Just last weekend the US sent a drone to kill the general of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard……but it was not intended to start a war…..at least that is the statement from Trump….
In the wake of Thursday night’s assassination of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the Pentagon offered a legal justification by claiming there was an “imminent” attack being plotted at the time.
That’s the go-to excuse for US airstrikes, but it is conspicuous that in all that’s been said on the high-profile assassination, the Pentagon is absolutely refusing to offer any details on what that threat actually was.
That’s not insignificant, to the extent that the US is going to try to argue a legal pretext for an act of war launched outside of a Congressional authorization. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was similarly light on details, but claimed it would have “put dozens if not hundreds of American lives at risk.”
There are details sorely lacking in all of this, and evidence as well. Sen. McConnell (R-KY) suggested some Senators might get a classified debriefing next week, but that still leaves the public in the dark as the attack risks starting a war.
The lack of specificity leaves open room for speculation. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) was eager to get in on this, claiming Soleimani was plotting a coup in Iraq at the time. He similarly offered no evidence, and given Iran’s close ties to the Iraqi government, it seems highly unlikely.
Adding to doubts about the imminent threat is the Department of Homeland Security, which even after the attack claims there is no domestic threat at all. While New York officials say they are bracing for an attack, the signs point to there being no intelligence at all
The action was taken to stop a war?
Then why a large deployment of troops?
Iran is threatening a “harsh retaliation” after the attack, and the US intends to deploy another 3,500 troops to Iraq and the surrounding area in anticipation of this escalating further. Iran says retaliation will be at a time of their choice.
The timing of the 3,500 more troops arriving is unclear, though they’ll likely mostly arrive in Kuwait. This plans are in addition to 750 sent earlier this week, and 4,000 announced at the time.
This caps off a shockingly escalatory week that has left the US on the brink of war with Iran and, realistically, with Iraq as well. On last Friday, a series of rockets hit an Iraqi base, killing a US contractor. The US blamed an Iraqi militia, and on Sunday attacked five of the militia’s bases, killing 25. The militia responded with protests at the US Embassy, which the US blamed on Iran, and by Thursday had escalated that to killing Gen. Soleimani when he arrived at the Iraqi airport.
Analysts have said this attack was an act of war, and the US rushing troops to the region shows that they are expecting retaliation.
I would like to see the intel for myself…..I am suspicious of the timing of this action only because of something said in the past by Trump……
Does a threat constitute a de-escalation?
Trump has now announced, via Twitter, that the US has singled out 52 Iranian sites, which he says represents the 52 hostages from the 1979-80 hostage situation, that the US will attack if Iran strikes “any Americans, or American assets.”
Trump was vague on what he intended to attack, saying they were “important to Iran & the Iranian culture.” It is noted that deliberate attacks on cultural heritage sites is illegal under international law.
Trump’s announcement is likely mostly about Iranian Gen. Gholamali Abuhamzeh saying there are 35 US targets in the region, and Trump wanting to have even more targets. It makes sense that more Iranian targets would exist, the US threats centering on Iran.
Iran is in a difficult position on potential retaliation, given the high-profile nature of the US attack, and Soleimani’s importance within Iran’s military. The US and Iran have hit each other in small ways for years, with bigger attacks deterred by the threat of equally damaging retaliation.
Avoiding full war is always an Iranian priority, but the US attack throws their deterrence into doubt. If Iran does not work something out, or carry out a commensurate measure, the risk would be that the US believes they can carry out attacks of this level with impunity.
I have criticized our president and his lack of knowledge of international situations….like the time in a phone interview when asked about al-Quds he told them about the Kurds.
But it is not just him, them president, that is clueless internationally…..the VP is just as f*cking ignorant….
Vice President Mike Pence defended President Donald Trump’s decision to authorize a drone strike that killed Iran’s top intelligence commander, Maj. Gen. Qassim Soleimani, in a series of tweets that pushed a conspiracy theory that ties the Sept. 11, 2001 attack to Iran even though there is no proof to make that connection.
In a series of tweets, Pence called Soleimani “an evil man who was responsible for killings thousands of Americans.” The vice president went on to say that Soleimani “assisted in the clandestine travel to Afghanistan of 10 of the 12 terrorists who carried out the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States.” It is far from clear how Pence made that conclusion that is not supported by what is publicly known about both Soleimani and those who carried out the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.
I have called Trump’s foreign policy knee jerk and chaotic…..and things like these are why I do so.,,,,the Big 4, Trump, Pence, Pompeo and Esper, are a clueless batch that is leading our foreign policy….it will come to NO good mark my words.
Just a thought.
I Read, I Wrote, You Know
“lego ergo scribo”