Apparently Qasem Soleimani was a key leader in the Iranian military:
As leader of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ elite Quds Force, the 62-year-old bore responsibility for Iran’s clandestine operations abroad, quietly extending the military reach of Iran deep into foreign conflicts such as those in Syria and Iraq.
In the process, he earned himself near-mythical status among his enemies and idolization by his Iranian hard-line supporters.
Analysts have complained that Soleimani had more diplomatic clout than Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and pondered whether he would eventually seek top political office. Some compared him to Karla, the fanatical, but fictional, Soviet spymaster in John le Carré’s Cold War novels.
Killing him was a major provocation, and certainly it will have some effect on the morale and capabilities of the Quds Force, but is it going to have any long-term effect? My guess is that it won’t, for two reasons. First, military and paramilitary organizations are designed to be resilient to loss of command since one of the major risks of war is, obviously, death. Second, the command structure of any quality military organization is going to be full of ambitious and talented officers who are capable of taking the place of the top leader.
In other words, there are half a dozen Karlas waiting in the wings to replace this guy. The history of this endless war is replete with the killing of some #1 or other that probably causes some short-term chaos, but changes very little in the long run. I think part of the reason that the US is constantly “decapitating” enemies is that we can do it with precision airstrikes rather than a commitment of ground troops, so it is a relatively easy gesture that shows we’re “doing something”.
Well, now we did something. As much as Trump, Pompeo and the rest want to do more, that next steps are a hell of a lot more militarily and politically risky than a targeted airstrike.
Gin & Tonic
Wonder how Gina Haspel is sleeping tonight.
Kay
I don’t know anything about Iran or Iraq but I do know the Trump people lie constantly, and they’ve already lied about this. Which puts the public in an impossible situation, as far as real information.
The lying is treated as tangential to that administration but it’s always been the central problem, and it’s a huge problem. It gets worse when there’s more on the line but it’s the crux of the rot. It all springs from it and there’s no way around it. They’re not credible. We’re adrift not because they’re poor managers (although I think they are) we’re adrift because they are incapable of telling the truth and without that we have nothing. We have competing narratives.
Another Scott
Reposting from downstairs, as it fits better here.
Who is Esmail Qaani:
(Emphasis added.)
So much for decapitating the leadership… :-/
Cheers,
Scott.
Roger Moore
@Kay:
The lying and the poor management are of a piece; you can’t really separate them. They lie all the time to cover for their incompetence, and part of their incompetence is an insistence that their lies are actually the truth.
Cheryl Rofer
I suspect that part of the motivation is that Trump is incapable of understanding the larger context but desperately wants an OBL moment. He’s practically begging us to recognize him that way this morning.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Cheryl Rofer: he’s probably asking Kellyanne to call the King of Sweden to suggest that Sheldon Adelson be allowed to fund a Nobel Prize for Assassination.
“Tell him we used to pretend to be Swedish after the war, he’ll like that. And Lara is Danish. That’s the same thing, isn’t it?”
Tim C.
@Cheryl Rofer: He’s really that dumb? I mean really? I know the answer is “yes” but come on. OBL committed a horrifying terrorist act on live television. There’s no way to get an OBL moment on some Iranian general that nobody but the most dedicated war watchers have heard of. This does not compute.
Cheryl Rofer
@Tim C.: Look at his reaction to the death of al-Baghdadi.
I agree that there is nobody comparable to OBL that he can obliterate.
And I think that’s only a part of it, but a part that others could use to manipulate him into the decision.
Tim C.
@Cheryl Rofer: Damn…. this is going from “scary” to “let’s not sleep tonight”
15 flush mistermix
@Tim C.: I agree with Cheryl – he’s mainly a narcissist and his fragile ego demands that everything he does be recognized as more important than what Obama did. That makes him easy to manipulate, but also it’s dangerous for the manipulators, because he’ll be constantly dissatisfied with them when their promises of adulation don’t come to fruition.
