Qasem Soleimani (IRGC Commander) killed in Baghdad

[Mange]

Iran is talking very boldly about targeting certain USA assets as revenge for our ridding the world of their terrorist leader who had just killed an American, & badly wounded many others, not to mention all of the people he had killed over his lifetime, including recently....

....hundreds of Iranian protesters. He was already attacking our Embassy, and preparing for additional hits in other locations. Iran has been nothing but problems for many years. Let this serve as a WARNING that if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets, 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 & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!

Trump on twitter like 25 minutes ago...

So much for deescalation, huh? It would be a war crime if carried out.

[Broomstick]

The problem with your whataboutism here is that it doesn’t make the stupid asshole any more of an asshole than the murderous asshole.

I’m both glad the fucker is dead and annoyed by the way it was done.

I frankly didn't care if he was alive or dead - dead someone will just replace him - and mad as hell about how it was done because it seems likely to get us in yet more war in the Middle East. All because the fucker who claimed while he was running for office that he'd get us out of the Middle East needed a distraction from his domestic troubles, including impeachment. Trump doesn't care if stroking his ego gets thousands of other people killed.

More war, more dead - this benefits no one.

[Broomstick]

And so are you Broomstick. Gaddafi was killed after the US knocked down the air defense system (with UK help) , and after the rest of Europe neutered his military via air strikes and naval gunfire.

Yeah, well, back terrorist groups like the IRA and/or blow up airplanes full of innocent bystanders over Scotland and do other similar acts of mayhem people tend to get pissed at you and try to restrict your ability to do more of the same.

That still does not negate the fact that Gaddafi was killed by his own people, not the US, not "Europe". His own people. Because, apparently, he was that much of a fucking dickhead.

[Col. Crackpot]

Jesus Christ Donnie... talking about incompetently stumbling into a goddamn war....

[Ralin]

Well then you are showing your inherent bias.

The fuck does that even mean?

killing the one guy leading the terrorist group is far better than killing all the poor misguided fools whipped up into a frenzy.

Wait, are you talking about Suleimani or Bush?

[Ralin]

I think a more appropriate analogy would be:

A US Army General is killed via FSB Spetsnazgruppa Alfa assault in the Ukraine.

Said general was involved in handling terrorist/resistance groups inside Crimea via facilitating them with money or munitions.

I think a better analogy would "America invaded Iraq and caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, and many many people rightly wanted America kicked out."

Basically, Soileimani and the US had a long relationship, from him basically running a long long insurgency against us in Iraq during the war with various cutouts.

And that's somehow a bad thing?

Note that we waited for him to enter Iraq before we iced him -- we could have sent stealth drones into Iran or sent a CIA wetworks team to kill him in Tehran -- but we waited until he was in a "free" area to kill him.

What the fuck does 'free' area mean?

[Darth Yan]

Sheps a rabid conservative AND a racist who thinks Arabs (particularly Palestinians) are subhuman animals because he can’t get over the fact that a lot of Palestinians had VERY good reasons to cheer 9/11. The fact they cheered at all makes them vermin one his eyes.

Him supporting war with Iran is par for the course

[TimothyC]

That still does not negate the fact that Gaddafi was killed by his own people, not the US, not "Europe". His own people. Because, apparently, he was that much of a fucking dickhead.

<rubs temples>
Let's take a brief review of the conversation so far.

That was the whole point of the agreement under Obama, to cut a deal with Iran to halt its nuclear program. Well, Trump tore it up and used it for toilet paper, so why the fuck should Iran even try to play nice or compromise anymore?

That was never a serious agreement, after:

Gadhaffi gave up his CW programs after seeing Saddam get smoked. Then later under Obama, Gadhaffi himself got smoked.

For shame - you're old enough to remember that bit of history. Gaddafi was killed during the Libyan civil war and was beaten/shot/anally raped to death by his own countrymen.

And so are you Broomstick. Gaddafi was killed after the US knocked down the air defense system (with UK help) , and after the rest of Europe neutered his military via air strikes and naval gunfire.

I'll try and break it down for you. Gadhaffi was killed, yes by his own people, AFTER the US/Euro intervention in Libya, one that was only considered viable because of the fact that the Libyan chemical and nuclear programs were dismantled. Gadhaffi was playing ball after the US invaded Iraq, and it didn't save him when Europe came knocking less than a decade later.

What Shep is saying is this: Based on the actions of the Obama administration and European leaders there is no reason for smaller powers to trust the word of the US/EU when there is pressure to get rid of the the nasty stuff, because the likelihood of intervention in a nation with chemical and nuclear programs is much smaller (see Syria, Iran, North Korea).

[Broomstick]

No, Shep is masturbating to violence, as he usually does.

Although I agree it's foolish to trust the US and EU. It's also foolish to trust Russia or China as well.

The nations of the Middle East are caught between a rock and a hard place, because they have a resource everyone wants so there is no way for them to avoid meddling by the large powers of the world.

