Reactions to Trump's Targeted Killing of Quds Leader Soleimani

Idiot wind, blowing every time you move your mouth
Blowing down the backroads headin’ south
Idiot wind, blowing every time you move your teeth
You’re an idiot, babe
It’s a wonder that you still know how to breathe

That's what I think of Donald Trump's decision to take out Iranian Quds Force leader Qassim Soleimani and Iraqi militia commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes. What's next? [More...]

Life During Wartime (Talking Heads)

This ain't no party, this ain't no disco
This ain't no fooling around
No time for dancing, or lovey dovey
I ain't got time for that now

Back to the news: The American Embassy in Iraq has asked all Americans to leave the country.

“Due to heightened tensions in Iraq and the region, the US Embassy urges American citizens to heed the January 2020 Travel Advisory and depart Iraq immediately. US citizens should depart via airline while possible, and failing that, to other countries via land,” it said in a statement.

Iran's response:

“The US terrorists and their vassals must wait for a crushing response and severe revenge from the offspring of Imam Khomeini and noble Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei,” Brigadier General Pakpour said on Friday.

Protesters in Iran burned U.S. flags.

Once again Trump in all his narcissistic infamy steals the stage to deflect attention from his own misdeeds -- this time impeachment.

I expect lots more opinions like this one found somewhere on Twitter to pop up:

It’s easy for the US to be the biggest warmongers in the modern era when the war never reaches their shores. The total disregard for human lives on their part is disgusting beyond belief.

We need to get out of the Middle East and let them fight their own battles and control their own destinies.

In the meantime, WWIII is trending on Twitter (with enough funny tweets to warrant a look)

"Anybody got any questions?" (last line of the the Talking Heads video, which by the way, is great fun to watch)

< Giuliani's Son's Cushy Golf Job at the White House | Golden Globe Awards 2020 >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Two more airstrikes tonight (5.00 / 4) (#1)
    by Towanda on Fri Jan 03, 2020 at 10:23:50 PM EST
    against Iran by the U.S. No explanation as yet as to why, when the explanation for the first strike was to take out the second- highest leader there, and that mission was accomplished.

    Maybe someone at Mar-a- Lago or in Moscow know shy . . .  since we now know that, although Congress was not informed, Trump told his buddies at  Mar-a-Lago and in the Kremlin.  Ahead of time.

    His buddies, with that insider info, must have made a lot of money in the market on defense sticks. A membership perq.

    As citizens observing and reacting (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by KeysDan on Sat Jan 04, 2020 at 12:03:35 PM EST
    to Trump's order to assassinate Soleimani, a high ranking official in a country we were not at war with, it is important to remember what we have learned through our own life's experience: if someone has been proved not trustworthy, it is wise not to trust him.

    Trump brings to this crisis a presidential record of lying--on matters large and small--size of crowds, Alabama weather drawn with a sharpie, on and on. Indeed, that Trump is lying is a good default assumption. The lack of credibility at times like this, is among the consequences of Trump's demonstrable character flaws. And, as expected, the lack of trust is part and parcel of his Administration.

    Pence attempted to blame Iran for 9/ll, saying that it assisted travel to Afghanistan "for 10 of the 12 terrorists" who caused the 9/ll attack. Pence's lie was easily detected, since there were 19 terrorists, 15 of which were Saudis. Pence needs more lying lessons from his mentor. And, of course, Saudis are Sunnis. Iranians are Shite. It seems that many in the Administration do not know Shia from Shinola.

    And, up is down. Pompeo claims the assassination to be a "de-escalation."   And, then there is that secret intelligence. It stopped an imminent attack. Although, it has not been explained how killing Soleimani disrupted the attack and saved the day.  The Deputy Commander of Quds has already picked up where Soleimani left off. With a little experience his old boss will be "looking up" at him with pride.

    The Iranian general was the world's worst bad guy, although most Americans never heard of him before his ungainly departure. But, apparently, he is well-known, and long-known, for his devastating asymmetrical warfare.