Another Scott
@Cheryl Rofer: The Pentagon yesterday was saying hundreds. Donnie turns it into thousands, then morphs it into millions.
Why he was obviously worse than Stalin and Hitler and Mao combined!!11ONE.
(groucho-roll-eyes.gif)
Cheers,
Scott.
chris
It’s Oh, shit o’clock and all is well!
RepubAnon
Do the war hawks think they’re living in a comic book, where the bad guy’s organization collapses if the leader is killed?
This reminds me of the way WW1 started, with Austria eager for a quick war with Serbia – to teach the Serbs a lesson. This did not work out well for Emperor Franz Joseph.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
clicking around twitter, I’m seeing people treated as experts (I have no means of evaluating their credentials, academics, think-tank types, higher-brow pundits) split between the idea that this will unleash hell on earth, and those who say Iran and its gov’t are too weak to hit back hard. I don’t know what to think, but I don’t trust the crew in the White House or at Mar-A-Fucking-Lago
Kent
So serious question. Is it in the Iranian state interest to see Trump re-elected or defeated in 2020?
On the one hand, one could argue that any new Dem administration is going to provide a better negotiating partner than Trump and that relations would be more likely to normalize. So perhaps the Iranians (or at least the Iranian people) might want to see a new Dem administration. But what about the hard core in the government?
On the other hand, one could argue that Iran has been in a decades-long geopolitical struggle with the US for influence in the middle east and that a chaotic and incompetent Trump administration that alienates US allies across the region is to the long-term benefit of Iran. The US pullout of Syria and abandonment of the Kurds, for example. The US green-lighting of the worst Israeli impulses is another example that further increases Iranian influence in the region. The Iranians may view Trump as the Russians do. As an incompetent actor that furthers their long-term interests in the region.
Because honestly, the Iranians have the ability to influence the 2020 elections against Trump by manipulating the price of oil. Which would also help Russia as a major oil exporter. $6 gasoline in the agricultural heartland during planting and harvesting season this summer would not bode well for Trump’s re-election. They could also fluff Trump by giving him an October surprise victory.
I fucking hate this timeline and the idea that Iranian mullahs have a vote for our next president.
JustRuss
Fox News says “hold my beer”. Actually, I have no idea what Fox is saying, but my guess is they’re thanking Jesus for Preznit Trump protecting our freedoms.
Enhanced Voting Techniques
@RepubAnon: You read the Atlantic interviews with the generals; Trump really think a Micheal Bay movie is how war works. More to the point, “comic book villain” is Trump’s form of leadership and all he understands.
15 flush mistermix
@JustRuss:
Probably most of them are, but last night Tucker Carlson went off script and shat all over the killing, though he said it was Trump’s manipulators what done it.
MobiusKlein
I don’t know, can’t really declare victory until Al Qaeda number 2 has been killed.
Boris, Rasputin's Evil Twin
@RepubAnon: From my reading and bitter experience, I maintain that anyone who advocates a fast, cheap war with an easy victory in sight should be taken out back, shot in the back of the head as needed, and hung on the fence with a sign around his neck that says why he’s there. It didn’t work for Franz Josef, it didn’t work for Hitler in Russia, it didn’t work for us in Iraq.
Patricia Kayden
Mike in NC
I can guarantee that these bellicose Trump tweets were prepared by Stephen Miller and/or caddy Dan Scavino. Our lazy Fat Bastard has no clue what “Quds Force” is since he avoids CIA briefings like a cat avoids a bathtub.
germy
Tim C.
@15 flush mistermix: That’s really interesting. Tucker was one of the ones, according to reporting last may, talked Trump down off the ledge last time. I think Tucker is a shyster, but knows that a major war in SW Asia is a big loser.
WaterGirl
@Cheryl Rofer:
Yep. I’m sure he thinks if he can have that, his impeachment will go away and be virtually wiped out of the history books. It’s a sad
dayweekmonthyeardecade when a malevolent child holds the office of President of the United states.WaterGirl
@Tim C.: I think Trump is exactly that dumb.
