US-Approved Air Strike Kills Iranian Military Commander Soleimani

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

This...could get messy. Trump ordered an air strike that killed the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, Qasem Soleimani, as well as Abu Mahdi al-Muhanis, the head of the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces. The latter is of concern due to the PMF being recognized in 2016 as an independent military force that answers directly to the prime minister.

The real concern, however, is that this air strike was ordered by President Trump, without the approval of Congress. Given the potential ramifications of this action, such as the risk of sparking off a war, that could become a major issue. I hope this doesn't lead to a war, but if it does...well, people who have been speaking out against Trump said that he would lead us into another war, so they'll have vindication, at least.

Source: CNN [https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/02/middleeast/baghdad-airport-rockets/index.html]

 

[Kwak]

Was he the target or did he just happen to be there?

 

[Baffle]

If I'm honest, I'm not up on the global war situation, but is it normal practice to order air strikes on the airports of countries you aren't technically at war with?

 

[Nedoras]

Was he the target or did he just happen to be there?

The Pentagon confirmed that he was killed in the strike but didn't specify that he was the target. However...come the fuck on. Right now government officials are literally celebrating his death and claiming that the people of Iraq are happy that he's dead. Even if they're not directly saying it, they're still fucking saying it. Right now they're fully dragging out the same playbook they used to sell the Iraq war almost twenty years ago. It's incredible. They're going right down the fucking checklist and it's amazing to watch. Amazing in a way that sickens me to my fucking core. And the SAME fucking people from back then are currently making the same rounds they did twenty years ago saying the same shit on TV. It's like I was thrown in a fucking time machine.

Will this lead to all out war though? Doubtful...for now anyway. Iran doesn't exactly want open conflict at the moment. They're suffering from all manner of internal problems, and an open war with the States isn't going to be on the table right now. They're definitely going to respond, but I don't think they're going to be as bold. There is going to be escalation though, and one thing can lead to another. It depends more on what the US does though, as the White House is fucking screaming for an open conflict with Iran and has been for quite some time. They'll say and do whatever they need to do in order to justify it. Even if that means pretending that it's 2002 again.

 

[warmachine]

I'm seeing many signs the US public want a war with Iran.

 

[Agema]

Was he the target or did he just happen to be there?

He was obviously the target. Arguably, not without some moral legitimacy - he's the commander of Iran's external operations and thus bears responsibility for a lot of insurgency and terrorism in the Middle East (including, with respect to the USA, the deaths of US servicemen).

Nevertheless, assassinating the personnel of foreign governments and militaries outside a state of war is a big deal. Under exactly the same rationale, other countries can feel free to take pot shots at the Secretary of State, head of the CIA, etc. who are ultimately responsible for decisions leading to the deaths of those countries' citizens.

Will this lead to all out war though? Doubtful...for now anyway. Iran doesn't exactly want open conflict at the moment. They're suffering from all manner of internal problems, and an open war with the States isn't going to be on the table right now. They're definitely going to respond, but I don't think they're going to be as bold. There is going to be escalation though, and one thing can lead to another. It depends more on what the US does though, as the White House is fucking screaming for an open conflict with Iran and has been for quite some time. They'll say and do whatever they need to do in order to justify it. Even if that means pretending that it's 2002 again.

I might be being very optimistic here, but I have a hard time believing the USA can substantially attack Iran without a clear and direct justification or provocation. I suspect such an order would have a serious cost in domestic support for the party that ordered it: hostility to unnecessary overseas engagements is significant in both parties.

What I suspect we're seeing here is more the USA deciding to openly engage its opponents on their level, a continuing erosion of the international norms that the USA has stood for (and to a large extent set up) in the postwar era. Who needs suicide bombers when you have high tech surveillance and drones?

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

Well, there will surely be no negative consequences to this particular action. Nope, no negative consequences whatsoever.

 

[Trunkage]

If I'm honest, I'm not up on the global war situation, but is it normal practice to order air strikes on the airports of countries you aren't technically at war with?

Imagine if Iran uses a drone to bomb LAX to kill a current four star general. Or Prince Charles at Heathrow (since he is technically leader of the armed forces). What would you call that?