     Therefore, the timing for the action at this point, is a question. Trump has been impeached by the House of Representatives for abusing foreign policy in the service of benefiting his own political position. So, it would not be out-of-bounds to be skeptical or to ruminate about less than noble motivations. It is all so confusing, if the assassination is retaliation for the US Embassy demonstrations, it would seem to have been more the work of Iragis, Baghdad being in Iraq, not Iran.

    While Trump's action seemed more capricious and precipitous and did not engage in the roll-out of Bush and Cheney, the pattern may be repeating itself--you say Iraq, I say Iran, just a letter difference.  It was WMDs, and Rumsfeld knew right where they were..north, south, east, and west.  Hans Blix, Sccott Ritter, and Mohamed ElBaradei, UN and IAEA inspectors said no WMD. The infamous yellowcake from Niger, was known as a forgery, but showed up in Bush's State of the Union. And, those aluminum tubes. All we need now, is a new NYTimes article on bad guy Soeimani by Judith Miller and we will feel as if we are at home, once again.

    Exactly. (none / 0) (#14)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 02:14:59 PM EST
    To underscore what you're saying, let's first listen to then-White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer's bull$chiTT from 2003:

    Fleischer: "Once the Iraqi people see that Saddam Hussein and those around him will be removed from power, they will welcome freedom, they will be a liberated people."

    Then, let's remember that the resultant Iraq War ultimately cost the lives of nearly 5,000 Americans and approximately 125,000 Iraqis, although estimates of the latter number may vary.

    Finally, let's fast forward to last Friday to listen to current Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and realize that 17 years later, neocon Republicans have clearly learned nothing from that experience:

    Pompeo: "I saw last night there was dancing in the streets in parts of Iraq. We have every expectation that people not only in Iraq, but in Iran, will view the American action last night as giving them freedom."

    MSNBC weekend host Joy Reid was absolutely right this past Saturday to suggest that those Bush White House alumni who are currently defending Trump's decision to assassinate Gen. Soleimani have no credibility and "might want to sit this one out."

    Further, we should note that Trump has now upped the ante by threatening to destroy Iran's Persian cultural heritage sites. In that regard, I would point out that the willful desecration or destruction of a country's sites of cultural significance is not only classified as a war crime by the United Nations and the Geneva Convention, it is also expressly prohibited by federal law. See Sec. 5.18, Law of War Manual, Dec. 2016 ed., pages 293-312 (U.S. Department of Defense).



    Speaking (none / 0) (#15)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 03:19:31 PM EST
    of war crimes and people with blood on their hands, everybody conveniently forgets this little gem
    a generation ago, America's military and intelligence communities knew about and did nothing to stop a series of nerve gas attacks far more devastating than anything Syria has seen, Foreign Policy has learned.

    In 1988, during the waning days of Iraq's war with Iran, the United States learned through satellite imagery that Iran was about to gain a major strategic advantage by exploiting a hole in Iraqi defenses. U.S. intelligence officials conveyed the location of the Iranian troops to Iraq, fully aware that Hussein's military would attack with chemical weapons, including sarin, a lethal nerve agent.


    Trump's constant projecting... (none / 0) (#20)
    by leap on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 06:01:01 PM EST
    The real deal $h!†-hole country is the USA.

    I (none / 0) (#21)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 06:19:54 PM EST
    would wager that Cheney and Rumsfield have a higher body count than Solemeni's. Why do they hate us?

    That is the question that the compliant press is afraid to ask.


    Along with the backstory (none / 0) (#22)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 06:27:22 PM EST
    Of the Carter era hostages Trump is "avenging".  And that it flowed directly from the bloody Shaw and who put him in charge.

    The (none / 0) (#23)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 06:41:56 PM EST
    Savak were a nasty piece of work, set up and "advised" for years by the CIA. Why do they hate us?

    Random thought (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 12:40:46 PM EST
    The Iranians are kind of famous for hacking and digital attacks.  

    Soleimani: US federal site hacked with pro-Iranian message

    Just thinking that since Trump has so recently and honestly bragged about being happy to take oppo research from a foreign, even hostile, government it would be pretty smart for the Iranians to present us and the world something like, say, Trumps tax returns.

