In the early hours of March 4, 2026, in international waters off the coast of Galle, Sri Lanka, the USS Charlotte, a Los Angeles–class nuclear-powered attack submarine, closed in on the IRIS Dena, a new Iranian Moudge-class frigate.
Submerged, the Charlotte fired a heavyweight, acoustic-homing torpedo at the hull of the Dena. It missed. It fired another. It connected. The periscope footage of the attack was released by the United States Department of War. It shows the shockwave of the torpedo fracturing the Dena’s hull and sending its helicopter flight deck metres into the air.
Within seconds, what was left of the Dena was plummeting to the depths of the Indian Ocean, carrying at least sixty of its crew of 180 to their deaths.
Some moments later, an email was sent from US Indo-Pacific Command to Sri Lanka’s maritime rescue agency. Twenty miles from Galle’s coast, a ship is in distress. Sri Lanka immediately engaged a search and rescue effort that included its air force and navy. The surface of the sea contained clues that a vessel had been attacked and had likely been sunk. But it was not clear whether the attack had come from above or below. They were able to rescue thirty-two sailors, and recover the bodies of eighty-seven others, many of whom had mysteriously broken legs.
The Charlotte had long vanished like an apparition beneath the waves.
This was on the fifth day of the US–Israeli war on Iran, 2,000 nautical miles from the immediate conflict zone.
I hope you were being sarcastic and not an ignorant monster.
I hope you are being sarcastic and not an ignorant monster.
The war is evil. But a military ship is legally a valid target. The lying characterization that a warship is not a valid target is what we object to. We don’t like liars.
An attack on an unarmed vessel during a ceremonial voyage 2000 miles from the illegal war… yeah no. Not a valid target. Just another war crime to add to the pile.
Might as well say that that school full of little girls is a valid military target because they might join the military someday. Just a really, really fucking stupid comment you made.
You are literally allowed to shoot fleeing soldiers, under the Geneva Conventions. I agree that the war itself is illegal, but under the laws of war it was a valid target. Please stop saying false things because they feel “truthy” to you.
You’re allowed to shoot unarmed soldiers you say?
Dang sure sounds like the unarmed soldiers 2000 miles from the illegal war were hors de combat to me, but what the fuck do I know? I’m just someone who values human life above the whims of a pedophile traitor but I assume you’re not bothered by such concerns?
None of those in that list are fleeing soldiers, which is the case I listed. You are obviously incapable of reading comprehension, so it is meaningless for me to reply further.
Oh dang yeah that ship really was fleeing that International Unity Celebration, you sure that doesn’t count? 🤣
Where does it say that being hors de combat is only fleeing soldiers?
Dang, man, you might just be really fucking stupid.
Under the definitions laid out in the IHL, which are taken directly from Geneva Convention Protocol 1, they were not hors de combat. This was a shameful, cowardly act - but it was not a war crime.
Contrary to you I don’t justify war crimes.