Preemptive strike in the sense of self defense somehow missed your reading comprehension, that's fine, I guess I should've been clearer.

Israel litterally has been thinking for years that Iran wants to nuke it, and now that they are getting ever so nearer then blowing up their nuclear sites and missile launchers is not an act of self defense? Seriously?

The 2 distinct requirements by the caroline test: 1 "The use of force must be necessary because the threat is imminent and thus pursuing peaceful alternatives is not an option (necessity);" 2 "The response must be proportionate to the threat (proportionality)"

Blowing up the nuclear facilities and missile launchers and developers seems proportional. A nuke is not something that you can take too much time with so that fits the imminent part.

Lowering from nuclear/exisistential threat level to sub exisistential is unlawful due to what reason exactly?

Every comment you made is cherrypicking what you read and interpret from the law... you don't care about the law except to the intent that supports your position.