    It would be a great petard to see his sorry azz hoisted on.

    So in other words, (5.00 / 4) (#24)
    by Zorba on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 07:02:33 PM EST
    "Iran, if you're listening, show us all his tax returns."

    Or not even tax returns (none / 0) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 12:43:56 PM EST
    The stonewall has produced a reservoir of stuff to produce.  

    The mind boggles.


    Or this (none / 0) (#11)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 01:27:29 PM EST

    An Iranian government official seemed to suggest that President Trump's properties could be potential targets in retaliation for the US targeted killing of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani.

    Hesameddin Ashena, who is an adviser to Iranian president Hassan Rouhani, tweeted a link this Saturday to a Forbes article that lists many of Trump's properties in America and Europe, including Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

    works for me. (none / 0) (#13)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 01:42:37 PM EST
    Enticing at first bounce, (none / 0) (#16)
    by KeysDan on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 03:26:53 PM EST
    but not really something to welcome.  Those Trump properties are peopled not only with guests, but also, with hard-working, low wage housekeeping, gardening, and other hospitality service staff.  Staff who, surely, have much to bear just working for Trump.

    The Iranians are smart and if their anger does not get the best of them, they might achieve their objectives with non-violent cyber-sabotage---e,g. Internet interference crippling credit card charging, daytime sprinkling on the links.  Of course, just the Iranian threats to the properties are likely to impact occupancy rates.  

    And, too, Trump would try to cheat insurance companies, or after he realized insurance would not cover due to "acts of war", he will try to lay the bill on US taxpayers.

    Trump has brought us to this point with his reckless, risky and irresponsible "alternate diplomacy"---assassination of a country's top military and political.leader.  Certainly, Saddam rivaled, if not out-distanced, Soleimani in the bad guy department.  His inelegant demise did little or nothing to advance regional stability and peace.  Indeed, look what it has and continues to reap.


    This was my first thought (none / 0) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 03:30:27 PM EST
    Iranian threats to the properties are likely to impact occupancy rates.  

    Hard to believe it would not.


    I (none / 0) (#18)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 03:51:16 PM EST
    think the Iranians just incresed the occupancy in his mind, though.

    I guess the (none / 0) (#19)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 04:02:54 PM EST
    Iranians know that making him go under financially could be about the worst thing that could happen to him.

    With Trump threatening (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 01:37:18 PM EST
    To bomb civilians and cultural sites I saw a statement from an Iranian official saying they will not target civilians.  That their war was not with the American people but the military.  So they would hit military targets.  And Trumps golf courses, I guess.

    Putting aside how seriously you might take that assurance it's pretty striking that it's the kind of thing we, as a country, used to say.  Before we started tweeting about bombing cultural sites.

    The only thing (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by CST on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 09:25:23 PM EST
    That may prevent the worst case scenario at this point is that the Iranians are the adults in the room.

    Pompeo has now (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by KeysDan on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 09:14:47 PM EST
    Indicated that he will not return to Kansas to seek the Republican primary nomination for US Senate.  Apparently, no need to leave his position as Secretary of  State now that he, along with his fellow Dominionist, Pence, have had their way with Trump and are realizing their Iranian fantasy.  

    Putin is not the only one who has pegged Trump as a useful idiot.  Trump seems to be fitting in well with the Pompence agenda.

    The first thing I noticed... (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by Jack E Lope on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 12:01:20 PM EST
    The first thing I noticed when hearing from any of the Drumpf apologists in radio and TV interviews was that they'd claim an imminent danger - thus justifying quick action by The Orangeident - followed by a list of reasons spanning years, any of which could have been presented to Congress for authorization to act.   This morning, I hear that Drumpf was presented a list of assassination candidates - which makes the "imminent danger" posed by any particular person on that list seem even less likely.   It sounds as if the President first decided to hit an Irani, then requested a menu.

    On another note, it appears to me that there are more people showing up at anti-US protests in Iran than attended the most-recent inauguration of a US President.

    After I had posted that... (none / 0) (#44)
    by Jack E Lope on Wed Jan 08, 2020 at 11:44:10 AM EST
    I did seek out (on various forums) comments that compared the attendance at Soleimani's funeral/memorials to the mostly-empty DC Mall on 20th January 2017.   I found them, so I had no need to post them.

