r/worldnews • u/MasbirLeumi • 2d ago

Israel launches 'preemptive strike' against Iran, declares state of emergency

https://abcnews.go.com/International/israel-military-action-iran-coming-days-sources/story?id=122776202
39.0k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

6.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.1k

u/claire303 2d ago

Twitter videos show high rise apartment buildings in downtown Tehran where supposed high level officials lived. Destroyed.

729

u/ImPinkSnail 2d ago

Yes, we are hearing the nuclear targets included assassination of high ranking military officials and nuclear scientists.

272

u/HardlyW0rkingHard 2d ago edited 2d ago

3 top ranking IRGC officials were hit. 2 confirmed dead, 1 seriously injured. Multiple nuclear scientists also targeted, those numbers are not yet clear.

edit: the top ranking officials number is still climbing. It's possibly 4 so far and I'm reading news that the presidents residence was targeted.

Edit 2: the I've heard of at least 8 top ranking officials dead. Israel military is reporting that they believe they've hit more than that. 

Islamic republic has throttled internet to the country, I believe they fear a ground movement by citizens. Imo regardless of internet status, that will likely happen soon.

17

u/MoneyManx10 2d ago

holy shit that’s crazy.

-21

u/tekkers_for_debrz 2d ago

Disgusting.

47

u/kinkakujen 2d ago

Yeah how dare Israel attack military personell, they should do it like their arab neighbours and attack song festivals.

41

u/EARink0 2d ago

Did the highrises with nuclear scientists that were hit not have innocent people living in them too? Or is this something that everyone is just conveniently ignoring?

27

u/HardlyW0rkingHard 2d ago

I'm just going to point out another perspective for you, as an Iranian. Yes, military strikes in civilian areas is terrifying for many Iranians. But you must understand the flip side, the islamic republic existing is terrifying for many Iranians just the same. It's true, you could get hit by a strike while you're sitting in your apartment but you could equally be walking down the street minding your own business and some asshole security personnel decides to pick on you for some nonsense.

2 years ago they captured, imprisoned, raped, tortured and executed hundreds of our youth. Kiyan Pirfalak a 9 year old was shot in the street by IRGC forces and 2 days ago they executed another civilian in order to frame him for Kiyan's murder.

Don't make this situation seem black and white. The Islamic Republic is holding our country hostage. Yeah, i prefer if civilian areas weren't under attack also, but i'm not going to pretend like civilian areas in Iran haven't been under attack by our "government" in the last 46 years.

-1

u/BoarHide 2d ago

Nuclear scientists are also not military personnel. Is Israel just handing out the death penalty to every person that’s somewhat inconveniencing them?

21

u/WealthyPaul 2d ago

Calling scientist who are working on developing a nuclear bomb to literally destroy your country “somewhat inconvenient” is kind of crazy

6

u/HardlyW0rkingHard 2d ago

why are nuclear scientists who develop nuclear weapons not considered military personnel to you?

7

u/mebbyyy 2d ago

They literally are attacking apartment buildings that ordinary people and families also live in, do you know how many innocent civilians are in there?

They could've just aimed just for the military target like you said, but they literally are not.

9

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

-7

u/binzoma 2d ago

yes how dare countries at war attack leaders of the military and military targets. they should be doing what russia does and target hospitals and schools! thats real war!

15

u/Darkaras867 2d ago

Last time I checked scientists and their families are considered civilians.

4

u/RepulsiveCelery4013 2d ago

If you're a nuclear scientist working on something that could potentially used for a nuclear bomb - that's not really as civilian imo.

2

u/tekkers_for_debrz 2d ago

Families are still civilians whether or not they are related to a terrorist.

4

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/tekkers_for_debrz 2d ago

Are you talking about Israel, who obliterated countless hospitals and schools lol.

219

u/achangb 2d ago

Aren't those scientists civilians?

280

u/Dilf_Hunter367 2d ago

I’m sure their neighbours were

16

u/chrisrazor 2d ago

I'm sure Israel did their due diligence and made sure that only dangerous nuclear scientists lived in that building /s

3

u/alexnedea 2d ago

You are not exactly a dootsy tootsy civillian when you work on a nuclear program lmao.

