational facilities in US and Iranian military compounds.

 

[King Billy]

It's only illegal in the fantasy world which you live in whereby international law actually means something in this context.

Most of the independent world law scholars declared it an illegal attack.

WHAT DOES INTERNATIONAL LAW SAY?​

Legal experts said many countries will consider the attacks unjustified under the United Nations Charter, which states that member states must refrain from using force or the threat of force against other states. There are exceptions when force is authorized by the U.N. Security Council or used in self-defense in response to armed attack, neither of which applies.

Explainer: Are the US attacks on Iran legal?

The U.S. military has joined Israel and attacked more than 1,000 targets in Iran and killed many of its top officials, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. On Wednesday, a U.S. submarine sunk an Iranian navy vessel near Sri Lanka.

www.reuters.com

I could post many such similar reports, but you'll never bother reading them due to your Confirmation Bias.

Why do you think the US, or Israel would even bother troubling the UN with such a ridiculous notion in the first place? They already know the outcome.

Because they know that the UN would never sanction an illegal attack against another country.
So they ignored international law, and did it anyway.

Tony Blair refused to join with USA attack on Iraq unless and until they had a UN resolution. Which they gained based on deceitful intel.
Starmer refused to join with Trump and Netanyahu, so they went it alone. And UK were dragged in anyway, because UK had 300 military based in a US Base in Bahrain, who were complicit in the attack.