Iran is sending a hell'va alot of weapons into Russia's campaign - Ukraine officials are now blaming Iran of murdering Ukraine civilians

[A.P. Richelieu]

It's not OK for Russia to use Iranian weapons to attack Ukraine.

But it's fine for Ukraine to use NATO weapons to attack Russia.

So basically if Ukraine calls to attack Iran, should Russia attack NATO as well?

Nuclear war?

Just ignore the clown, it gives me a headache.

Be grateful to Russia by just focusing on the East part of Ukraine.

Russia do not have to consider Europe to be neutral in the war, but they have to consider the consequences of escalation.
Ukraine has the same considerations, but the incremental damage that Iran can bring is insignificant. Legally the situation is the same, but practically it is very different.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Russia do not have to consider Europe to be neutral in the war, but they have to consider the consequences of escalation.
Ukraine has the same considerations, but the incremental damage that Iran can bring is insignificant. Legally the situation is the same, but practically it is very different.

well a question , why every one agree they must attack Iran , but no one attack Iran and they are waiting for others to do the attack even if their military budget is several time more than Iran military budget..
the fun fact is that we can launch those shahed toward ukrain from iran , we can launch missile toward Ukraine from Iran , they cant do any such thing

 

[Beny Karachun]

I’m no fan of Iran, but people think Iran is some cakewalk. They can think again. Is Russian misadventure in Ukraine has shown anything it is that age old adage “only a fool underestimates his opponent.”.

It's not that Ukraine is particularly strong, it's that the Russian army is only a shell of what it was portrayed to be.

 

[salarsikander]

Will Occupiers of Palestine do the same and help the Helpless Jewish Clown of the President in the Ukraine ?
Occupiers of Palestine claim to be the formidable force in the Middle East - I wonder when will they send the Weapons to Ukraine to assist their Jewish Brethren from the Clutches of Evil Mozher Russia who are godless people

It's not that Ukraine is particularly strong, it's that the Russian army is only a shell of what it was portrayed to be.

And yet Iran is openly Sending Arms to Ukraine, whereas the Occupiers of Palestine are scared shitless of sending even a single Bullet to Ukraine ?

 

[Beny Karachun]

And yet Iran is openly Sending Arms to Ukraine, whereas the Occupiers of Palestine are scared shitless of sending even a single Bullet to Ukraine ?

We are also bombing Iranian weapon shipments in Iraq, Syria, kill Iranian generals in Teheran, blow up drone factories and nuclear research sites throughout Iran, whereas the Iranians aren't capable of responding with even a single bullet against Israel.

By the way:

This is an Israeli MRAP in Ukraine, no one knows how it got there, probably because Israel works in the shadows.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

well a question , why every one agree they must attack Iran , but no one attack Iran and they are waiting for others to do the attack even if their military budget is several time more than Iran military budget..
the fun fact is that we can launch those shahed toward ukrain from iran , we can launch missile toward Ukraine from Iran , they cant do any such thing

The fact that Iranians consider killing civilians is ”fun” is probably an incentive to do something about it. It is said that revenge is a dish best served cold.

 

[MultaniGuy]

And why should we care?

Let the Europeans fight among themselves.

 

[salarsikander]

We are also bombing Iranian weapon shipments in Iraq, Syria, kill Iranian generals in Teheran, blow up drone factories and nuclear research sites throughout Iran, whereas the Iranians aren't capable of responding with even a single bullet against Israel.

lol, no proof, a random pic of mrp. saying its in ukraine, where as jewis president is bitching on irani support to russia,

 

[Beny Karachun]

lol, no proof, a random pic of mrp. saying its in ukraine, where as jewis president is bitching on irani support to russia,

 

[Sineva]

Once a country decides to abandon their neutrality in favour of one side in a war, they open up themselves to an attack from the other side, which then fights a war of self-defense,
If the other side is fighting a legal war, then attacking the culprit is not illegal.
Russia cannot legally attack NATO for supporting Ukraine, since their war is illegal from the start. Ukraine can attack Iran legally for supporting Russia in violation of neutrality.
Thereis no need for Iran todeclare war for this to happen.
That iran has the legal right to attack Iran does not mean they have to attack Iran.


It was thought that Ukraine could not damage the bridge to Crimea, and yet it is out of operation. Ukraine will get even in a way of their choosing, and at a convenient time.

