Heeheeeheee you’ve proved my point!
They’re also not “cowering”. This idea that when other countries attack us we become united and emboldened to fight back but when we attack other countries they run away with their tails between their legs is a cartoon version of reality. You are correct when you say that Iran are “not stupid”; in fact they’ve proven themselves quite shrewd. We’ve pissed them off, and since their country isn’t run by a big incoherent baby they will consider their response carefully.
On that point, given that the first thing they did was to fully withdraw from the JCPOA, it’s fairly obvious that what they are doing is biding their time while developing a nuclear weapon, knowing full well that the US will be far less willing to pull this kind of shit on a nuclear power. Then they’ll keep doing the same sniping they’re already doing while the US blusters and sputters impotently.
No he didn’t. He gave Iran back its own money as legally required (I realize that a president that follows the law is novel to some), plus negotiated interest payments also required. Had he not given back the money, the interest payments would still be accumulating. It had fuck-all to do with “appeasing” them.
You may be getting richer but you’re not getting smarter nor less gullible.
Not sure why this is in the Pit, but what the hell. The real trouble getting to the heart of your OP is, we don’t actually know WHY Trump did what he did. On the face of it, it seems he did it more out of pique than any sort of grand strategic thinking. That’s always a bad rationale. It’s also unclear if he thought at all about the ramifications to said action. Both GW Bush and Obama also could have acted against Soleimani at various times, and chose not too, despite the fact that this guy was pretty obviously heavily involved in operations against the US and our allies, and had been responsible, at least at the strategic level, in many US (and other) deaths. On the face of it, that’s all good reason to kill this guy. In addition, he was a key person in the Iranian chain of command with respect to their exterior operations and coordination with the various militia and para-military (terrorist) groups Iran uses in it’s various proxy campaigns. So, again, seems like he should be a target and that, as you say (so far) the US has gotten off lightly. We assassinated a key person who was in fact doing and had been doing harm to the US and our allies in the region for over a decade. No brainer.
However, there are some other pieces of information that give some context to this. First off, while alive Soleimani wasn’t universally beloved in Iran. There are various factions in the country, unsurprisingly, and many of them did not really like him, and in fact some were working to remove or limit his power. There is also a line of thinking that this guy was using media and other sources to try and buff his cred in order to gain even more power…perhaps a man who would be king. Killing him, however, had the perhaps unintended effect (since it’s unclear Trump even gave one thought about any of this) of basically uniting those factions and basically bringing the hardliners to full and undisputed (for now) prominence. There were, before this happened, quite a few protests happening in Iran, and the hardliners, despite the bone Trump threw to them wrt the nuclear treaty, were having a hard time keeping their grip as tight as they wanted. This, however, has allowed them to once again become preeminent…at least for now. And the way they handled their response, while probably not satisfying everyone, has been pretty masterful wrt their own internal narrative. Plus, it leaves them free to basically keep doing what Soleimani was already doing, i.e. waging an underground and hidden proxy war against the US with the aim of consolidating their power and preeminence in the region, starting with Iraq. On that front as well this killing IN Iraq has done a lot to bring several of the nominally allied Iranian aligned militia groups back into line and on the same page, and put the factions in Iraq who were either tepid supporters of the US or at least not having any great antipathy at a huge disadvantage…which is, of course, a benefit to Iran.
The trouble is, in a nut shell, that we don’t know why Trump ordered the killing or what the strategic purpose was. Depending on what the goals were, it might have been the right move…though, from what little has been said (despite all the hot air saying it), I don’t think we actually had any. It was just pique…Trump was given a range of options, and out of pique chose the harshest one because he’s Trump and was grumpy.
Frankly, neither Iran or the US is coming out of this smelling like a rose, and both sides have fucked this up by the numbers. The Iranian hardliners are holding on to their hate and trying to tighten their grip, while internally their people are increasingly disillusioned, angry and frustrated by it all. The US is playing into this factions hands, and giving them opportunities TOO gain a tighter grip and put those protests down and gain in power. I doubt either side has actually learned any real lessons out of this, and my own WAG is that Iran will push the proxy actions one time too many, and the next time…or the time after that…it will be an actual war. A war neither side wants, and the region especially, not to mention the world economy DEFINITELY doesn’t want, but happens anyway because both sides are too stubborn and stupid to try and reconcile. At least wrt the US there is the chance we will get a new president and go in a new direction. In Iran though? That’s going to take some serious blood, if it ever happens.