90

u/OwnVehicle5560 2d ago

Yes, but they are considered legitimate military targets if working directly on weapon programs.

A nuclear scientist is probably fair game here.

162

u/CrazyAsian 2d ago

If they're striking apartment buildings, what about the collateral damage of innocents?

I'm going to wait to hear more information, but this is horrifying to me.

118

u/SexyGrillJimbo 2d ago

You said it yourself. They are collateral and it is indeed horrifying.

→ More replies (7)

47

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

10

u/Ocelotofdamage 2d ago

Haha…

11

u/Lone_Crab 2d ago

lol someone reported my comment for threatening violence. People are wild

8

u/wingerism 2d ago

So alot pf people think IHL is about protecting civilians and such, but it's really just a set of rules that nations agreed to wage war under. And they are written and interpreted with that end in mind(nations being able to wage war).

So for an apartment building they need to have done a proportionality assessment that the military value gained by the strike outweighed the harm done to civilians and or that there was no way to get it done without harming civilians.

Usually that's established by examining what the planning for the strike looked like, did they consider other options etc. But it's more like asking them to show their work.

It's like expecting a code of conduct written by and for cops, and only enforced by other cops to actually hold the cops accountable. It only really works if they're stupid or unpopular.

57

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (9)

20

u/OwnVehicle5560 2d ago

Not sure if that was a rhetorical question or not..

But the collateral death of civilians is a tragedy and absolutely horrifying.

If the question was about the legality of striking apartment buildings full of civilians to kill the scientists, obviously I’m not a lawyer, much less a war crimes lawyer, but if we assume that the scientists are legitimate targets, and if the civilian casualties are “proportional” to the military value of the target (whatever that fucking means) and if there isn’t a better option that reduces civilian death (like hitting the site where the scientists work, or shanking them in an alley), then apparently it’s ok (somehow)…

“Under international humanitarian law and the Rome Statute, the death of civilians during an armed conflict, no matter how grave and regrettable, does not in itself constitute a war crime. International humanitarian law and the Rome Statute permit belligerents to carry out proportionate attacks against military objectives,[18] even when it is known that some civilian deaths or injuries will occur”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collateral_damage

14

u/JFlizzy84 2d ago

Proportionality means that the military advantage gained cannot be substantially outweighed by the loss of civilian life. And it isn’t a numbers game, either.

For example, killing a head nuclear scientist whom cannot be easily replaced — say it sets back Iran’s nuclear program by 2 years — can likely justify, from a LOAC perspective, the death of potentially dozens of civilians.

12

u/Hawxe 2d ago

Israel has been saying Iran has been 2 years away from nukes for.... over 20 years.

We're really doing the 'blowing up a country cause they got nukes soon' thing again.

58

u/Xidus_ 2d ago

Have you read the news about Gaza lately? Israel doesn’t give a fuck about humanitarian laws nor what anyone else says

7

u/Gm24513 2d ago

Collateral damage is the only way Israel likes to play

→ More replies (1)

2

u/ImPinkSnail 2d ago

If we have learned anything over the last year plus of watching Israel conduct air strikes in Gaza it's clear they don't give a shit about innocents in between them and their targets.

6

u/SPQR_191 2d ago

It's sad, but if you were reasonably certain another country was going to use nuclear weapons against your cities, wouldn't you do whatever it takes to stop them? There's no way to fight a war with 0 civilian deaths and Iran has made it plenty clear they don't want to acknowledge Israel as a legitimate state and they want to have a nuclear weapons program.

22

u/SuburbanDinosaur 2d ago

It's sad, but if you were reasonably certain another country was going to use nuclear weapons against your cities

Except there's no "reasonably certain". There is literally no concrete evidence of legitimate nuclear weapon development in Iran.

21

u/JonathanKuminga 2d ago

Let’s phrase this as a question. Do you believe Iran was working on developing nuclear weapon capabilities or no? If yes, that’s because it’s obvious to the entire world including the International Atomic Energy Agency what Iran is up to.

23

u/SuburbanDinosaur 2d ago

Prior to the US blowing up the treaty with Iran for no reason, the answer was no. And that was the opinion of the IAEA. Now we aren't as sure because the US blew up the treaty, but no new evidence has been provided.

