Brendan Connelly retweetledi
MAJOR BREAKING: Trump threatens to “obliterate Iran’s Power plants,” at 7:44pm Et on Monday if the Strait of Hormuz is not open.
Here are five reasons why this would be such a horrible move:
First, it would be a major escalation of the war. This is already a highly combustible moment: Trump publicly threatened to “obliterate” Iran’s power plants unless Tehran reopened the Strait of Hormuz within 48 hours, after weeks of U.S.-Israeli strikes, Iranian missile attacks, and a major energy shock tied to the strait’s disruption. Reuters and AP both describe the conflict as already expanded, with Iranian strikes reaching Diego Garcia and southern Israel, and with the Strait of Hormuz still central to the crisis.
Second, Iran would likely retaliate far beyond just the battlefield inside Iran. A strike on power plants would hit core civilian infrastructure, so Tehran would have strong incentive to answer with attacks on U.S. bases, Gulf energy sites, shipping, partner states, and possibly diplomatic facilities. Reuters has already reported Iranian warnings to Gulf energy installations, ongoing attacks on major regional oil and gas facilities, and broader threats tied to Hormuz. The Wall Street Journal also reports increased pressure on U.S. diplomatic missions.
Third, it could create a humanitarian disaster inside Iran. Knocking out major power generation is not like hitting a discrete military target. It can cascade into water treatment failures, hospital disruptions, food spoilage, communications blackouts, fuel distribution problems, sewage failures, and mass civilian suffering. Even if the U.S. framed it as coercive pressure, the real-world effect would likely be to punish civilians broadly. That would invite international condemnation and serious questions under the laws of war, especially if the attacks were viewed as disproportionate or as targeting dual-use infrastructure with predictable civilian harm. The EU has already called for an end to strikes on energy and water infrastructure.
Fourth, it would probably make the global energy crisis even worse, not better. The current war has already driven a historic supply disruption: Reuters reports the effective closure of Hormuz and related attacks have removed massive supply from the market, pushed oil sharply higher, and threatened LNG availability for years. G7 governments are already discussing action to protect energy supplies and maritime security. A U.S. attack on Iran’s electrical grid could push Tehran to make Hormuz even more dangerous, expand attacks on Gulf producers, and harden the crisis rather than resolve it.
Fifth, it would deepen the political blowback at home and abroad. AP reports Congress is already demanding an exit plan and questioning the administration’s legal authority and strategy as the war drags on and costs mount. A deliberate strike on national power infrastructure would intensify those concerns, especially if it looked like mission creep, collective punishment, or a step toward regime-change war without congressional authorization. Allies that support keeping Hormuz open might still oppose turning the war into a systematic attack on civilian infrastructure.
English