Plus, there are none so blind as those who will not see.
Yutsano
@germy: Who drops these names to him? Does he honestly think* this will increase his standing with the military? The military resents the fucking Blackwater style contractors. It wouldn’t surprise me if he did something that stupid.
*I know I know I know…
Cacti
Muqtada al-Sadr today:
For those who don’t remember, the Mahdi Army is the militia group that inflicted about 3,000 U.S./Iraq Security Force casualties during the Shi’a uprising of 2004 in Iraq.
MisterForkbeard
@Yutsano: I’m pretty sure he thinks it’ll get him points with racists and people that like it when soldier/police kill ‘deserving’ civilians.
germy
@Yutsano: Maybe he wants to assemble his own army of loyalists.
WaterGirl
@Boris, Rasputin’s Evil Twin: This appears to be your first comment on Balloon Juice.
Speaking only for myself, that talk of violence is not appreciated, and coming right out of the gate, it gives me pause.
Immanentize
@RepubAnon:I wondered (below) if we should think of him as “Grand Duke Soleimani”
Tim C.
@MisterForkbeard: Yeah, but he’s already got those. Here’s what I wonder. Let’s say for the sake of argument, there’s the long known 27 percenters that we talk about here a lot. Trump’s at 42% So that’s 15% of the country, give or take, that really hate Democrats, Liberals, etc, but also know Trump is a human garbage dump. Those people are with him because the economy is hot, they are getting their CCC-level racist buttons pressed or they think holy Jeebus works in mysterious ways and now we can take away the girl’s slut-pills. He’s putting that 15% in a position to jump ship if this goes badly. Likewise, there are no anti-Trump votes out there that will flip to him. ever. This is a dumb dumb move for him on all levels.
Brachiator
@Another Scott:
Vietnam era: Body count, body count…
Today: Decapitating the leadership
Immanentize
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Too weak to hit back? ZOMG that is stupid. They still have a very large modern military. They also have many war hardened militia forces to call upon. Moqtada al Sadr is re-commissioning (if that’s the right word) his Shia Militia in Iraq.
Then, there are the soft Trump targets around the region and the world without even getting to the question of shipping.
Too weak to strike back?
Sam
The Iraqi govt will try to expel us; imo we should accept but we probably won’t. Militias will attack us. Question is whether Iran tries to extend the battlefield to the us and Europe. I think they will if they can. The ME will be a bad place to be, but attacks in US or Europe will up the ante.
sdhays
@Kent: The Iranian state is very cash-strapped. I’m not sure not selling oil is an actual option for them. And with sanctions and decline oil production, I’m not sure they have the ability to affect oil prices to the extent you suggest without doing something to affect others’ oil production (like closing the Strait of Hormuz, which would be very, very bad for lots of reasons).
?BillinGlendaleCA
@WaterGirl: Boris has commented before.
Cacti
“If Hillary Clinton had won, we’d be at war.”
-Susan Sarandon
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Sam: I wouldn’t be surprised if Iraq severed diplomatic relations with us.
JoyceH
Hey, is it just me? Last night, the news several times showed that clip of Trump on NY Eve saying that Iran didn’t want to go to war with us and that it would be a short war. The talking heads all compared the remark to the mindset of the world leaders at the outset of WWI and pontificated about how wars are never as quick and easy as the leaders think they’ll be and how naive Trump was to think that.
But I didn’t have that reaction at all. When I heard Trump talk about how it would be a short war, my instant reaction was, “OMG, he’s talking about nukes.” Anyone else come away with that impression?
WaterGirl
Washington Monthly: Martin Longman (excerpt below)
Trump is Now Guilty of Reckless Endangerment
Yutsano
@?BillinGlendaleCA: @WaterGirl: Secondeded. He’s not frequent but I have seen his nym before.