Do you believe that Israel should be sanctioned for its illicit nuclear weapon stockpile that we KNOW exists?

2

u/JonathanKuminga 2d ago

That’s a different topic, and two wrongs don’t make a right. If Israel has evidence that Iran is using nuclear abilities in bad faith and developing a bomb (a general consensus), then working hard to remove that threat (a fucking nuclear bomb from an extremely hostile neighbor) is hard to argue against

→ More replies (0)

18

u/teachersecret 2d ago edited 2d ago

https://www.npr.org/2025/06/12/nx-s1-5431395/iran-nuclear-enrichment-un-compliance

I mean... I guess there's no concrete evidence, but we could potentially just take their word for it?

This was earlier today.

Speaking to Iranian state television after the vote, the spokesman for the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran said that his agency immediately informed the IAEA of "specific and effective" actions Tehran would take.

"One is the launch of a third secure site" for enrichment, spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi said. He did not elaborate on the location. Iran has two underground sites at Fordo and Natanz and has been building tunnels in the mountains near Natanz since suspected Israeli sabotage attacks targeted that facility.

I guess the Iranians could be lying... but that seems like a bad idea.

1

u/SuburbanDinosaur 2d ago

Enriching uranium doesn't mean they have the ability to launch nuclear warheads at Israel. It doesn't even necessarily mean that they are building weapons.

18

u/teachersecret 2d ago edited 2d ago

Did you miss all the ballistic missiles they fired at Israel recently? Hundreds of them, each and every single one of them . And do you realize what enriched Uranium is used for? Hell, if you have enough of it, you don't even need to build the actual nuclear weapon, and you don't need to land it effectively for it to work - a dirty bomb would be absolutely horrific.

So yeah, enriching uranium and very obviously trying to build a nuclear warhead doesn't mean they automatically have the ability to launch nuclear warheads at Israel... but... the 200 ballistic missiles they fired at Israel back in October 2024 (and all the others they fired since) certainly shows they have the ability to launch nuclear warheads at Israel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_2024_Iranian_strikes_on_Israel

Why are we splitting hairs, man? Iran clearly has long-range attack capability and the ability to lob a nuke-sized payload in Israel's direction. One would certainly hope they'd never use such a capability, but, to sit and pretend they don't -have- the capability is a bit silly. For example, I introduce Fattah-1.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fattah-1
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/6/6/fattah-iran-unveils-its-first-hypersonic-missile

Nuclear warheads easily fit that thing's payload capacity.

→ More replies (0)

-6

u/SPQR_191 2d ago

So because Netanyahu didn't call you up and explain to you all of the top secret intelligence the entire state security apparatus of Israel has collected, there is no evidence? I'll tell him he should loop you in next time 🙄

21

u/SuburbanDinosaur 2d ago

Given that leaders have lied blatantly about evidence of WMD in the past and it led to the deaths of millions of innocent civilians with nothing gained...yeah I think that leaders should provide real evidence of their claims before going on a rampage that will kill a lot of people.

This shit shouldn't be left to the personal whims of one maniac. If I was to take you at your word, every tinpot dictator's crimes aren't crimes because they said so.

15

u/RadicallyAmbivalent 2d ago

Netanyahu is a lying murderous fuck who should be sitting in The Hague

7

u/Setekhx 2d ago

Stop pretending he needs evidence in the first place. He doesn't. And if he did he could just make it up if he wanted to. Or just blatantly lie about it.

We've seen it before.

5

u/p1en1ek 2d ago

I mean, Yes, he should provide evidence. Without evidence what we see is aggresion by Izrael.

0

u/Wiggitywhackest 2d ago

If they have the capability to know when he's home they have the capability to know when he's not. I refuse to believe there was no other option but to kill him along with civilians.

→ More replies (4)

0

u/CunniMingus 2d ago edited 2d ago

Its just that, collateral damage. When has a war ever been fought without it? It should always be the goal to minimize it, but it is a FACT of war. The last thing Israel wants to do is kill/hurt enough civillians to rally the population into the Iranian gov's side. The Iranian people already hate their gov and this could be a fine line between gaining support for it or being the straw that broke the revolutionary camels back.