^Or Trump and his immediate subordinates really had no clue that Soleimani was even going to be there, which would be a better explanation for the lack of releasing their reasons behind the attack. This administration has a history of being unable to maintain such security, stands to reason that they’re not releasing the reports they acted on not because of security concerns but because they make Trump look worse than he already does.
So if anyone else was in the white house, this might have been a great idea but because Trump just happened to be there, it was a bad idea?
I remember similar concerns about Islamic retribution coming from the right when Obama killed bin Laden and dumped his body in the ocean.
So I understand that you are always going to get some partisan resistance to giving credit where credit is due but by all accounts this guy needed killing. Of all the Democratic candidates, only Butigieg is coming out and saying this was a bad idea and it’s going hurt him on any national defense questions at the next debate.
I suspect that Biden will take a “even a blind squirrel can find a nut”/“even a broken clock is right twice a day” approach to the events. I am becoming more and more convinced that Biden is the best head of state on that debate stage, foot in mouth disease and all.
Until we see a string of good decisions from Trump, I think this is about right.
Law and order does not exist in international relations the way it does in my suburban neighborhood. Trump can’t just call the cops and have them arrest the guy.
If Berger was orchestrating and coordinating attacks against Iran, then he is an eligible target. If Trump can prove that the dead guy was in fact responsible for orchestrating the attacks against US personnel, it was justified.
True. International law is more of a gentleman’s agreement between powers. Nations can and will do whatever they can get away with.
It comes down to how well an act works diplomatically. Was he a bad enough guy that other nations will hand wave it? Will nations be less willing to trust that the US can have restraint? Aside from something that’s a blatant war crime and unites multiple nations against you, the main thing any nation needs to worry about is how an act affects its reputation.
I see two potential problems here; Iran’s retaliation (which may have ended or just started) and damage to the US’s image. In either case only time will tell if this turns out badly for America.
There’s a world of difference between killing a stateless declared terrorist in Bin Laden and a uniformed military leader.
How does this make things better? Do you really think this is over – that Iran doesn’t plan to do anything more in retribution, behind the scenes or otherwise? And how much more is Iran unified now than before? We might have just done a huge favor to the Iranian government – their people might be more strongly behind them than they have in decades. And all it cost, from their perspective, is one general.
The point is that we don’t know, and can’t know. This was wild flailing, from an irrational and incompetent leader with incompetent advisors. I suppose it’s possible that sometimes wild flailing might do something good… but the chances seem pretty damn low. The idea that anyone can declare this a success this soon is ludicrous. This could have ramifications for years.
I thought you, of all people, recognized that military action, especially against state actors, in the Middle East, usually backfires.
It’s a moronic opinion and you’re a moron.
I don’t think it’s as mysterious as all that.
If you try to determine the military strategy, there are a lot of complicated mental gymastics to make bad outcomes into good outcomes. You have to ignore that the “imminent attack” is being re-defined by Pompeo as “not imminent.” You have to ignore that senators who have seen the intel have said that it wasn’t a credible presentation. You have to ignore the fact that “we can’t show you the supporting intel” would be a most convenient cover for “there’s no supporting intel.”
But, if you don’t want to make Occam cry, frame it in terms of Trump’s known important priorities: #1, his political survival. #2, getting good press/avoiding bad press.
By this measure, Trump made a very canny political move that helps him in numerous ways. He avoids a Benghazi-like press moment. He knocks some momentum out of the impeachment story. He possibly sways some of his impeachment jurors in the Senate who are Iran war hawks and/or beholden to defense contractors. By this metric it’s simple to see that Trump made a very smart and successful move here.
Trump is out for Trump. His only talent and interest is preserving and glorifying Trump. Let that principle be your guiding star, and things won’t seem complicated or mysterious at all.
