The Bombing of Iran’s Bridges and Power Plants and the Left’s War-Crimes Outrage

The Democrats are screaming “war crimes” over plans to hit bridges, power plants, etc.

If a deal is not reached with Iran at end of the cease fire then the Commander-in-Chief can do what must be done to change the regime.

Democrats have not read the Geneva Convention nor do they have any idea of historical precedence.

Clinton bombed Yugoslavia for 78 days including taking out all their power plants during the war over Serbia/Kosovo.

He destroyed what was, at the time, the most modern and thriving society in the Balkans and wore out our F-16 fleet and depleted our supply of bombs at same time. He was not accused of committing war crimes.

Rantz: The left’s war-crimes outrage over Trump’s Iran strike is a double standard

BY JASON RANTZ

Talk Show Host and Columnist at Seattle Red

The left has suddenly discovered war crimes. Specifically, they’ve discovered them now that Donald Trump is in the White House ordering strikes on Iranian infrastructure. The outrage would be more convincing if it hadn’t gone mostly quiet during the previous two Democratic administrations that did the exact same thing.

When U.S. military officials justified the strike on Iran’s B1 bridge by describing it as eliminating “a planned military supply route for sustaining Iran’s ballistic missile and attack drone force,” critics immediately reached for the war crimes accusation. That framing is worth examining carefully, because it is precisely the framing Bill Clinton and Barack Obama used when they were bombing infrastructure to rubble and there wasn’t a collective declaration of a war crime by the left.

The legal framework at issue is dual-use targeting under International Humanitarian Law. Infrastructure that serves both military and civilian purposes can be a lawful target if it provides genuine military advantage and the civilian harm isn’t disproportionate to that advantage. Clinton and Obama both invoked it. The international community accepted it both times. Now, suddenly, it’s a novel atrocity?

Clinton bombed Serbia for 78 days — and no one called it a war crime

During NATO’s 1999 air campaign against Yugoslavia, Clinton’s commanders targeted power plants, oil facilities, bridges, factories, and water supplies, all of it civilian infrastructure targeted deliberately and justified as militarily significant because it supported Serbian air-defense and command systems.

The International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia reviewed the entire campaign afterward and declined to open a war crimes investigation. The justification held up. Clinton gave the commencement address at West Point.

The mainstream Democratic left didn’t call it a war crime. They cheered it as humanitarian intervention. Biden was actively lobbying Clinton to bomb sooner. The accountability movement that never materialized is the same one now demanding Trump face a tribunal.

Obama publicly celebrated destroying ISIS energy infrastructure — with no legal blowback

Barack Obama didn’t just strike energy infrastructure; he publicly celebrated the results.

His administration launched thousands of airstrikes against ISIS oil fields, pipelines, and supply lines, pointing to those strikes as proof the campaign was succeeding. The coalition hit facilities that also served civilian populations, because that is the definition of dual-use infrastructure. No war crimes charges followed. No humanitarian outrage erupted across the opinion pages. The legal community accepted the military utility argument and that was the end of it.

Read the full article.

©2026 Royal A. Brown III. All rights reserved.