Immanentize
@Yutsano: you know who else hates the Blackwater Killers? Iraqis. Really really hate them. Seems we might want Iraqis to not hate all US forces just now?
WaterGirl
@?BillinGlendaleCA: @Yutsano:
The comment had to be approved before posting, which I did, so he must have had a slightly new nym or a new email address.
Kent
That’s exactly what I’m talking about. Blowing up a few tankers and oil facilities in the Gulf would absolutely spike oil prices. Maybe not permanently but at the right time it could affect an election. They did the same thing last year with the drone attack on Saudi’s facilities that was claimed by Yemen but that everyone thinks Iran was behind. It is in their playbook.
Yutsano
@Immanentize: Oh shit. You’re almost guaranteeing he’s going to do this. Ugh. I’m depressed now.
Archon
@Kent:
Blowing up tankers would me a massive escalation that would negatively effect billions of people, including lots of Americans that hate Trump. That would be a major miscalculation on Iran’s part IMO.
Iran’s play is to ramp up their proxies in the region while publicly portraying Trump and the United States are an enemy to global stablility.
Immanentize
@Yutsano: What a Bizarro World, eh?
Today I was forced to have this thought:. “Well, my 18 year old son, the Immp, can’t be called up. He has no stomach for the military.”
Calouste
@Sam: I doubt Iran would want to extend the battlefield to Europe. The Europeans have been treating them fairly regarding the nuclear treaty, unlike the imPOTUS. A split between the US and Europe would be to their benefit.
Immanentize
@Calouste: and Russia’s as well. Funny that.
Chris Johnson
@15 flush mistermix: Whoa, that’s very interesting… since I’ve been suspicious Tucker Carlson works for Putin or those like him. I think he goes places he shouldn’t and carries messages in his role as ‘trusted right wing mouthpiece’ and is much closer to a literal working spy than Trump could ever be. He’s McConnell-grade treacherous.
It looks to me like somehow Trump got war actions through the military’s chain of command, but obviously these are catastrophic actions.
Not in that Iran will hurt us: that’s not the game being played here. We’re being set up to become in literal fact the unaccountable global threat, the monsters of history, that hard leftwing folks have long thought we already were. We are NOT the cops of the world, we’re not peace, we’re not stability. We fuck with people for benefit or just lulz and we will kill you and we’re not safe to have around.
Russia wouldn’t directly take us on, but is delighted to see us become an obvious threat to the whole rest of the world starting with Iran. That’s the end goal, isolating us from what friends we had. (much like online social manipulation: see Contrapoints’ new video on ‘cancel culture’, to someone familiar with this stuff it’s obvious she is marked for destruction by Russia as someone who calls out what they do. They are mostly doing it for political reasons, not ‘trans rights’ reasons)
What interests me is that Hannity did an abrupt unexplained flipflop. Did he get briefed? Did Trump violate what Putin expected of him, but in a way that can be turned to Russia’s advantage by undermining US standing abroad?
Trump is the wrecking ball, but I think he exceeded himself this time. I don’t think anyone expected this. The only reason Putin can be happy about it is, it can be turned against the US.
I don’t even want to LOOK at Twitter or any of the other places that are known to be heavily controlled and manipulated information. I would remind you folks, balloon juicer friends, that this is still an information WWIII and well underway, and they do not have to bomb everyone and nuke the planet if they can make us BELIEVE that someone has nuked the planet and we’re all dead. So, the trolls will be heightening panic. I don’t want to look at them, nor will I believe everything I see.
gene108
@Boris, Rasputin’s Evil Twin:
Did work for us in Grenada and Panama.
Game, set, match libtard
Martin
The Straight of Hormuz is gonna be lit. Wonder if we’re going to shoot down another passenger airliner after entering Iranian waters?
Reminder that Iran can’t turn this into a war. They simply don’t have the reach. They’ll retaliate, as is their want, and we can recognize it as such, or we can escalate. Only the US can turn this into a war.
