Instead of doing some investigative journalism and telling us whether the U.S. torpedo strike that sank an Iranian warship was legal "under the rules of war," ABC News is instead reporting that the attack "raises questions" about the attack's legality. After all, it was in international waters.
The sinking of an Iranian warship Tuesday by a U.S. submarine thousands of miles from the war zone in international waters raises questions about whether the attack was legal under the rules of war.
— ABC News (@ABC) March 6, 2026
Read more: https://t.co/Igt6EkdCNR pic.twitter.com/5M5aSErxUN
Chris Boccia and Luis Martinez report:
The sinking of an Iranian warship Tuesday by a U.S. submarine thousands of miles from the war zone in international waters raises questions about whether the attack was legal under the rules of war.
Military law experts said the Iranian ship, which was in the Indian Ocean in international waters off Sri Lanka, would have been a lawful target had the U.S. declared war. The fact that it hasn’t done so makes the issue a murky one.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi called the attack an “atrocity.”
"The U.S. will come to bitterly regret precedent it has set," he said.
"Experts" say it raises questions.
No, it really doesn't.
— Stephen Green (@VodkaPundit) March 6, 2026
The only people raising this question are morons and the mainstream media.
— Bonk (@BonkPolitics) March 7, 2026
The Venn diagram of these two groups has the entirety of the latter contained inside the former.
Does Iran funding every terrorist group they possibly can to attack the west count as “legal under the rules of war”?
— Tim Young (@TimRunsHisMouth) March 6, 2026
No, it doesn't. It doesn't raise any questions about legality. It doesn't matter where an enemy warship is. It's an enemy warship.
— McCallum (@BK_McCallum) March 6, 2026
Are you back to publishing Iranian propaganda again?
— Mike Derscher (@MDerscher) March 6, 2026
Nope. Complete fantasy from ABC. Maybe they should hire better interns?
— Tedward Stickel (@StickelTedward) March 7, 2026
No, it doesn't. What else you got?
— Goldens Rule (@retiredgolden) March 6, 2026
Just so we’re clear, you’re uncertain whether sinking an enemy WAR ship might be a war crime?
— Yanny (@yanikmtandere) March 6, 2026
No actually it's quite clear that it's fine. The only people raising questions are activists and cry babies
— Patrick Seven (@Patrick98109645) March 6, 2026
You guys may need to study up on what a Navy actually does.
— Jon, No H 🇺🇸 (@jmt29609) March 6, 2026
What kind of Iranian ship was it again?
— Shut It Down. Goodnight. (@ShutItAIIDown) March 6, 2026
You should definitely file a complaint...somewhere. I'm sure someone will do something about it.
— Diogo20Pups (@PleasantPups) March 6, 2026
It absolutely doesn't. A surface warship (note the use of the word "war" in that name) is a fair target anywhere except in a neutral port under the protection of being interned there, and thus out of the fight.
— AGuyinTexas (@a_guyin) March 6, 2026
There are no "rules of war" unless a superpower decides they exist and somehow convinces its enemy to adhere. Fantasy at best. There is no such thing as a fair fight. Next.
— CesspoolSwimmer (@CesspoolSwimmr) March 6, 2026
Clickbait from a US news organization propping up a global terror regime, just incredible.
— Josh Zampich (@JoshZampich) March 6, 2026
Where do these rules of war say that you have to wait to be attacked until you can strike? No one in the comments thinks this "raises questions."
***