> The argument has been made that Stuxnet was self-defense, but anticipatory self-defense, which makes it a valid use of force. But that is open to debate, beca

> The argument has been made that Stuxnet was self-defense, but anticipatory self-defense, which makes it a valid use of force. But that is open to debate, because depending on stance made, Stuxnet’s usage could be seen as justifiable defense given Iran’s statements of hostility, or as an act of war against Iran itself. So... basically Stuxnet is an illegal act of force iff this argument is unsound? Isn't that the case with any use of force?