JPL
@germy: Maybe he’ll have a line of clothing that the NYTImes can tout.
Martin
@JoyceH:
Of course. Trump being amoral sees nukes as an efficient and expedient option. He always has. We are once again at the mercy of the so-called adults in the room. Anyone want to put money on whether the generals will disobey that order? I don’t.
Brachiator
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
I tend to instantly distrust anyone who claims that Iran is “too weak to hit back hard.” But apart from that, and being wary of anything coming out of the White House, I don’t know how best to evaluate these “experts.”
James E Powell
@RepubAnon:
Oh yes, absolutely. And not just the war hawks. Probably a majority of Americans.
Bill Arnold
@Cheryl Rofer:
The scariest aspect for me is that this is yet another move towards normalizing state-level political assassination. There are only a few countries that do this; most do not, yet.
When state level assassination is normalized, the evil often spreads down to targeting the general citizenry, and not just by states.
dr. bloor
@Bill Arnold: NPR’s headline described it as a “bold gambit.”
Felanius Kootea
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: The way I think about the Iran situation is “how would the US react if an adversary killed the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff with a drone strike shortly after he landed in Turkey?” Iran doesn’t have the military reach of the US, obviously, but Iran will react. It has to. Will it do so by playing to the sympathies of the rest of the world, currently uneasy about 45: “the US has become a danger to us all because it’s run by a narcissist sociopath who is unpredictable and cannot be controlled from within” or by striking militarily at soft US targets overseas? We’re about to find out.
Kay
@Roger Moore:
I know I harp on the lying but it seems so central and profound to me, and it’s treated as just a personality quirk. It’s a big deal. Our sheriff here is currently embroiled in a scandal – it’s complicated but what it has boiled down to legally is his lying under oath. It’s front page news and has been for months.
That’s ONE person and it’s local government so checked by at least three layers on top of it. This is just about every member of the Trump Administration and it’s checked only the Democrats in the US House.
These people aren’t credible. Nothing they say can be believed. You just can’t build anything real on top of that. It’s corrupted at the source.
Bill Arnold
@Boris, Rasputin’s Evil Twin:
I’d prefer that they be shot with 1000 micrograms of LSD, daily, until they repent.
ETA saw Watergirl’s comment, and maybe this too is a little harsh. Sorry, warmongers set me off sometimes.
Cheryl Rofer
@Bill Arnold: Yes. Not much has been said about assassination as a tool of statecraft yet. I think there is an international convention or somesuch that the US has signed on the subject, promising not to do it, but highly specific munitions provide a big temptation.
I haven’t had time to look into it in detail, but it is one of the bad things here, although Trump is not the first to use it.
Yutsano
@Felanius Kootea:
Can we make this Pompeo?
Archon
@Martin:
I do think the military would refuse an order to pre-emptively use nuclear weapons on Iran.
The fact that it’s even a concern though show’s how far down the rabbit hole we’ve gone.
MobiusKlein
@Immanentize: I am thinking the same about my 18 year old son.
He may have forgotten to send back his draft registration card.
For once, his procrastination may help him.
Enhanced Voting Techniques
Were is the mystery in that; wog bashing is always popular and Hannity is about being popular. It reads more like the rest of the consertivs think this is the 80s movie climax were the villain gets killed and Carlson was the odd man out who realizes this is real life.
I am sure Carlson will walk that back by Monday.
mrmoshpotato
@Patricia Kayden: A-fucking-men!
Mnemosyne
Am I the only person assuming that the initial Iranian retaliation will be against Saudi Arabia? That seems like their best bet, strategically speaking, plus it doesn’t really allow the US to declare war.
Mnemosyne
@MobiusKlein:
Diagnosed ADHD makes one 4-F, which is making me very relieved for some young men I know.
