Trump has given Iran a 48-hour ultimatum to open the Strait of Hormuz, saying that if they don’t open it, the US will “obliterate” Iran’s power plants. I didn’t think Trump could appall me anymore, but by now I should have learned to expect anything from this Huge Floating Turd (HFT).

I suppose I feel so strongly about this because it’s exactly what Putin has been doing in Ukraine. In Ukraine, such actions have been described as war crimes. Now, attacking energy infrastructure isn’t always a war crime. After all, a plant producing explosives, drones, or anything else needs energy, and the plants providing that power can play an obvious military role. However, the opening article of Part IV of the Protocol Additional I to the Geneva Conventions reads as follows:

Article 48 - Basic rule In order to ensure respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, the Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives.

Russia has claimed it is attacking Ukraine’s energy infrastructure because of its contribution to Ukraine’s military effort. Now, the HFT and his minions have repeatedly claimed that Iran’s military capability is destroyed and that its industry is well on its way to being obliterated:

"Soon and very soon, all of Iran’s defense companies will be destroyed." "For example, as of two days ago, Iran’s entire ballistic missile production capacity—every company that builds every component of those missiles—has been functionally defeated and destroyed."—Hegseth, March 13th.
"We have already destroyed 100% of Iran’s military capability."—HFT, March 14th.
"We are winning, and Iran is being decimated." "Iran’s missile and drone arsenal is being massively degraded and will be destroyed." "What we’re destroying now are the factories that produce the components to make these missiles and the nuclear weapons they’re trying to produce."—Netanyahu, March 20th.

So, what is the military justification for destroying power plants?

For the sake of fairness, I should point out that the US did not ratify the aforementioned Protocol Additional I to the Geneva Conventions. You can read the letter the White House sent to the Senate explaining why ratifying it was deemed inconvenient. To save you the trouble of opening it, here’s the bulk of the text:

In key respects, Protocol I would undermine humanitarian law and endanger civilians in war. Certain provisions, such as Article 1(4), which grants special status to "armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination," would inject subjective and politically controversial standards into the applicability of humanitarian law. Protocol I also elevates the international legal status of self-described "national liberation" groups that practice terrorism. This would undermine the principle that the rights and duties of international law attach principally to entities that have those elements of sovereignty that allow them to be held accountable for their actions and the resources to fulfill their obligations.

Equally troubling is the easily inferred political and philosophical intent of Protocol I, which aims to encourage and give legal sanction not only to "national liberation" movements in general but in particular to the inhumane tactics of many of them. Article 44(3), in a single subordinate clause, sweeps away years of law by "recognizing" that an armed irregular "cannot" always distinguish themselves from non-combatants; it would grant combatant status to such an irregular anyway. As the essence of terrorist criminality is the obliteration of the distinction between combatants and non-combatants, it would be hard to reconcile ratification of this Protocol with the United States’ announced policy of combating terrorism.

We recognize that certain provisions of Protocol I reflect customary international law, and others appear to be positive new developments. We therefore intend to consult with our allies to develop appropriate methods for incorporating these provisions into rules that govern our military operations, with the intention that they shall in time win recognition as customary international law separate from their presence in Protocol I. This measure would constitute an appropriate remedy for attempts by nations to impose unacceptable conditions on the acceptance of improvements in international humanitarian law. I will report the results of this effort to you as soon as possible, so that the Senate may be advised of our progress in this respect.

And here is a further quote from the closing of the letter:

The effort to politicize humanitarian law in support of terrorist organizations has been a sorry development. Our action in rejecting Protocol I should be recognized as a reaffirmation of individual rights in international law and a repudiation of the collectivist apology for attacks on non-combatants.

I copied all this here to make it clear that the US was not taking issue with the obligation to distinguish between civilian objects and military objectives or with the statement that attacks on civilian objects are forbidden. And now this HFT is threatening to do just that.

And why? Simply because he went into a situation without any plan, when he should have known better—everyone suspected what would happen once this all started. Even an idiot like me thought the Strait of Hormuz would be closed. Anyway, now that the HFT finds himself in a mess—largely of his own making, and without knowing how to spin anything resembling a victory—he’s stopping at nothing. First, he insists in every way that the US doesn’t need help from anyone and doesn’t want countries joining in once the war is won. Then, he basically orders other countries to send boats into Hormuz. Then, he goes so far as to threaten the dissolution of NATO if they don’t comply. Next, because gas prices rise in the US—something entirely predictable—he lifts the sanctions imposed on Russia over the Iran war. The Russians are reportedly offering to share information with Iran if the US stops sharing information with Ukraine. Given the HFT’s sense of loyalty, honor, and decorum, I’m just waiting for that to happen. And after Iran attacks an LNG factory in Qatar in retaliation for an Israeli attack on the gas field that produces a huge part of the energy Iran uses for domestic consumption, Trump is now saying, “Either you give me my win, or the US will commit war crimes.”

Clearly, the people in the Iranian government are fucking crazy fanatic murderers, and everyone would open champagne to celebrate if they were gone. For a while, Israel appalled me. I guess I was naive enough to expect some basic level of morality, but by now I’m resigned—much like one is resigned to the warring camps in Sudan being amoral criminals. In Israel’s case, it pains me more because, unlike Sudan, it’s a democracy. That means a lot of people vote for and support what Israel has been doing in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, and now Iran—including many people I know. And believe me, this pains me.

As for what the US does or doesn’t do under the HFT’s direction, I don’t blame Americans. The war against Iran seems pretty unpopular, even among Trump voters, and ultimately, it goes against everything the Huge Floating Turd campaigned for. But what the US is doing is burying any trust and moral authority it had. Who knows what will happen in Iran, whether the bombing of the power infrastructure will occur, whether Hegseth’s calls for no quarter will have any effect, or whether the US will betray Ukraine even further. But it will be hard to forget it all. Yesterday, I wrote about vulnerability, trust, and friends, saying at one point that if somebody does something that hurts me or has the potential to hurt me and then expresses contrition—and if that contrition feels heartfelt and proportional to what happened—I tend to consider it all as water under the bridge. Man will the US have to show contrition for all this to be water under the bridge.