    Those comments resulted in a flood of gentle and well-reasoned responses.

    I'm kidding, of course, about the nature of those responses - but not the volume.  I am amazed at how many trolls popped out from under that bridge.


    Yes, it seems like (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 02:38:53 PM EST
    a Keystone Kops operation without the talent and planning of Mack Sennett.  The killing of Soleimani is being justified by an imminent threat to American lives, but there is no reason to believe that.

    There has been no credible or consistent reason or explanation, more an attempt at showing a retrospective way that the action was right and urgent.  From Pompeo's flailing around for a reason or the grounds for the action, it appears that he is deploying justification in the theological sense of declaring or taking righteous action in the sight of God.

    As Michelle Goldberg claims (NYTimes, January 7), there is the influence of rapture-mad Iran hawks like Pompeo, citing the WaPo reporting that Pompeo and Pence have been pushing for a hit on Soleimani for months.  And, too, there is Pompeo's interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network, when the Secretary of State agreed with the interviewer that God might have sent Trump to save Israel from the "Iranian Menace."

    The reporting that military officials who presented Trump with a bizarre Goldilocks menu were "flabbergasted" when he picked the most extreme, is downright reckless, if not insane. If doubt still exists about there being plenty of insanity to go around, US forces sent a letter saying they were withdrawing from Iraq, followed by a statement that they were not withdrawing from Iraq.

    The Pomppence influence as well as Esper's vision of Raytheon sales dancing in his head, were probably just icing on Trump's beautiful chocolate impeachment cake.

    This is all prelude.. (none / 0) (#35)
    by desertswine on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 04:18:48 PM EST
    to some imminent offensive action about to take place.  Very disturbing.
    Operation Let's Kill Us Some Muslims.

    The root source of Iranian animosity ... (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jan 08, 2020 at 01:53:09 PM EST
    ... toward the West can be directly traced to "Operation Ajax (U.S.) / Operation Boot (U.K.)," when the mutual desire of the United States and the British Empire to dominate Iran's oil resources and its vital strategic position in the middle East led the CIA and MI6 to plot and implement a successful military coup against the democratically elected government of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh on August 19, 1953.

    Instead, the Mosaddegh government was replaced with the absolute monarchy of Shah Reza Pahlavi, who proceeded to repress and brutalize his own country over the next 25 years. Not surprisingly, the Iranians have never forgotten any of this. They came to bitterly resent the perpetual American interventions in their internal affairs, the unequivocal U.S. support for the Shah's regime, and our generally contemptuous posture toward their people and culture.

    As many of us who were around 40-plus years ago well remember, this smoldering indignation eventually exploded into righteous outrage and culminated in the violent popular overthrow of the Shah in 1978-79, whose dictatorial rule gave way to the present-day Islamic theocracy that was led at the time by the late (and virulently anti-American) Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

    Khomeini's own longstanding hostility toward the United States found perfect synergy with his people's desperate desire to cast off the choking yoke of Anglo-American corporate interests. The subsequent 444-day seizure of the U.S. Embassy and American diplomatic hostages in 1979-80, the deadly truck bombings of the the U.S. embassy and Marine Corps barracks in Beirut in 1983, the multiple kidnappings and assassinations throughout the Middle East, etc., are all consequences of this sad and tragic history.

    In turn, those unfortunate events led to two other contemporaneous and crucial U.S. policy decisions that were, to be perfectly blunt, acts of war by proxy -- our massive military and intelligence support for Saddam Hussein's devastating war of aggression with Iran (1980-88), in which an estimated 600,000 to 800,000 Iranians lost their lives, and our political and military cover for Israel's disastrous invasion of Lebanon in 1982.

    Frankly, I think it can be said with confidence that the late Gen. Soleimani's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps would likely have never come into being, were it not for the U.S.-backed Iraqi invasion of Iran in 1980. Likewise, Hezbollah would similarly not exist but for Israel's U.S.-supported invasion two years later and its subsequent 18-year occupation of much of southern Lebanon.

