Hacker News Reader

Comment by mrtksn | Hacker News Reader

First footage from the area doesn't appear to show any extended damage, so maybe it was all a show.

Regardless, a sovereign country was bombed tonight just because they can. This, IMHO, can have very bad outcomes for the peace worldwide since it means that anybody who can bomb someone can just go ahead and do it. No more international order.

What's next then? Bomb Brussels because EU doesn't buy chicken from USA? This stuff isn't OK.

The regime change in Iran can be a silver lining if it changes with something more cooperative. But yes, I agree that this is unlikely.

View on HN

to be fair what you see is 6 bombs points of entry, you don't know what happened to the underground compound.

From what I gathered from OSINT types, they have breached the ventilation shafts above the centrifuge halls

> Regardless, a sovereign country was bombed tonight just because they can.

The dictatorial nature of Trump's order to attack a nation is far more concerning. Supposedly the US requires an act of Congress to authorize this sort of operation. Sidestepping congress underlines US's descent into totalitarianism and one of the very first acts crystalizing a dictatorship.

An act of Congress is not required for the first 60 days.

The way the world works these days m 60 Days is enough for the president to unilaterally get us into war with literally every country on the planet.

This president has clearly exposed the unarticulated parts of out laws which is supposed to make them work; The hope that the president will essentially act and interpret them in “good faith”

Congress and the US in general has had plenty of time to adjust the powers of the president as US naval, air, and communications capabilities have increased.

not doing so is approval of the change in the president's power to initiate and wage war unilaterally without congressional involvement

> a sovereign country was bombed tonight

IRGC isn’t a sovereign country, it’s a designated terrorist organization

You forgot that IRGC already directly attacked Israel twice in 2024 [1,2], and that’s not including countless proxy attacks and terrorist acts, culminating in October 7th massacres & atrocities

You got it wrong: IRGC attacked and Israel retaliated

US is just helped a little bit their ally

> This stuff isn't OK.

UN, ICC, ICG, etc. all became a $hit show, they don’t work. For 40 years IRGC threatened with Genocide of Jews, and they did nothing. Now when Jews retaliated: * This stuff isn't OK.* ;)

—-

1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_2024_Iranian_strikes...

2. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_2024_Iranian_strikes_o...

huh? iran definitely has a sovereign government. just because you dont like it doesnt make it not true.

Substance over form

De facto vs de jure

Pedantic rule-based systems are easy to circumvent with loopholes and lacunas. That’s why we should look at the substance and not merely a [legal] form

Examples:

- form: a cryptocurrency, but substance: an unregistered security

- “medical alcohol” during dry laws / Prohibition

- “medical marijuana” & patients vs drug users

- etc.

—-

Was Third Reich[1] a “sovereign government” or a front for The National Socialist German Workers' Party?

Was USSR a “sovereign government” or a front for a Communist Party?

Is Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) a “sovereign government” or merely a front for IRGC[2]?

And wasn’t Iran/Persia already a “sovereign government” before IRGC staged a coup d'état (aka “revolution”)?

—-

> "De facto" and "de jure" are Latin terms used to distinguish between what exists in reality and what is legally recognized. "De facto" refers to something that exists in practice or reality, even if not officially established or legally recognized. "De jure" refers to something that is legally recognized or officially established

——

1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Germany

2. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Revolutionary_Guard_...

So China isn't a sovereign government because it's a front for CPP and can be bombed at will...?

If any entity threatens u: u have 3 options: fight back, surrender, or self-destruct

In the first case, u have 2 more options: strike pre-emptively, or wait for them to strike & then retaliate

It doesn't matter what the entity is, it only matters whether they are enemy or not

——

> So China is not a sovereign state because it is a front for the CPP and can be bombed at will...?

I don't see the logical connection here. I never wrote that countries controlled by terrorist or authoritarian entities should be bombed at will. I wrote that some countries are highjacked by them, & if they attack or declare their intention to attack u, u may as well do it first

The amount of "oh of course we just have to kill them all" I am seeing online in the past day is horrifying.

Attacked Israel as a response to something?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com