Ah,no,it doesnt.
Supplying weapons does not make iran a co-belligerent,just like the us initially not being considered to be a party to ww2,despite its massive support to the allies,at least until it formally entered the fight against the axis powers.
In order for the ukraine to have any legal justification to attack iran proper,iran would have to be considered to be a co-belligerent with russia,which it clearly is not.The most that the ukraine could do legally would be to attack iranian arms shipments en route to russia,ie basically an exclusion zone.
The irony here is that I`m sure that iran would`ve been quite happy to sell weapons to the ukraine as well.However,sadly,since it tows the western line on iran [despite the costs to itself] this is just not a realistic possibility.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Ah,no,it doesnt.
Supplying weapons does not make iran a co-belligerent,just like the us initially not being considered to be a party to ww2,despite its massive support to the allies,at least until it formally entered the fight against the axis powers.
In order for the ukraine to have any legal justification to attack iran proper,iran would have to be considered to be a co-belligerent with russia,which it clearly is not.The most that the ukraine could do legally would be to attack iranian arms shipments en route to russia,ie basically an exclusion zone.
The irony here is that I`m sure that iran would`ve been quite happy to sell weapons to the ukraine as well.However,sadly,since it tows the western line on iran [despite the costs to itself] this is just not a realistic possibility.

Delivering arms makes Iran a non-neutral nation.

There is no concept in International Law that covers belligerence or non-belligerence as far as I know. You are welcome to show that I am wrong - with pointers to the treaty.

Non-belligerency relies on the fact that the opposing side might consider it advantageous that it does not take active part in the battles.

Sweden choose to be a non-belligerent nation in the war of aggression started by the Soviet Union in 1939 (The Winter War). That meant that it was not limited to the rules of neutrality, but since the Soviet Union did not want Sweden to send its army to Finland, they refrained from attacking Sweden except a handful of isolated events.

As a non-neutral nation, Iran suddenly exposes a multitude of valid military targets which can be attacked inside Iran as part of a war of self-defense.

 

[Hack-Hook]

The fact that Iranians consider killing civilians is ”fun” is probably an incentive to do something about it. It is said that revenge is a dish best served cold.

we didn't knew its fun , we learned it from the best AKA, NATO, terrorist CENTCOM and Israel .
and its the dish we are serving cold . remember the chemical weapon you gave Saddam, remember the MKO terrorists you harbor and support, remember hundreds n thousands of more enmity you commit against Iran

and its not our problem how Russia use the weapon we send to them . do you guys at NATO ever had problem with for example how Israel use weapons you gave them or how KSA use the weapons you gave them

 

[Messerschmitt]

I never thought of Ukraine as a major arms exporter. I doubt they sold weapons to Iran's enemies unless Pakistan qualifies as one

He might be refering to the Ukrainian Hrim-2 SRBM whose development is reportedly being financed by Saudi Arabia.

 

[Sineva]

Delivering arms makes Iran a non-neutral nation.

There is no concept in International Law that covers belligerence or non-belligerence as far as I know. You are welcome to show that I am wrong - with pointers to the treaty.

Non-belligerency relies on the fact that the opposing side might consider it advantageous that it does not take active part in the battles.

Sweden choose to be a non-belligerent nation in the war of aggression started by the Soviet Union in 1939 (The Winter War). That meant that it was not limited to the rules of neutrality, but since the Soviet Union did not want Sweden to send its army to Finland, they refrained from attacking Sweden except a handful of isolated events.

As a non-neutral nation, Iran suddenly exposes a multitude of valid military targets which can be attacked inside Iran as part of a war of self-defense.

Ah,no,not necessarily.
The US DOD law of war manual clearly points out that "acts that are incompatible with the relationship between the neutral State and a belligerent State under the law of neutrality need not end the neutral State’s neutrality and bring that State into the conflict as a belligerent"

In other words Just because iran may have provided weapons to russia does not make it a party to,ie a co-belligerent to the international armed conflict in the ukraine.

You might want to look under IHL [International Humanitarian Law] 1949 Geneva Convention III

No it doesnt,nor does repeating this claim ad nauseam magically make it so.

 

[hussain0216]

Delivering arms makes Iran a non-neutral nation.

There is no concept in International Law that covers belligerence or non-belligerence as far as I know. You are welcome to show that I am wrong - with pointers to the treaty.

Non-belligerency relies on the fact that the opposing side might consider it advantageous that it does not take active part in the battles.

Sweden choose to be a non-belligerent nation in the war of aggression started by the Soviet Union in 1939 (The Winter War). That meant that it was not limited to the rules of neutrality, but since the Soviet Union did not want Sweden to send its army to Finland, they refrained from attacking Sweden except a handful of isolated events.

As a non-neutral nation, Iran suddenly exposes a multitude of valid military targets which can be attacked inside Iran as part of a war of self-defense.

Cry somewhere else

Western countries are the biggest arms suppliers in the world, you have decades and more of sending weapons to kill innocents across the world and on numerous occasions involved yourselves in wars for profit

Please for fcuks sake stop trying to act moral when your neck deep in blood