    Further, Washington's conscious failure to acknowledge and comprehend these very real contemporary historical drivers of the Islamic Republic's current behavior -- in which a pervasive ignorance of relevant (and often inconvenient) cultural knowledge and history dominates the stated views and opinions of most of our politicians and news media personalities -- is arguably the primary factor in our present-day difficulties with Teheran.

    History is the story of actions and consequences. It can only tell us about mistakes made in the past, about the illusions and delusions that motivated policymakers, and the ideologies and ideals that often underscore the good, bad and self-interested acts of peoples and governments. And while knowledge of that history can inform our future, it cannot predict it.

    Suffice to say, therefore, that the current drive to war with Iran is motivated by the same willful blindness that brought us the recent and still-ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will end only when the politicians who are responsible for this fiasco, along with their advisors and funders, are made to pay a serious penalty for their recklessness and stupidity.


    Interesting (5.00 / 3) (#47)
    by FlJoe on Wed Jan 08, 2020 at 03:58:40 PM EST
    more than a furrowed brow here
    Conservative Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) blasted the Trump administration on Wednesday for their "unconstitutional" briefing on why President Donald Trump assassinated Iranian General Qassim Suleimani.

    CBS News reporter Kathryn Watson described Lee as "ANGRY."

    "It's un-American, it's unconstitutional, and it's wrong," Lee said.

    Senate and House (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jan 08, 2020 at 05:13:37 PM EST
    Republicans may find that Trump and his enablers are not just contemptuous of Democratic members but of the institution itself.  

    Threats of war crimes (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 05, 2020 at 07:10:56 AM EST
    Isn't it?

    Let this serve as a WARNING that if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets, we have.....

    ....targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran &  the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!

    They have said their response will be against military sites.

    And then it should end.  Raise your hand if you think that is how it will go.

    They have said if we do this they have 300 sites targeted.

    I am creeped out and appalled at the giggly vacuous reporting of this on CNN.  as usual on CNN.

    Trump has couched his threats as revenge for the Carter era hostages.  You just know his bitter jingoistic mouth breathers will love this.

    This just looks worse and worse.

    Which is, as I said, Trumps goal.  I really wish I did not think it could work for him.

    Clearly the "Sunday shows" (none / 0) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 05, 2020 at 07:15:30 AM EST
    Are going to raise my blood pressure to dangerous levels.  Can't do it.

    Going back to the comfort of streaming a creepy series about a psychotic mass murderer


    Trump is nuts.. (none / 0) (#5)
    by desertswine on Sun Jan 05, 2020 at 11:38:25 PM EST
    He threatened Iraq with sanctions like they've never seen before since their parliament voted to expel US forces.

    "We have a very extraordinarily expensive air base that's there.  It cost billions of dollars to build, long before my time.  We're not leaving unless they pay us back for it."

    "If they do ask us to leave, if we don't do it in a very friendly basis, we will charge them sanctions like they've never seen before ever.  It'll make Iranian sanctions seem somewhat tame."

    The president had a football game on the television affixed to the wall.

    25th amendment now please.


    Still nuts... (none / 0) (#6)
    by desertswine on Sun Jan 05, 2020 at 11:51:50 PM EST
    President Trump claimed Sunday that his tweets are sufficient notice to Congress of any possible U.S. military strike on Iran, in an apparent dismissal of his obligations under the War Powers Act of 1973.

    I am waiting for dear leader to proclaim himself el presidente for life.

    Not trump (none / 0) (#7)
    by jmacWA on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 04:45:44 AM EST
    I am waiting for dear leader to proclaim himself el presidente for life.

    I don't think he'll do it himself.  He will send out one of his toadies to break the news to it.  I am sure they are arm wrestling now to see who gets the honor


    If his tweets meet that legal requirement, (none / 0) (#31)
    by Jack E Lope on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 11:59:38 AM EST
    ...tweets also prove his intent to commit war crimes.

    I mean, more than may have already been committed.