The other part of the issue is that this guy, Sulemani, is very well liked. He's be asked to run for president but keeps refusing, stating he's just a simple solider. He's been desperate to become a martyr for deades and now he's got his chance.

 

[Agema]

I'm seeing many signs the US public want a war with Iran.

Polls suggest otherwise.

Repulican voters are significantly more gung-ho than Democrat voters, but for a president that likes the idea of war with Iran, still ultimately lukewarm. Apparently ~60% of Republicans are open to military action Iran to prevent its nuclear program (as a last resort). That could be shifted upwards a bit by ramping up rhetoric, threats and tensions, but it's worth bearing in mind the anti-war minority can feel very strongly about it and the Republicans don't have a lot of margin for error at the moment.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

All he had to do was not supremely shit the bed for one more fuckin' year. Great start to the decade, eh?

All I have to say is that if Canada even slightly considers jumping on this, I'm finding the nearest protest and mailing my representative and making the biggest fuss I can.

I'm going to spend the rest of the day trying to forget this is happening, and hopefully, it won't have started a war by the time I poke my head back up.

I might be being very optimistic here, but I have a hard time believing the USA can substantially attack Iran without a clear and direct justification or provocation.

*cough* IRAQ WAR *cough*

I suspect such an order would have a serious cost in domestic support for the party that ordered it: hostility to unnecessary overseas engagements is significant in both parties.

This is the only hope I've got. That enough people will be against this war that it will basically destroy the GOP.

...Then again, all Trump has to do is say "it was Iran's fault, they started it" and like a third of the country will go "YEAH, YEAH THIS WAS A GOOD WAR!!!" and the media will equivocate instead of pushing back, and there goes all the momentum against them. :s

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

I might be being very optimistic here, but I have a hard time believing the USA can substantially attack Iran without a clear and direct justification or provocation. I suspect such an order would have a serious cost in domestic support for the party that ordered it: hostility to unnecessary overseas engagements is significant in both parties.

I wish you were right, but we're dealing with the Trump Adminstration. "I'll say it's true. I'll tell you to believe me. And that is now the Truth of the matter. Don't believe your lying eyes"

Trump on Solemaini: "He should have been taken out many years ago!" [https://www.cnn.com/middleeast/live-news/baghdad-airport-strike-live-intl-hnk/h_2434833535dac3d2fb02d50c7695ff43]

President Trump tweeted from Mar-a-Lago this morning about the death of Qasem Soleimani, claiming that the general "was plotting to kill many more" Americans and he "should have been taken out many years ago."

Trump added that Iranians "are not nearly as saddened as the leaders will let the outside world believe."

The White House has issued a lunch lid until 1:45 p.m. ET, meaning we won't see the President before that.

[tweet t=https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1213096352072294401]

And to your further point. [https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/pelosi-says-trump-carried-out-strike-iranian-commander-without-authorization-n1109831]

The strike in Iraq was directed by President Donald Trump and killed Qassem Soleimani, the commander of Iran's secretive Quds Force, the Defense Department announced Thursday night.

The move, which is likely to provoke retaliation from Iran, comes amid heightened tensions between the Trump administration and Tehran over rocket attacks aimed at coalition forces in Iraq. U.S. officials have said those attacks were likely carried out by Iranian-backed militias with links to the Quds Force.

"Tonight's airstrike risks provoking further dangerous escalation of violence. America - and the world - cannot afford to have tensions escalate to the point of no return," Pelosi said in a statement late Thursday.

The strike was carried out without an "authorization for use of military force" against Iran and without the consultation of Congress, the speaker said.

"The full Congress must be immediately briefed on this serious situation and on the next steps under consideration by the Administration, including the significant escalation of the deployment of additional troops to the region," Pelosi said.

There's only one person making the decisions here. Not the United States. The sad part is... he represents the United States, as it were.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I might be being very optimistic here, but I have a hard time believing the USA can substantially attack Iran without a clear and direct justification or provocation.

*cough* IRAQ WAR *cough*

They pretended 9/11 was down to them, and the US hadn't been fighting a long a pointless war for a while. I don't think people will be quite so eager this time. Sure, a lot of them will be, but not so many.