You are criticizing the killing of a man that by all accounts is responsbile for the deaths tens and hundreds of thousands of Sryian civilians and desperately needed killing.
In many ways al Qaeda and the other terrorist organizations that looked up to him are more likely to attack us with impunity, but I don’t recall a lot of hand wringing about “consequences” when we Obama killed Osama bin Laden. Except for a few people from the right but most of them just didn’t want to give Obama the credit.
Sure, Iran can attack us but it does so at it’s peril, unlike al Qaeda we know where the Ayatollah Khameini is at all times, we could drop a bomb on his head within a day, we could bring Iran to its knees in a week. As fucked up as the Iraq war was, it left no doubt in anyone’s mind, that the USA can conduct a fairly complete and thorough conventional war with minimal cost and casualties. We may not be able to rebuild the country afterwards but there is no doubt of whether we can institute regime change in an Iran/America war. It’s over before it starts, and Iran knows it. That is why they seem to be back off with face saving moves.
This lets Iran know that there are consequences to orchestrating attacks against American forces. They know that we will react to provocation and it won’t be cheap for them when they kill our people.
What do you think iran is going to do that it wasn’t going to do before? Shoot more missiles at empty bases?
That’s a lot of ifs that you’re throwing out there. If this one general was so meaningless then why would it unify their people so much? This guy was significant, he was responsible for countless american deaths and people in Iran loved him for it. Fuck those people.
How many more americans should we have let him kill before we react? Or should we be putting the goodwill of the iranians ahead of american lives?
If this guy did everything that the pentagon and Trump says he did, then it doesn’t matter how much Iran might retaliate. We can’t let it go
We can never really know the future. And the notion that anyone can condemn this so soon seems equally ludicrous. But right now it looks far more likely that we just killed a guy that needed killing and Iran backed down because they can’t win a fight against us unless the rest of the world takes their side.
Really? Why would you think that?
I was against the invasion of iraq but that’s because I am against use of force under any circumstance. I am against war that is is unjustified. We have every justification to kill this man if he did what the pentagon and the trump administration says he did.
Big news! Iran relaced Soleimani with a hippie, liberal pacifist. The new general is totally not going to keep doing the same things as the dead guy.
The Trump rubes will fall for anything.
So when they told the Iraqis to tell us that they would be bombing our base so that we cold evacuate our troops so that noone would get hurt. That wasn’t a response?
It seems to me that they are suddenly a lot more careful about taking american lives than they were last week. Perhaps the killing of Suleimani has something to do with their newfound caution.
Then we better make sure they never become a nuclear power, shouldn’t we?
There is also the sticky matter of our constitutional requirement to repay all debts. It was actually a constitutional problem that everyone conveniently ignored. We owed that money to Iran despite the fact that there was a regime change. We don’t get to ignore our debts because there has been a successor in interest that we do not like.
The rest of the money was just unfreezing iranian assets. Mostly held by non-US banks in non-US accounts. It was never our money, it was always their money.
We’re in our 10th year of sustained economic growth. Pretty much everyone is getting richer. Trump is so good for the economy that the economy was reacting to his presidency almost exactly 8 years before he took office. The economy was probably growing due to his birtherism, the economy clearly interpreted that as confirmation that he would one day run for president and began its decade long sustained growth. 
I can’t imagine how the Joint Chiefs haven’t been involved in some fashion on the various efforts in Iraq, many of which have killed Iranians. Do you have a plausible scenario where the leadership of the military isn’t involved in what the military does?
Nobody is criticizing that. The criticism is about making a rash decision to possibly provoke more conflict.
Because bin Laden was an inconsequential, stateless, isolated figure by that that time. His network was destroyed, he was an international pariah.
There’s something to be said for this, but remember this takes place in a complicated and interconnected region. Say the US gets kicked out of Iraq… now Iran has a free hand there, unless the US is willing to re-invade Iraq.
Or, if I’m Saudi Arabia, what I want to do now is screw my rival Iran by staging a terror attack against US interests in the region and trying to pin it on Iran.
This has never been a question of whether the US or Iran has a bigger dick, it’s about intelligent management of allied and rival interests in a complex region.