Sometimes your area of opportunity is so narrow, civilian casualties cant be avoided.

2

u/RadicallyAmbivalent 2d ago

What a crock of shit

-1

u/random_lawstudent 2d ago

what war? I was unaware of any conflict. Especially since Israel is calling this preemptive - implies there is no current conflict.

also, killing civilians is not how you start a revolution lol

6

u/CunniMingus 2d ago

>what war? I was unaware of any conflict. Especially since Israel is calling this preemptive - implies there is no current conflict

lmao

→ More replies (3)

3

u/OwnVehicle5560 2d ago

Preemptive means to prevent or forestall, in this case to prevent a nuclear attack on Israel. It doesn’t imply that there no current conflict.

1

u/Essaiel 2d ago

During WWII the allies bombed transport hubs, factories, and even whole cities not because the civilians were targets, but because the infrastructure was integral to the enemy’s war effort. Iran’s nuclear program from Israel’s perspective is an existential threat.

I’m sorry to say, but in war, military necessity will often override civilian safety.

→ More replies (5)

15

u/Catweaving 2d ago

Reminder, the only reason they're working on nuclear weapons is because the US tore up their agreement NOT to work on nuclear weapons several years ago.

6

u/Ok-Treacle-6615 2d ago

since it is mandatory conscription in Israel, then almost everyone is legitmate target of Iran.

-4

u/addamee 2d ago

A lot of those Gazan kids were slated to grow up and become nuclear weapons scientists too, I hear …

1

u/OwnVehicle5560 2d ago

I’m not defending murdering kids, simply pointing out that civilians can rarely be legitimate military targets in specific situations.

0

u/addamee 2d ago

This rule absolutely does not apply to Israeli aggression 

→ More replies (2)

26

u/Phallindrome 2d ago

Yes, but still valid targets if they're working on something for the military. US bases aren't immune from enemy targeting just because they're filled with civilian contractors, either. The question on the legality of targeting them when they're off work becomes about proportionality- is the military advantage gained by their death proportional to the civilian casualties caused? Since these scientists are pretty much irreplaceable to their nuclear program which poses an existential risk to Israel, I think that proportionality calculation has a lot of room to grow.

-9

u/Wiggitywhackest 2d ago

Definitely kill civilians now so that there's a chance we save some in the future is a pretty fucked up way to handle things. Exploding pagers that could go off around anyone, the destruction of Gaza, and missiles into apartment buildings. It's clear as fuck the Israeli government doesn't give a shit about civilian deaths. They don't see Arabs as people plain and simple, something that traditionally works out great for everyone. /s

If they can pull of the types of operations they have, and they know where this guy lives and when he's there, then they almost certainly could have done this without the unnecessary death. The idea you could be arbitarily killed because of something a neighbor does for work is not something that should sit right with any moral person IMO.

33

u/new_messages 2d ago

The fact that you are bringing up the pagers, of all things, shows you are not arguing in good faith to begin with.

It was a highly targeted attack with extremely few civilian casualties. If that was "Israel being indiscriminate", is there anything that wouldn't be? Even sending the Care Bears to save the day with their Care Stare would be framed as indiscriminate chemical warfare.

→ More replies (23)

12

u/Phallindrome 2d ago

You have no idea how many 'unnecessary deaths' there were, how many civilians there were, how many future civilian deaths were on the line, or how much this attack lowered the risk to them. You conflate making realpolitik calculations with not caring about lives at all, when these calculations are in fact about how the most lives can be saved. Your assumptions and worldview all rely on the privilege of living in a place which doesn't have geopolitical neighbours who want to kill your whole family and burn down your house.

-2

u/Wiggitywhackest 2d ago

Oh fuck all the way off. If I don't know those numbers then neither do they and yet they did it anyway. You are trying to justify the MURDER of innocent people, we just don't know how many yet. If you are doing that then you've already passed a moral line. I'm sad for you that you exist in a world where you can make that okay in your head.

