Israel's preemptive attack is legally, morally and diplomatically justified.
Watch the Dershow on Youtube, Rumble, Spotify and Apple to see what I have to say about the attacks.
Discussion about this post
No posts
© 2025 Alan Dershowitz
Substack is the home for great culture
PREAMBLE: International law involves concept analysis beyond Dershowitz's propagandistic competence. He has no moral standing for analyzing morality. Though never even indicted, Dershowitz is generally known by large numbers of Americans as a pedophile rapist personally linked for 20 years to the notorious pedophile blackmailer and Israeli intelligence spy Jeffrey Epstein. Dershowitz protected and enabled Epstein's criminality against children, keeping law enforcement at bay for decades while 250 kids according to AG Bondi were being raped and trafficked. Dershowitz was specifically accused of participating in the Epstein pedo gang, multiple underage children accusing him of nonconsensual pedophilic rape. Scared, he influence peddled a corruptible US District Attorney for a secret immunity.
Dershowitz's unawareness of the Federal Victims Rights Law resulted in the immunity being judicially revoked. Efforts to get alibi evidence or any concrete basis for refutation of the rape allegations have failed. Finally there has been a comprehensive still-ongoing cover up of pedo- related events and involvements, including Dershowitz's activities with Epstein. Speculation from Elon was that the President was entangled. The aim of the pedo organization cover up is obstruction of production of evidence relating inter alia to Dershowitz's activity. This obstruction is facilitated by standard tactics of Dershowitz and the Epstein Estate: connecting any compensation or stopping lawfare to Non-Disclosure Agreements. Briefly stated, Dershowitz's past contaminates any relevant legal analysis, as does his patent prejudice.
LEGALLY JUSTIFYING RECENT ISRAELI ATTACKS ON IRAN: This involves interpretation of relevant international law: the UN Charter, Article 24 (threats and use of force against territorial integrity or political independence), and Article 51 (on use of force in self-defense), and any relevant Customary International Law.
For the Jewish State to be legally justified in attacking Iran, the criteria of self-defense under Article 51 need to be fulfilled given the absence of an authorizing Security Council resolution.
* was there an armed attack by Iran or its proxy?
* was an attack imminent and unavoidable under the doctrine of anticipatory self-defense.?
(this doctrine is not expressly authorized by the UN Charter but is constantly invoked by USA
and Israel)
If self-defense is invoked, any military response must be
* necessary---there were no viable peaceful alternatives
* proportional- - in proportion to the threat faced.
This legal analysis requires a reasonably objectively based thought process obviously incompatible with Dershowitz's histrionic narrative-based presentations in which relevant facts are routinely disregarded, hidden or fictively manipulated. Legal justification requires that the conditions of Articles 24 and 51 are met, the threat was real and imminent and the response was proportionate,
*
That it is fine, as long as they dont ask for us to help them.
Learn to fight your own battles. We are not your daddy. We are not your brother. We are not your ally. We are just a country trying to survive too.
No more convulted foreign entanglements. Leave the UN. Leave NATO. Let Europe and Israel sink or swim. It is not 1948 anymore. If you have a problem with Iran, deal with it yourself.