Felanius Kootea
@Mnemosyne: Targeting Saudi oil facilities with some plausible deniability as they’ve done before wouldn’t surprise me.
I also wouldn’t visit a Trump hotel outside the US anytime soon. They’d probably wait a few months to take that step.
Another Scott
@Sam:
AlJazeera:
Happy 2020!!1
:-/
Cheers,
Scott.
Barry
@Gin & Tonic: “Wonder how Gina Haspel is sleeping tonight.”
I would guess that she’s not sleeping much, but is likely very happy.
War has been good for her.
MisterForkbeard
@JoyceH: I’m reminded of stories about the Civil War, in which people thought it would be so quick and simple that civilians packed picnic lunches to go see the opening battles.
These days, we’re so much more powerful than our enemies that “war” is pretty quick and easy. The problem is that literally everything after we finish our initial objectives is very hard.
Bill Arnold
@Felanius Kootea:
They need not take that step at all; just make a little suggestive noise about it, then wait. Years, decades. Iranians are known for patience.
Felanius Kootea
@MisterForkbeard: “Quick and easy?” 18 years and counting. The war is everything, not just the initial battle. And very much the unintended and unanticipated consequences.
I hope there is no John Bolton equivalent in Iran. Same crazy impulses with a much more limited budget and reach.
Barry
@Kent: “On the other hand, one could argue that Iran has been in a decades-long geopolitical struggle with the US for influence in the middle east and that a chaotic and incompetent Trump administration that alienates US allies across the region is to the long-term benefit of Iran. ”
The problem here is that Iran has serious skin in the game. Their risk is getting hammered in a horrible war in the meantime.
China, for example, merely has to cope with a more chaotic situation. Their risk of destruction is low.
Chief Oshkosh
“…Americans in the region are much safer after the demise of Qasem Soleimani,” Pompeo said.
Even so, the State Department issued an advisory instructing U.S. citizens to leave Iraq “immediately” and avoid the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad…
–Military Times 3 Jan 20;
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2020/01/03/pompeo-on-soleimani-death-the-risk-of-doing-nothing-was-enormous/
Which is it, Mikey? If Americans are much safer, why is your State Dept instructing Americans to leave immediately and avoid the US Embassy? Could it be because Americans are now much LESS safe? Could it be because you and your boss have no plan for what to do on the very next day? And how are Americans supposed to leave? You bombed the airport.
Oh, I see from the State Department website that you’re suggesting that they go by road. So which route to which country might be safe for that? Since normally US citizens would get that information from the local Embassy, and you’re telling them not to even approach the Embassy, what the fuck are they supposed to do?
Oh wait, I see from the State Dept webpage that they’re supposed to get an appointment with the U.S. Consulate General in Erbil. Mikey, didn’t anyone tell you that Erbil is in Iraqi Kurdistan? Shit, sure would be nice if we hadn’t stuck the knife in the Kurds’ backs, eh Mikey? Sure would be nice if we had some allies up there in Erbil just about now. And get a fucking appointment? Shit, are they even answering the phones in Baghdad or Erbil?
Oh wait, I see from the State Dept webpage that US citizens stuck in Iraq are supposed to “Monitor local and international media for updates ” since apparently the State Dept won’t be providing much information.
Mikey, you’re a goddammed idiot.
https://iq.usembassy.gov/security-alert-u-s-embassy-baghdad-iraq-january-3-2020/
Gin & Tonic
@Barry: My point, of course, is that by the rules now set by the Trump administration, her assassination by Iran is fair game.
Frankensteinbeck
I’ve been thinking about what serves Iran’s interests. The best thing I can think of for them* would be the US being removed from Iraq. They’re likely to get that.
*That could possibly result from this, anyway. They’d rather Saudi Arabia collapse than anything else, but there’s no visible path from this event to that result.
RaflW
Seeing news that 3,500 service-members are being deployed to Iraq. Not surprised, since the embassy is shut and vulnerable. No plan to evacuate anyone in the country not attached to the US government (if even those who are attached have evac options).
