[bluefishinit]

It was an illegal strike:

> An Israeli airstrike carried out within Syria without its consent would be in contravention of Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, which prohibits a state from using force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any other state... Unless Israel were able to justify any airstrike as an act of self-defense, it would be in violation of international law.

[mytailorisrich]

> Unless Israel were able to justify any airstrike as an act of self-defense, it would be in violation of international law.

So... not illegal since hezbollah has been targeting and attacking Israel with Iran's help. Israel is defending itself.

In any case there is no law between sovereign states.

Now, Iran's use of drones to retaliate seems calibrated to avoid a further escalation because it is unlikely that they will cause much damage. But let's see how things unfold as apparently Iran has launched a large number of drones...

[ta1243]

So it would have been legal for the UK to bomb Dublin in the 90s because the IRA was bombing civilians in the UK?

[jazzyjackson]

international law is an oxymoron

[Ajay-p]

In general, or through terrorist organizations? I would say your statement should be expanded: Iran has a history of targeting civilians.

[IAmGraydon]

Please explain how this was used against the territorial integrity or political independence of a state.