I’m not convinced Trump wants a war or has ever really wanted one. I think the SOB is ignorant enough to believe that a surgical strike here and there and pressure can make the Iranian regime fold.
As I’ve said before with Iran, as I have with NK, the danger is miscalculation based on ignorance, assumptions, and not giving anyone - domestically or internationally, ally or foe - what the end game is. Trump is making critically important decisions based on whatever he instinctively feels is good input, and who knows where the hell that input comes from – it could be coming from Infowars for all we know.
That’s not what I am asking. I am asking if anyone on the right side of the aisle is trying to pull the “This “impeachment” crap should be set aside until we deal with this real problem-The President has important things to deal with right now and your silly trial is a dangerous diversion!” angle.
Right, it will be just like when Reagan bombed Libya after Qadaffi blew up the airliner over Lockerbie. Killed Qadaffi’s daughter. Libya got the message and didn’t fuck with us after that.
Except that didn’t happen. Many people remember it that way, even lifelong Democrats (and probably 90% of Republicans). But the fact is that Qadaffi blew up the airliner two years AFTER the air strike that killed his daughter.
That’s certainly possible, but it wouldn’t matter one way or the other what Republicans do to thwart off impeachment. What really matters is the blow back from Trump’s decisions, as that, more than Democrats’ vain attempts to impeach him on anything he’s done so far, is something that could turn more voters against him. It could be that if this unfolds into a disaster, support for impeachment could go way, way up.
I read somewhere, can’t find it now, that the US did not know Soleimani was at the airport and we were going after lower level targets. It was intended to be a one time strike as a show of force and that would be the end. Now it that were true, the question is now moot as Trump has said we were targeting Soleimani, and of course a mistake cannot be admitted.
This makes sense to me, I do not believe Trump wants a war because a war is not going to help him get re-elected. Well, probably not. Who knows how the public will react if this escalates. Many will buy Pence’s bullshit.
Question about the statement that Iran and Soleimani were planning major attacks against America? Any credibility to that? Why would Iran do that? What would be the objective?
The story I saw, and I just quickly skimmed it at work, didn’t say flunkies, but “legitimate” military targets. The question is really moot, I searched and can’t find the story anywhere now.
It would be a zero on your scale. People like to extend Irans capabilities, but frankly if they could have hit the US, they would have done so by now. Right now their first order of business is to get their president/grand poohbah/what ever, into their most deepest bunker.
After that worthy is assured that his personal safety is not in doubt, they get down to business and decide what they lost and what they can do about it. The one guy that might have been able to craft a solution, has now been returned to his constituent atoms and is now dust in the wind.
So Iran is now going to be a little bitch, and go turtle and cry for mommy.
Are we now pretending that this whole crisis didn’t start with the goal of stopping Iran from being an international sponsor of state terrorism? That’s just going to keep right on rolling while we pat ourselves on the back for sinking their navy? Congratulations, we just got played again Vietnam-style.
Honestly I am never going to get why people are so intent on proving the US wins military victories while getting curb-stomped in terms of geopolitical objectives. It’s such a tragic and murderous sucker’s game.
I’m sure Soleimani spent most of the past 20 years planning some sort of attack on the US, but I doubt this situation was any more than “Iraqi Yellowcake 2.0”.
Most likely Trump turned on Fox News, didn’t want to look bad, asked his generals to drone somebody to make him look good, and inadvertently stepped into a world of shit when they bagged bigger game than anyone was expecting.
I gotta throw in with HMS Irruncible here; this is really NOT how he’s seen outside the USA. He is weak and predictable, and incapable of standing up to real strength.
His bluster doesn’t make him look strong or erratic at all.
That’s possible. I certainly hope anyway there aren’t details leaked about what the US knew that point to how it was known. Also though it’s possible that despite Soleimani’s higher profile in recent years (at one time he was a pretty shadowy figure, not as much last 5 yrs or so, lots more picture/video of him) the US didn’t know any time recently exactly where he’d be at a given exact time without attacking him on Iranian soil (more provocative still), or somewhere the US has less ability to strike (not as easy in Russian occupied areas of Syria for example). So an opportunity to hit him in relatively easy to access Iraq came up and it wasn’t all to to do with recent or near future activities.
Trump can be accused of lots of things but wanting another foreign war is not a reasonable criticism of him it doesn’t seem to me. However wars start by miscalculation all the time.
I’m pretty sure they meant attacks on US personnel in Iraq and perhaps the Middle East generally, not attacks on the continental US. The US and Iran have been fighting an undeclared war for years/decades, 100’s of US service people’s deaths in Iraq were related to Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corp activities, and a US contractor was killed in an Iranian affiliated militia attack on a US base in Iraq just days ago. The objective was and is to get the US out of Iraq and ultimately the Mideast. IOW it’s been a fairly normal state of affairs for Soleimani as commander of the IRGC to be planning attacks on US interests in the Mideast, and it’s considered ‘major’ whenever those attacks results in US deaths. We can debate if that ‘justifies’ killing the IRGC commander or whether it’s wise if ‘justified’, but I don’t think there’s a fundamental credibility issue with claiming Soleimani was in Iraq at least in part to aid and coordinate, with proxies, attacks on US interests or facilities there.
Under most rules of war I can think of, bumping someone off while in a state of peace is called “murder”. And since when is Iran an adversary ? Or Iraq a fucking active war zone ? Against whom ?
Why is retaliation by Iran the only concern? Whatever Iran’s official retaliation may be, should I or should I not be concerned that Hamas and Hezbollah have both called for revenge? ( read the Assad regime has done so, too, but haven’t confirmed it yet.)Is it unrealistic to think Iran will retaliate in some form soon, and the terrorist response, which would likely take greater coordination, would happen down the road a little way?
I hope you can find the source for this because I have heard that too (on this board courtesy of another poster) and I think it adds the perfect element of comedy to this tragedy. Only Trump could fuck it up like this, trying to hit some foot soldiers and accidentally glassing a senior general from next door. And since Trump isn’t capable of admitting fault as you noted, he’s going to clusterfuck his way into an actual war.