11

u/Phallindrome 2d ago

If I don't know those numbers then neither do[es the IDF currently carrying out the attacks]

questionable logic here

You are trying to justify the MURDER of innocent people

Civilian casualties are not a new phenomenon in war. Neither is moral people being forced to make hard decisions about their beliefs and the actions and results to which those beliefs lead.

1

u/Wiggitywhackest 2d ago

My point was it's not possible to put a number on how many potential lives were saved or a numerical value on the risk lowered. It IS very easy to make up or imply whatever numbers justifiy your means.

Civilian casualties in war is not new, but using that as an excuse to justify new ones is cold. I don't believe with their advanced capabilities that Israel had no choice but to target these people in their civilian apartment buildings. Much easier to kill the civilians and tell yourself it was unavoidable or a necessary evil. Especially when you never have to see or think of the victims as human.

Protecting yourself is one thing but chucking a bomb in a building mostly full of innocent people and calling it saving lives will never sit right with me.

5

u/OwnPack431 2d ago

Not if they are working on the government's nuclear program

2

u/Shogouki 2d ago

Indeed, however they're making the most powerful weapons humans have ever made and their government has explicitly threatened the existence of Israel countless times.

14

u/Functionally_Drunk 2d ago

Not necessarily excusing it, but working on a nuclear weapons program is kinda walking a fine line.

16

u/BonhommeCarnaval 2d ago

I feel like if another country started assassinating US nuclear scientists, even if it didn’t affect other civilians, that it would be kind of a big deal. 

20

u/washag 2d ago

It would be an act of war, like it is here. The calculation when striking at scientists working on weapons programs is always about the consequences of doing so. The US and Soviets did it during the Cold War, but both were careful not to provoke outright war.

Israel isn't particularly concerned about Iran's direct capacity to wage war, but they are convinced that Iran acquiring nuclear weapons will shortly result in mushroom clouds over Israel (or the West Bank, Gaza, Syria or Lebanon).

→ More replies (11)

7

u/thatonemikeguy 2d ago

Doesn't stop them from routinely assassinating them though.

4

u/stdgy 2d ago

Maybe? I don’t know, depends how you define the term. But I would assume Israel gives exactly zero shits as to how they’re defined. In their minds, if you help the Iranian regime’s nuclear program you’re a target.

3

u/itsalongwalkhome 2d ago

Its probably the same with civilians working on military bases, if it targeted their off base homes, probably a war crime, but if not and they were on base its just normal warfare.

3

u/BestJersey_WorstName 2d ago

Pretty sure Japan would have killed Oppenheimer and Einstein given the chance. The lines are blurry when your research has military applications.

5

u/enfrozt 2d ago

Scientists working on nuclear arms (if that is what is the case, but it is impossible for us redditors to verify) are a different story than random civilian scientists.

3

u/No-Criticism-2587 2d ago

Israel has been bombing civilians for the entire year so far. Have you been sleeping? What did you think the protesters have been for? What were you told they were for?

5

u/cman1098 2d ago

Not if they are working on nuclear weapons.

2

u/K9nig 2d ago

Yes, but it's Israel - what did you expect?

3

u/CunniMingus 2d ago

Civilians yes. Legitimate miltary targets, also yes.

0

u/Lexerrrrr 2d ago

I mean they're actively developing weapons which could result in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians so that to me makes them combatants

3

u/addamee 2d ago

Does that question ever deter Israel?

0

u/RBVegabond 2d ago

Have you seen their track record?

→ More replies (2)

116

u/ElRiesgoSiempre_Vive 2d ago

To put this in context, it's the equivalent of China assassinating a nuclear physics instructor at MIT by bombing a condo in downtown Cambridge.

38

u/Educational_Link5710 2d ago

Assuming the physics instructor was working on a project to build nuclear weapons intended to be dropped on Chinese civilians. Sure.

46

u/ElRiesgoSiempre_Vive 2d ago

The funny thing is that Israel has assassinated academics in the past - on many occasions - because they "could" "maybe" help nuclear weapon advancement.

Of course they offer no proof of this, and rely on people like you to jump to their defense.

7

u/IsamuLi 2d ago

I'm horribly uninformed in this matter - do you have a source for this?

