They apparently gave the assassination option which wasn’t supposed to be the one he chose.
*
*"In the chaotic days leading to the death of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s most powerful commander, top American military officials put the option of killing him — which they viewed as the most extreme response to recent Iranian-led violence in Iraq — on the menu they presented to President Trump.
They didn’t think he would take it. In the wars waged since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Pentagon officials have often offered improbable options to presidents to make other possibilities appear more palatable."*
"That official described the intelligence as thin and said that General Suleimani’s attack was not imminent because of communications the United States had between Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and General Suleimani showing that the ayatollah had not yet approved any plans by the general for an attack. The ayatollah, according to the communications, had asked General Suleimani to come to Tehran for further discussions at least a week before his death. "*
How is it a decades-old question? As far as I can tell, we’ve bombed the fuck out of people we’re angry at, and then we’ve put boots on the ground — and I get that that’s a decades-old point we maybe don’t need to go on and on about. You get that I’m talking about skipping the “boots on the ground” part, right?
So bomb the shit of them and then hope what, that the regime just disappears? That Hezbollah and all the other Iran-associated militia throughout the ME just disappear with them?
You know, they might. But they might not. And I can guarantee Shia Islam will not. The US will create an implacable enemy for generations.
OTOH, Saudi Arabia will be most grateful and forever indebted.
And that was FOURTY years ago. And you blew them up about it already.
Do I get to murder German officials because they took Alsace & Lorraine once ? What’s the expiration date on a casus belli, if any ?
When Trump tweeted "“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” and “if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets… Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD,”, I came up with a possible solution to this dilemma. Superglue mittens onto his hands and duct tape his mouth shut.
@ Kobal- Yabbut, memories in that part of the world go back centuries. They hold grudges from 500+ years ago. 40 years is nothing when Persia was already old at the Battle of Marathon. Plus, Mr Guerilla War was still an active combatant at the hour of his death, not some relic of the past.
I am not trying to defend Trump here, just, yanno, being comprehensive.
Maybe, but on the other hand, let’s consider what happens when the US just bombs the ever-living fuck out of countries with the assumption that we’ll crush an ideology.
Let’s see: bombed the ever-living shit out of Vietnam, and made the country nearly united against us. Bombed the ever-living shit out of Laos and ended up turning that country communist. Bombed the ever-living shit out of Cambodia and get the Khmer Rouge.
Fast forward to more recently. Bomb the shit of Afghanistan and no more loyalty to the US than we had in 2001. Bombed Iraq and we got a mostly Iran-leaning “partner.” So, we can see where this will lead already.
We can level Iran. We might get a refugee crisis. We might get a power vacuum. We won’t fill it. Maybe Russia or China will.
Oh by the way: we’re adding more than a trillion dollars in deficits to our national debt every year. A hegemony requires money to run it. We’re not in it for the long haul.
As I’ve said, Persia and Mesopotamia: graveyard of the American hegemony.
Yep. I get that. This is what every drunk idiot uncle at the end of the bar yells at the TV at the sign of every conflict. “Just bomb them and go home.”
How do you think this turns out well for the US in this case? 1 years, 5 years, 10 years down the road? Does Iran never come back from this? Does nobody come to their aid? Is that someone else’s problem? Are you thinking about what we get out of this, or are you just thinking of the satisfaction you’ll feel watching a short-term victory on the teevee?
The ‘logic’ is the enmity between the two countries, the recent escalating tensions, and that this guy in particular basically ran a terrorist army that killed US troops. His arrival in Iraq probably signalled more mayhem. You said the enmity was too old, and I responded that nothing is too old with these guys.
What if the Iranians play grown-up? Along the lines of “We are super-dooper pissed off, but we are restraining ourselves because the gravity of the situation is a big fat crazy American guy”. Be a hell of a thing, that kinda self control, so I gotta doubt it, But it would sure make us look like junkyard dogs, yes?
No, it wouldn’t.
Such a move would be followed by a couple of dozen TrumpTweets celebrating the “fact” that he made them back down, followed by the Republicans backing him up.
You know how to 100% prevent guys like him from killing US troops ? Not having US troops there. And come on. You know the beef (some) Iraqis have with US isn’t about ancient enmities and bygone slights. Much like that guy wasn’t in Iraq about the hostage bloody crisis. You’re all there for the oil & political influence in the right now. It can stop any time you like…
But as has been recently pointed to me, the “neat” thing about the US maintaining mil bases all over the world is that *any *conflict whatsoever is bound to be able to be described as “putting American lives at risk” and thus demand retaliation/pre-emptive bombing and what have you. And thus the forever war continues, for the holy glory of Northrop-Grumman.
Iran will respond. If they don’t, they will be seen as weak by the Saudis and the Sunnis in general, as well as by Israel and the US.
But Iran never responds quickly or rashly. They will think about it carefully for a few weeks or months, and weigh all their options and the all the likely responses. They will make a calculated and calibrated response, not an all-out attack.
Their options include cyberwarfare, strikes at US allies like the Saudis and the Israelis, strikes at US bases or embassies around the world, attacks on American contractors in the Middle East, a limited or temporary closure of the Strait of Hormuz, attacks on oil tankers, multiple small attacks of various types.
Why? Why why why why why does military leadership give Trump an extreme response, knowing how clueless he is and how Neanderthal his logic is? (Iran man bad. Kill bad Iran man.) After meeting with him for three years, how do they not expect him to take it? Let’s fly another plane past King Kong. Surely he won’t swat this one!
Guys, the man has already wondered why we have nukes if we’re not going to use them, so the longer he remains in office the % chance of nukes being fired inexorably approaches 1.