Lots of people “need killing”. In many or most cases, killing them out of hand, without due process or something similar, would make the situation worse.
Because bin Laden didn’t have a country strongly behind him, and bin Laden had attacked the US on American soil. The entire world recognized that we had a legitimate reason to want him dead, and there isn’t a single government, beyond possibly the Taliban, that was really that upset that we killed him.
The idea that defeating Iran would be easy, with “minimal cost and casualties”, is the kind of idiotic thinking that got us into Vietnam and Iraq 2. It’s nuts. I guess you didn’t learn that lesson, but there are virtually no easy military actions in that region. We need to get it into our skulls that the first Gulf War was almost a unicorn of a war – very defined and limited goals, a true international coalition, major regional support (including regional popular support), etc. It’s not likely to happen again. Killing people is not going to fix the Middle East.
So far the consequences appear to be increased popular support for the Iranian government, actual international sympathy, looking like the aggrieved party, all at the price of one man. Iran is in a stronger position now than 2 weeks ago, IMO. We’re certainly in a weaker position internationally.
Get nukes. Why wouldn’t they? And we can’t stop them, now that we made the catastrophically stupid decision to pull out of the nuclear agreement in a way that provided no benefit to anyone but Iranian hard-liners. We’re not going to invade Iran (knock on wood)… and that’s the only possible way to keep them from getting nukes if they want them. Even that probably wouldn’t work, and would massively weaken America and cost thousands upon thousands of lives.
With more popular support, Iran will have more volunteers and more resources to conduct the kind of nasty covert stuff they’ve been doing for decades.
This kind of attitude is just so stupid and counterproductive that it’s not even worth considering. We shouldn’t be in the region involving ourselves in regional conflicts.
We should have gotten out of the region years ago. We should stop interfering in the regional conflict between Iran and Saudi Arabia. They’re both bad guys. Neither is better than the other.
We’ve let that kind of thing go for decades, all over the world. The smart thing to do is to stop getting involved in dumb situations that aren’t really about us. That’s how to keep Americans from getting killed by assholes like him.
And obviously it’s nuts to trust anything this White House says, about Soleimani or anything else. They lie constantly.
I’m sure that’s how it looks in the White House talking points. In the real world, it looks like irrational, incompetent flailing.
I thought you’d learned the right lessons from Iraq. Apparently I was wrong. Getting further involved in these regional conflicts is just weakening the country in a big way – risking more lives and more money for no gain at all. The idea that Trump just happened to stumble upon the right kind of military action to make things better is not a serious thing to consider. As a rule, US military action in the Middle East makes things worse, 99% of the time or more. I see no reason to believe that this is in that ~1% when it might not make things worse.
Iran has some smart and evil people in their ranks. They can find ways to hurt and kill Americans abroad in ways that are hard to trace back to them. This just vastly increases their incentive to do this. We should be on a path to lessen this incentive – disentangle ourselves from the evil regime of Saudi Arabia. But we’re led by idiots, so they’re just making things worse, and more Americans will die for nothing because of it.
An Iranian-backed militia killed a single US contractor. The US killed half a dozen militia members. Iran responded with no deaths. The US assassinated a general.
The Iranians have been the ones taking measured responses for this entire escalation. The US has been shitting the bed and threatening war crimes.
If only there was a way to do this. Maybe a plan of action. It could even be mutual, with various groups involved in the discussion, negotiation, writing, and enforcement. Since we want it to cover everything, it could be “comprehensive”. And mutual just doesn’t roll of the tongue like “Joint”. Aha! We can create a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action that will allow Iran relief from sanctions while preventing them from developing nuclear weapons.
Oh wait, we did that. And Trump said “fuck that” and reimposed sanctions. And Iran STILL held to it for over two years, only ending after the US assassinated one of their leaders.
We’ve somehow managed to make Iran look like the fucking grownups.
If you think this kind of thing is a good idea, and you’re a US citizen, in good health, under 45, and haven’t served in the military, then you’re a fucking pathetic sniveling chickenhawk coward who should stay in your basement and stop inflicting your pathetic cowardice that risks American lives on the rest of the country.
Fuck all the cowardly warmongers, now and forever.