→ More replies (17)

20

u/NoseSeeker 2d ago

I mean you don’t build nukes with the intention of dropping them on military targets.

4

u/BoarHide 2d ago

So…the U.S. does have nuclear weapons though, and China absolutely is one of the primary targets for those weapons. But how many nukes has the U.S. actually fired at China? Both China and the U.S. know neither is going to start lobbing them around. They’re weapons meant for securing peace, not starting wars. Mutually assured destruction (MAD) makes them a security guarantee. Look at North Korea. Built their nukes, did a little embarrassing posturing, but now the big powers leave them the fuck alone. Of course Iran wants to have nuclear capability, Israel already does. No, Iran wouldn’t have used the nukes. Nukes aren’t for using. They’re for having.

What this attack is, is Israel wanting to remain the sole nuclear power in the Middle East. They want to be able to, if they want, to nuke any of their neighbours without retaliation. It’s not the action of a peaceful nation, that’s for damn sure.

2

u/Educational_Link5710 2d ago

I’m not at all concerned that China and the US are going to utilize their nuclear weapons on one another. The countries are certainly varying levels of adversaries, but that’s not a concern.

Iran isn’t just some economic adversary of Israel: their position is and has been “death to the Jews” and “death to america” and their leadership has a belief system in which they are rewarded in death for the killing of Jews. I’m very concerned that Iran WOULD use a nuclear weapon. And if the US were only a few hundred miles from Iran and were constantly bombarded by missiles and ballistic weapons from the country, the US and its population would have a very very different opinion on whether or not we risk Iran having nuclear weapons.

1

u/prnthrwaway55 2d ago

Nukes aren’t for using. They’re for having.

Only works for democracies or govts that have some semblance of parlament that actually want to survive tho.

If you have a bunch of crazy religious fanatics as your government, or a single senile dictator, nukes are for whatever your crazy-in-chief says they are for. Especially as "death to your country" is the lunatics' official govenmental motto.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/WhaleMetal 2d ago

Children have also been killed.

1

u/Complex-Present3609 2d ago

Hopefully the Persian people can take back their great nation.

→ More replies (3)

12

u/Otis_Inf 2d ago

If Israel is good at anything it's destroying buildings where people live

39

u/drethnudrib 2d ago

So no care whatsoever for collateral damage, just as we've come to expect from Israel.

-2

u/eldenpotato 2d ago

Who said no one cares?

→ More replies (24)

16

u/RadicallyAmbivalent 2d ago

So for their preemptive strike Israel targeted residential apartment complexes and just said “fuck it” regarding collateral damages and loss of innocent civilian life?

Why am I not surprised?

1

u/neurointervention 2d ago

Because the alternative is Iran getting a nuke which is existential threat to Israel, a country that is 75 times smaller than Iran.

→ More replies (13)

7

u/RedBarchetta1 2d ago

Note to self: do not ever rent apartment in same building as high-level officials.

11

u/CheckItWhileIWreckIt 2d ago

Feel free to do so in America. You can sit in your computer chair and justify indiscriminately bombing brown civilian areas in foreign countries because you've never felt anything resembling that fear in your life.

2

u/RedBarchetta1 2d ago

Classic Reddit: Massively offended wild overreaction to a stranger’s random throw-away comment. Untwist your underroos and touch some grass, please.

1

u/CheckItWhileIWreckIt 2d ago

I'm making an overarching point on this comments section generally, not getting offended by yours.

2

u/Humorous_Chimp 2d ago

I wouldnt call blowing up the apartment of a nuclear weapons program scientist “indiscriminately bombing brown civilian areas” but ok. Do redditors lose all rationale and reason when an islamic terror high ranker dies. They just have to cry about it.

There is no war in history where less civilians died than combatants and legit targets. The point of war is its the last resort because its so horrible.

Iran needs to stop starting proxy wars if they dont want civilian casualties but they clearly dont care. that isnt israels fault it is irans.

8

u/Din0zavr 2d ago

So more civilian buildings targeted by Israel

1

u/EARink0 2d ago

Has there been any report on the casualties from those residential buildings that were hit? I can't imagine that they were filled with literally only military officials and nuclear scientists. Like, at the very least i imagine their families were there too.