    Note to those (none / 0) (#8)
    by KeysDan on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 08:31:18 AM EST
    "Adults in the room", e.g. Mark Esper, Secretary of Raytheon  and  Mike Pompeo, Secretary of End Times.  Following orders is no defense to war crimes.  Giving, following or relaying orders to commit war crimes are also war crimes.

    Bolton (none / 0) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 09:39:51 AM EST
    If Bolton says he will respond to a subpoena and the senate republicans say, as they so far are saying, no Bolton here's my question.

    Why doesn't Nancy subpoena him.  Will he say he will only respond to a body controlled by republicans?  If so, let him do that.

    If you believe the reporting Lev has probably given them enough to have more hearings anyway.

    I'm (none / 0) (#28)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 10:09:03 AM EST
    sure she is gaming out that scenario right now. There are probably advantages both ways but I suspect keeping the ball in McConnel's might still be her preferred course at the moment, Bolton's ploy has certainly increased the pressure on him.

    On the other hand I don't trust Bolton one bit, I think he would trade lying tRump out of trouble for his lifelong dream or war with Iran, the timing of all this seems to indicate Bolton is certainly using it as leverage.

    On the other other hand Bolton must be nervous that his precious war would be ruined by an incompetent coward. Stay tuned.


    I'd be perfectly (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Zorba on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 10:19:37 AM EST
    happy to parachute Bolton into Iran.  He wants war, let him go fight it himself.

    What (none / 0) (#30)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 10:29:18 AM EST
    and lose his chickenhawk status?

    Trump just now (none / 0) (#33)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 01:46:02 PM EST
    "He would know nothing about what we are talking about"

    It seems like Mitch will (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 06:50:01 PM EST
    Possibly keep his cats in a herd enough to start the trial with no guarantee of witnesses.  The senators in question are saying they will allow the process to start.

    This seems like a face saving thing to me.  Mitch can look like he is not completely owned by Nancy knowing he probably can't stop witnesses, probably including Bolton, from ultimately being called.


    It's (none / 0) (#36)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 05:55:02 PM EST
    on, CNN reporting that Iran targeted two Iraqi bases with ballistic missiles. The bases had American presence and the missiles were launched    from Iranian territory.

    Saying (none / 0) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 06:39:13 PM EST
    A second wave has been launched

    Iran saying they "leveled" (none / 0) (#38)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 06:43:47 PM EST
    Al Asad airbase.  It really does appear to be on.

    A terrifying thought. (none / 0) (#40)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 08:12:50 PM EST
    Trump might be the best hope for de-escalation in the Administration and among Republicans.  A fight the hawks and    rapture types have long dreamed.

    After a long silence, (none / 0) (#41)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 09:23:49 PM EST
    Trump has tweeted "alll is well". Encouraging.  The tweet was atypical in that it used correct punctuation and grammar.   So, not written by him.  Says he will have a statement tomorrow.  Nothing tonight.  Not surprised if Trump is  incapable of addressing the American people at this point.  

    It (none / 0) (#42)
    by FlJoe on Wed Jan 08, 2020 at 09:11:03 AM EST
    is looking more like the Iranians are acting in a very measured manner, apparently giving warnings to the Iraqis and seemingly trying to avoid any casualties.

    Trump's statement (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jan 08, 2020 at 11:14:37 AM EST
    this morning was scary, not so much in what he said, but in his delivery.  He appeared to be experiencing shortness of breath, slurred words, and demonstrated an odd demeanor, as if on soporifics.

    Trump was late to the podium and in his short presentation reiterated the badness of Soleimani and the goodness of his having him killed, reported that there were no American or Iraqi casualties resulting from the Iranian missile strike, called on the heretofore useless NATO for help, and blamed it all on Obama and the Iranian nuclear deal.  

    It all seemed to be face-saving for the base and media, but when all was said and left undone, this mess he started is concluded for now.  Pence was notable for his spooky glare that never left Trump's orange face.  Probably upset about the outcome and having to wait longer for his end times fever dream to come to fruition.


    I particularly enjoyed.. (none / 0) (#49)
    by desertswine on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 01:16:57 AM EST
    his descent from heaven entrance, before lumbering to the podium.  I say "lumbering" because he is physically absolutely graceless.  He did not look like a healthy man.

