Does the US president risk breaking the rules of war with threats against Iran?

President Trump’s latest posts on Truth Social demand Iran reopen the Strait of Hormuz or face the destruction of its bridges, power plants, and desalination facilities by Tuesday. The message includes insults calling Iranian leaders “animals” and boasts about sending the country “back to the Stone Age. ” When pressed on whether these threats cross legal lines, Trump pointed to Iran’s recent crackdown on protesters, claiming its leaders have killed thousands in the last month. Legal experts warn that mass attacks on civilian infrastructure could violate international war laws. Under the rules of armed conflict, a target must contribute directly to military operations and offer clear strategic value. Destroying entire networks like power grids simply to pressure a government would likely fail this test. Past US strikes in Iraq and Serbia used precision weapons to avoid long-term damage, but Trump’s threats suggest much broader destruction.Some of Iran’s own attacks on energy and water systems in neighboring countries have also raised concerns about deliberate harm to civilians. While international courts exist to prosecute serious violations, neither Iran nor the US accepts their authority. Still, any country could theoretically bring war crime charges against officials involved in illegal attacks. Trump’s shift toward collective punishment—punishing civilians for government actions—mirrors rhetoric used by Israeli leaders during the Gaza war. Describing opponents as animals has been a tactic to justify severe measures. Yet history shows that bombing a population rarely forces leaders to surrender, especially when they’ve shown they’ll use extreme force to stay in power. So far, Trump has mostly avoided hitting Iran’s power grid, but recent strikes on a bridge and petrochemical plants suggest a change. The question now is whether cooler heads in the military will block reckless orders. The Strait of Hormuz remains Iran’s strongest bargaining chip, and threatening total destruction may only push its leaders to dig in deeper.