 

[Satinavian]

I might be being very optimistic here, but I have a hard time believing the USA can substantially attack Iran without a clear and direct justification or provocation.

They kinda just did it.

Really could you say that was not an act of war ? That the US and Iran are still at peace ? That the Iranian actually believe that ? It is a bit out of fashion to actually declare wars nowadays.

So far it is low intensity, but let's wait for the retaliation.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

I might be being very optimistic here, but I have a hard time believing the USA can substantially attack Iran without a clear and direct justification or provocation.

They kinda just did it.

Really could you say that was not an act of war ? That the US and Iran are still at peace ? That the Iranian actually believe that ? It is a bit out of fashion to actually declare wars nowadays.

So far it is low intensity, but let's wait for the retaliation.

This is a horrible aside, but I feel it's necessary.

I fucking Hate Trump. I feel he should be impeached. I Fucking hated George W. Bush. I never felt like he should be impeached. I just grinned and bared it because while I didn't agree with most of his actions, they never seemed harmful or done out of malicious intent. We can say the Iraq War, but it was done out of retaliation of 9/11 and 'faulty' intel that was disproven years after the conflict.

Trump harms the safety of the world. This can easily be Iran's Archduke Ferdinand. And the cavalier and disgusting way that Trump puts it in his stupid twitter feed does nothing but rankle me, and I'm still American. I can't imagine how other people view it.

Forget the how good the Economy is doing, Trump is unfit to wield the power he throws around when the mood suits him.

The best thing of his Presidency is that we will forever have a template of how not to be a President.

 

[tstorm823]

Nevertheless, assassinating the personnel of foreign governments and militaries outside a state of war is a big deal. Under exactly the same rationale, other countries can feel free to take pot shots at the Secretary of State, head of the CIA, etc. who are ultimately responsible for decisions leading to the deaths of those countries' citizens.

I'm not entirely convinced that's a bad thing. I heard a politician on the radio say this, that we don't kill their political leaders so they won't target ours, and it struck me as the most cowardly thing I've ever heard. "Well, it's important that we leave the people creating the violence alone and just slaughter their subordinates because we don't want them to come after our decision makers. Perpetual war is a fine consequence for keeping our politicians quarantined from any repercussions."

 

[Avnger]

If I'm honest, I'm not up on the global war situation, but is it normal practice to order air strikes on the airports of countries you aren't technically at war with?

This is the equivalent of Syria assassinating one of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff or the Secretary of Defense at the Mexico City airport as a "terrorist" for our support of Syrian rebels.

 

[Chimpzy_v1legacy]

How quaint, I seem to vaguely remember Trump once accusing Barack Obama of wanting to start a war with Iran in a desperate bid to save face and ensure his re-election.

Wait no, he totally did [https://twitter.com/RiegerReport/status/1212928617518419968]. And [https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/141604554855825408]. Not [https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/255784560904773633]. Just [https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/260421157201784832]. Once [https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/379717298296086529].

 

[Avnger]

Nevertheless, assassinating the personnel of foreign governments and militaries outside a state of war is a big deal. Under exactly the same rationale, other countries can feel free to take pot shots at the Secretary of State, head of the CIA, etc. who are ultimately responsible for decisions leading to the deaths of those countries' citizens.

I'm not entirely convinced that's a bad thing.

So you'll be volunteering to be on the front lines then, right?

 

[Avnger]

Oh, looks like we're already sending the first wave of young men and women to die for Trump's ego-necessitated war. So much for pulling out of the Middle East...

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/u-s-sending-thousands-more-troops-mideast-after-baghdad-attack-n1110081

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

Oh, looks like we're already sending the first wave of young men and women to die for Trump's ego-necessitated war. So much for pulling out of the Middle East...

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/u-s-sending-thousands-more-troops-mideast-after-baghdad-attack-n1110081

I feel (much like the Imperium who worship the God-Emperor r/Donald "jokingly" refers to the President as) many in the Cult feel a sense of warmth and pleasant sensations in their chest knowing that sacrifices will be made to appease their Emperor.

But while the thousands of Psykers a day are needed to keep the God-Emperor in the realm of 40K, Trump needs to have people like him.