    Lindsey disagrees (none / 0) (#50)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 06:07:40 AM EST
    Sen. Lindsey Graham compares Trump's address on Iran to Reagan's 'tear down this wall' speech

    The reporting is that the whole thing was prearranged.  The US knew hours before the "attack" which was arranged to allow the Iranians to shoot some rockets in our general direction without actually hitting anyone.

    If Iran had wanted to hit something they most certainly could have.

    That is not the end of it.  IMO
    That was the end of the beginning.  The first act the Iranian government has actually taken credit for in decades.  There will be other "acts" they will not take credit for

    They will take their time avenging the General.

    As for the speech, adderall was trending on Twitter.  It makes sense.  Trump is the poster boy for adderall.  Know something about this.  Took it for years.

    It turns out my doctor advised me to stop taking it when I retired and to content myself with being unfocused because it's very hard on the system.  especially the older you get.  It is after all pure amphetamine.  Not the best thing fir a 70 year old.

    It did not effect me so much since I always took fairly small amounts.  I have a friend, who introduced me to adderall, who took  much higher doses that I did.  When her doctor said no more, after a mini stroke, she really kind of fell apart for a while.

    She acted and sounded lik Donald in the "tear down the wall" speech.


    Lindsay (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 03:01:42 PM EST
    is one of the most pathetic people in the senate and that is saying something.

    Excuse me, but that's 'Sen. Liberace' to you. (none / 0) (#52)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 05:37:19 PM EST

    It's also since been reported ... (none / 0) (#46)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jan 08, 2020 at 02:01:31 PM EST
    ... that the Iranian government notified Baghdad prior to the ballistic missile launch, with the unspoken understanding that the Iraqi government would immediately inform Washington, and that the Iranian military deliberately programmed those missiles to target vacant stretches of land on those U.S. bases.

    So, it's rather obvious that the Iranian response was meant to serve notice on the Trump administration, rather than inflict American casualties or damage U.S. facilities. This is not the degraded military infrastructure that The U.S. defeated in Iraq in 2003. The Iranian military is well-organized and far more sophisticated than many realize.



    ... couldn't find their own a$$es with a mirror and a map, never mind Iran:

    "Twenty-eight percent of registered voters were able to accurately label Iran on a map of the Middle East region, according to new Morning Consult/Politico polling conducted Jan. 4-5, before the Iranian military fired missiles at two bases in Iraq housing U.S. troops. Twenty-three percent could identify the country on a larger, also unlabeled, global map. Eight percent of voters thought Iran was Iraq on the smaller map."

    I want to take the 20 or so citizens who placed Iran in the vicinity of Missouri and toss them off the Eads Bridge into the Mississippi River, so that they can one day tell their grandchildren what it was like to go swimming in the Persian Gulf.


    I'd be interested to see how many Iranians (2.00 / 1) (#54)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 11:34:51 AM EST
    could accurately label Missouri on a map.

    And it wouldn't surprise me ... (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 01:45:41 PM EST
    suo: "I'd be interested to see how many Iranians could accurately label Missouri on a map."

    ... in the slightest if a greater percentage of Iranians could actually identify Missouri on a map of the United States, than could Americans themselves.

    Contrary to your implied perception, given your cheeky comment, Iranians are hardly an ignorant and backward people. It might surprise you that starting with 7th grade, English is taught as a second language in all Iranian public schools and is compulsory through the secondary level years. Further, the tradition of higher education in Iran is rooted in the early centuries of Islam, and public accessibility to higher education in that country long predates our own, which is actually less than a century old by comparison. In 1920, less than 10% of American adults had a high school diploma.

    Both our own National Geographic Society and the Royal Geographic Society in the U.K. define geographic literacy as "the ability to use geographic understanding and geographic reasoning to make far-reaching decisions." But for all our affectations otherwise, far too many Americans are generally operating at a base level of incredible ignorance, and geographic literacy in this country is abysmal at best.