This thing was both anticipated (see Bolton, John and his Twitter boner), and thoroughly unplanned. Trump to a horrifying T.
WaterGirl
@Gin & Tonic: I say again that Trump is too stupid to comprehend what he has done. In nearly said that might be the scariest part of all this. But no, there are about 10 scariest things about this.
WaterGirl
@RaflW: have you always been RaflW and my brain always corrected it before?
RaflW
@Tim C.: Among the many tactical errors by the T WH, not briefing Schumer, Burr etc but telling Graham (at the insecure as fuck Mar a Lago, no less) means that even a chimeral gleam of bipartisanship is gone.
Tucker is a racist, a creep, and a scoundrel. But he grasps that when caskets start coming back, it will be 100% on the GOP.
RaflW
@WaterGirl: Yes … except I’ve mostly been posting as Raoul for a couple years. Haven’t paid attention to my nym on the iPad it seems.
WaterGirl
@RaflW: interesting! If you merged your online nym on all your devices, which one would you use? Sounds like Raoul?
Scamp Dog
@MisterForkbeard, @Felanius Kootea: We’re great at defeating enemy military forces (and blowing up commanders, etc.). Unfortunately that’s not enough to win a war anymore.
rikyrah
@germy:
Because, of course…
Hoodie
It seems that the Iranians would have plenty of options for retaliation in Iraq or Syria. Of course, they could simply target US military or civilians. However, perhaps a smarter thing for the Iranians to do would be not to treat this as an act of war, but rather a rogue, criminal action that the US president conducted without proper Congressional input. I can’t imagine that the Iranians are not aware of Trump’s current political predicament and they could spin this quite effectively, at least outside of the US, as a ploy by a beleaguered politician to save his position. They could, for example, take American military or diplomatic personnel in Iraq hostage (e.g., using Iraqi proxies) as part of an action to enforce justice for the Soleimani assassination, based on a claim that the attack was, essentially, an illegal murder ordered by Donald Trump for which these personnel are accomplices. That could put Trump in a real vise, having Americans held hostage in a situation in which the US probably would be hard pressed to free them (especially if they’re extradited to Iran for holding) and would not have a lot of sympathy from the international community, especially since Trump obviously escalated this beyond a normal proportional response. Killing an Iranian general who was visiting Iraq in such an open manner is not like killing an insurgent leader.
J R in WV
@Mnemosyne:
And my nephew, on the spectrum, and really odd to be around, even when medicated, has been trying to enlist in the Army since he got old enough. Can’t with his medical history.
So instead he enrolled in the Law Enforcement Academy, got a license to be an armed peace officer. Has trouble looking me in the eye, who cares for him, yet wants to be pulling illegal vehicles over in the middle of serious nowhere in the dead of night — how is he going to tell when someone looks way off? Can’t with his medical history.
Sad! But at least he won’t be a special operator in Iran.
Cermet
By most accepted definition this was an assassination, not just a killing; i.e. killing by surprise a high level government offical for payback or for political reasons. So, wondering, except for the killing of the Iranian Premier back in the 50’s, when was the last time we targeted some country’s high level offical, and assassinated one previously?
chopper
@Cheryl Rofer:
and i mean, ignoring the differences between al-baghdadi/suleimani and OBL, the former two were killed with drone strikes. getting bin laden was a dangerous call, and it could have gone to shit a hundred different ways. it was a much tougher operation in every single aspect.
WaterGirl
@Gin & Tonic: Unlike Trump, she might just be smart enough to know what she unleashed, or at the very least, enabled.
Jim Parish
@Cermet: If you’re thinking of Mossadegh, he wasn’t killed; he lived, in retirement, until 1967.
Cermet
@Jim Parish: Thanks, good to know. So, this is a first, then?
cain
@Another Scott:
Plot twist, it was this guy that was the real power behind Iran.