I doubt anyone here works in defence materials sciences and like the rest of the world would be 49/51 regarding voting intention. I've never voted for a pro war party fwiw but if I'd been of an age, I would have called ww2 a just cause war.

This isn't a just cause and it's not even a war. It's state sanctioned terror. I don't know it has ism in it.

Australian legal opinion says it's unlikely a credible defence in international law exists for this attack. It may redefine the norms for (un)lawful acts by the state, other states, weak and powerful will undoubtedly reflect on this.

It's also being claimed a success. Words like "obliterated" used. Time tends to tell a story there. I think it's a little too soon to say how successful these strikes were, tactically or strategically.

> Australian legal opinion says it's unlikely a credible defence in international law exists for this attack.

The international community has known for a while that USA and Israel are both belligerent nations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court#U...