We know Mr. Trump well. He is a trustworthy person and will pay attention to the rights of individuals and the people of Iran.

 

 

#stop_attacking_iranian_peoples_Electricity

#US_Congress_US_humanrights 

 #president_Trump_please_dont_attack_irans_Electricity

'#President_DONALD_J._TRUMP

We know Mr. Trump well. He is a trustworthy person and will pay attention to the rights of individuals and the people of Iran.

 

 We ask Mr. Trump not to attack Iranian infrastructure, such as power centers. This is a form of genocide against the Iranian people, and this does not serve the friendship of the nations of the region with the United States. They should consider this. Electricity belongs to the nation, and hospitals, families, and food, everything is supplied by electricity, and electricity belongs to the Iranian people. Please do not attack Iran's electricity.

👇👇👇

 As per Iranian Government request, please let this statement serve to represent that I am pausing the period of Energy Plant destruction by 10 Days to Monday, April 6, 2026, at 8 P.M., Eastern Time. Talks are ongoing and, despite erroneous statements to the contrary by the Fake News Media, and others, they are going very well. Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DONALD J. TRUMP

 

 The United States of America is in serious discussions with A NEW, AND MORE REASONABLE, REGIME to end our Military Operations in Iran.” - President Donald J. Trump

 from other peoples

 So you are publicly threatening a sovereign nation with actions that would very likely constitute war crimes under international law?
We know the iranian regime is a terrorist and anti humanity but 
Targeting critical civilian infrastructure such as electric grids, water desalination plants, and energy facilities is not just “military strategy.” Under the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols, objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population are explicitly protected. Destroying them would foreseeably lead to mass civilian suffering, displacement, disease, and potentially millions of indirect deaths.

This is not ambiguity. This falls under the prohibition of collective punishment and indiscriminate attacks. You are openly stating an intention to cripple an entire population’s ability to access water, electricity, and basic survival needs if political demands are not met.

How is this compatible with international humanitarian law? With proportionality? With distinction between civilian and military targets?

If any other country made this exact statement, it would immediately be labeled a threat of terrorism and a violation of international law. So why is this framed as diplomacy when it comes from the United States?