    Companies like Google and Yahoo! are constantly hiring GIS specialists. The U.S. Dept. of Defense certainly recruits them for purposes of strategic planning, and commercial interests hire them to decide where to locate and build the components of business infrastructure. State and municipal transportation, urban planning and civil defense departments are all in need of geographers. So is the Trump White House, apparently, in order to inform the head honcho in the big sombrero that Alabama is not on the Atlantic seaboard.

    But the primary reason why geographic specialists in this country are in such short supply is because most public schools in the United States don't include geography in the curriculum. In fact, the "No Child Left Behind" Act purposely excluded the use of federal funds for the teaching of geography as a national priority in public education, even though those subjects had been included in the bill's first draft. And funding for geography education was only recently restored through the Every Child Achieves Act of 2015.

    This is hardly a new phenomenon. In 2003, two years after the start of the U.S. / NATO war in Afghanistan, a survey found that only 15% of Americans could locate that country on a world map. So, no, we shouldn't be surprised that only 23% of Americans can find Iran.

    That pervasive level of citizen ignorance is at least in part the reason why Vice President Mike Pence could level the breathtakingly audacious claim last week that Iran was somehow behind the 9/11 tragedy, with every reasonable confidence that such a patently false charge would somehow resonate and stick with a significant portion of the American electorate.



    "Contrary to your implied perception" (2.00 / 1) (#57)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 02:27:37 PM EST
    Contrary to your implied perception, given your cheeky comment, Iranians are hardly an ignorant and backward people.

    Oh, no, not my implication at all. Not by a long shot. Please don't project onto me your contempt of those who are less knowledgeable about geography than you.


    Or, apples to apples (5.00 / 3) (#56)
    by Yman on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 01:46:48 PM EST
    ... how many Iranians could find the United States on a map.  

    Hell, most Americans couldn't find Missouri on a map.


    It's somewhere in the vicinty of Iran (none / 0) (#58)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 02:28:42 PM EST

    Why the changing stories? (none / 0) (#59)
    by KeysDan on Mon Jan 13, 2020 at 01:03:20 PM EST
    If it is a day ending in "y", we can wait for another, "so the story goes" moment.  Soleimani assassination rationales vary from Trump, and among and within his cohorts faster than Trump's windmills can turn to cause cancer.

     Imminent threat, not so imminent, but for past deeds, shore up the Republican Senators who will be needed in Impeachment trial, 9/ll, embassy attack--- only to be seen and raised to four (4) embassies. And, then the possibilities of Raytheon and Rapture.

    Secretary of Defense Mark Esper on Sunday: "I didn't see the intelligence about Iran posing an imminent threat to four embassies."  Of course, since intel information is, no doubt, on a need to know basis, no need for the Secretary of Defense to be up on it. That is more for the his family and guests at Mar a Lago.

    But, Esper did say that we have "exquisite" intelligence, apparently, a refurbishment since the Deep state spying on Trump and their wrong findings that Russia  interfered in the 2016 election, when we all know it was Ukraine or China or a 400 lb guy in his mother's basement. Besides, Putin says so.

    So why the cascade of utterances? Maybe it was because Trump became incapacitated in the midst of  his misadventure and each cabinet and other officer in the circle was left on his own to conjure up a reason.

    We know that all through Tuesday, January 7, curiously, there was no tweet or word from Trump, until the late evening "all is well" tweet seemingly crafted by someone other than Trump (e.g., no typos, misspellingss).  And, that the Wednesday, January 8, short teleprompter speech was worrisone: shortness of breath, wheezing, slurred speech, and, more than usual, odd demeanor.

     It has not gotten much better since then, with, for example, his retweets of photo shopped depictions of Senator Schumer in a turban and Speaker Pelosi in a hajib. Apparently, picking up on Republican Rep. Doug Collins "Democrats love terrorists", for which he had to quickly apologize.  

    Tr*mp is going to present us with (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by vml68 on Mon Jan 13, 2020 at 02:38:38 PM EST
    incontrovertible proof of the "imminent threat", soon... a map with four embassies encircled with a black sharpie ;-)!

    Secretary of Defense Mark Esper on Sunday: "I didn't see the intelligence about Iran posing an imminent threat to four embassies."