Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

DetroitLegalBeagle

(2,510 posts)

6. Not always.

Reply to Katinfl (Reply #3)

Fri Apr 3, 2026, 05:59 PM

Apr 3

It's not automatically a war crime. Dual use infrastructure are legitimate targets if they serve a military purpose, function, or contribute to its effectiveness. Rules around proportionality still need to be followed as well as minimizing civilian casualties. But if the bridge is being used by the military, steps are taken to minimize civilian casualties, and its destruction won't disproportionally harm the civilian populace in comparison to the military advantage its destruction would give, then its not considered a war crime.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

7 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

reACTIONary paleotn rpannier rictofen SheltieLover InstantGratification Chin music

35 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

So far, one F15, one A10 and one, maybe two Blackhawks lost. [View all] drray23 Apr 3 OP

And pootin claps & cheers SheltieLover Apr 3 #1

and gives direction! IrishAfricanAmerican Apr 3 #16

Of course pootin planned this & continues to orchestrate it. SheltieLover Apr 3 #18

Don't forget the AWACS destroyed on the ground Mysterian Apr 3 #2

And the F-15s lost to friendly fire. And .. ruet Apr 3 #5

And one KC-135 destroyed plus several others damaged. paleotn Apr 3 #14

Bombing civilian infrastructure is a war crime. Katinfl Apr 3 #3

Not always. DetroitLegalBeagle Apr 3 #6

Good analysis! reACTIONary Apr 3 #11

Do you think the US will follow the guidelines? Katinfl Apr 3 #19

The assault itself is an unnecessary war of aggression. PufPuf23 Apr 3 #29

Parsing it is exactly what courts do. DetroitLegalBeagle Apr 4 #34

The bridge in question is surrounded by cranes. Iran is claiming it was not even fully constructed HesNotHere Apr 3 #31

Because the officers who opposed the bombing wnylib Apr 3 #10

In this case, yes. James48 Apr 3 #23

Military force should only be used as a last resort to protect vital national interests, with a clear objective. walkingman Apr 3 #4

How else could tsf lift ruskie sanctions on oil to please pootin? SheltieLover Apr 3 #20

I think there will be more, much more, that will be revealed later... and it'll be shameful and shocking. liberalla Apr 3 #7

And we have abandoned 13 of our military bases in and around Iran because we can't stop the Chinese Botany Apr 3 #8

And moved the personnel to hotels in the nearby towns. TheRickles Apr 3 #9

Would you rather they remain exposed? RetiredParatrooper Apr 3 #13

I'd rather they weren't there in the first place. TheRickles Apr 3 #26

Then SAY that RetiredParatrooper Apr 4 #35

I Never said that. Botany Apr 3 #27

Epstein is directly tied to Israel, not Putin. nt PufPuf23 Apr 3 #30

Putin's name came up over 1,000 times in the Epstein files. Botany Apr 3 #32

So am I MustLoveBeagles Apr 3 #15

Wait, what? TomSlick Apr 3 #12

Gremlins MustBeTheBooz Apr 3 #24

If Gremlins are now armed and have joined forces with Iran, we're in deep kimchi. TomSlick Apr 3 #25

Don't forget the AWAC. Iggo Apr 3 #17

There's no money for healthcare or education or social programs IronLionZion Apr 3 #21

And the congressional Military stock holders (of both parties) are celebrating. LiberalArkie Apr 3 #22

I also saw a report than an F16 was shot down. rsdsharp Apr 3 #28

I saw that too. Today was a quantum leap in Iran's lethal capacity. Maru Kitteh Apr 3 #33