[MKSheppard]

What the fuck does 'free' area mean?

Well, it's considered very gauche and extremely rude and provocative to kill people on your opponent's territory.

It's why Russian dissidents during the Cold War were able to (once moved to US) live with impunity, or likewise, why the US never attempted to deal with the rare few American defectors in Moscow.

It's why there was such an uproar over the Litvenko case and the Skripal poisonings, because they happened in the UK, and not, instead; say in Turkey.

[Ralin]

Well, it's considered very gauche and extremely rude and provocative to kill people on your opponent's territory.

It's why Russian dissidents during the Cold War were able to (once moved to US) live with impunity, or likewise, why the US never attempted to deal with the rare few American defectors in Moscow.

It's why there was such an uproar over the Litvenko case and the Skripal poisonings, because they happened in the UK, and not, instead; say in Turkey.

And this is relevant to the US's decision to assassinate him and start a war with Iran because?

[Knife]

Well, it's considered very gauche and extremely rude and provocative to kill people on your opponent's territory.

It's why Russian dissidents during the Cold War were able to (once moved to US) live with impunity, or likewise, why the US never attempted to deal with the rare few American defectors in Moscow.

It's why there was such an uproar over the Litvenko case and the Skripal poisonings, because they happened in the UK, and not, instead; say in Turkey.

And this is relevant to the US's decision to assassinate him and start a war with Iran because?

You asked what a "free area" was. He explained it. In a non declared war, they would not kill an Iranian General in Iran, so they waited for him to be in Iraq...in a free area as in free to hit him.

Keep in mind, I do not agree with the action and I'm against what my government did and want no war with Iran. Just explaining what Shep did.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

That isn’t “fair”. And no jingoism is implied. Just a statement of fact. An embassy is an embassy. Sacred soil for a diplomatic mission. Just ask Julian Assange.

Like Ziggy said, no it isn't. The lives of the diplomatic mission inside the US embassy aren't worth more than those of any number of Iraqis killed by the government they represent. Less, really.

I'd cheer if it was burned to the ground.

I assume you mean in terms of the number of Iraqi civilians killed compared to the number of diplomats in the embassy, otherwise you're saying the American lives are worth less than Iraqi ones.

Some idiot did indeed take a shot at said embassy: Rockets explode near US embassy in Baghdad.

Several rockets exploded near the US embassy in Baghdad hours after thousands took to the streets for the funeral of the Iranian general killed by a US airstrike.

At least one rocket landed inside the Green Zone in the Iraqi city, which houses government offices and foreign embassies, including the US embassy.

Streets in the Iraqi city of Baghdad where lined with mourners earlier on Saturday to mark the funeral processi on of General Qassem Soleimani, the head of Iran’s elite Quds Force.

No-one was injured by a Katyusha rocket that fell inside the square less than a mile from the embassy, according to an Iraqi security official.

The security official said another rocket in Baghdad landed about 500 metres from As-Salam palace, where the Iraqi president Barham Salih normally stays in Jadriya, a neighbourhood adjacent to the Green Zone.

Another security official said three rockets fell outside an air base north of Baghdad, where American contractors are normally present.

Royal Navy resumes escorting ships through strait of Hormuz.

The Royal Navy will accompany ships through the Strait of Hormuz amid heightened tensions between the US and Iran.

Following the US airstrike to kill Gen Qassem Soleimani, one of Iran's top military officers, the Navy will protect UK-flagged ships and has warned against travel in the region.

Iran has vowed to take revenge on the US, while President Trump dispatched 3,000 extra troops to Kuwait.

Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said he had instructed the HMS Montrose frigate and the HMS Defender destroyer to return to the key oil passage imminently, adding: “The Government will take all necessary steps to protect our ships and citizens at this time.”

He continued to urge “all parties” to de-escalate the situation, but appeared to give some backing to the US for the first time as he announced the shipping plan.
Thousands of mourners took to the streets to mark the death of Gen Qassem Soleimani.

After speaking to his US counterpart Mark Esper on Friday, Mr Wallace said American forces have been “repeatedly attacked by Iranian-backed militia” in Iraq during “the last few months”.

“General Soleimani has been at the heart of the use of proxies to undermine neighbouring sovereign nations and target Iran’s enemies,” Mr Wallace continued.

“Under international law the United States is entitled to defend itself against those posing an imminent threat to their citizens.”

The practice of escorting ships in the Strait of Hormuz was stood down in November, after being used during the fall-out from the seizure of the British-flagged Stena Impero tanker by Iran in July.

The difference this time, the Ministry of Defence was keen to stress, is UK ships now have a choice to navigate the waters without an escort at their own risk.

Really I'm surprised the practice was even stood down given the Iranian tendency to seize ships just because it can.

[MKSheppard]

These Media Posts will serve as notification to the United States Congress that should Iran strike any U.S. person or target, the United States will quickly & fully strike back, & perhaps in a disproportionate manner. Such legal notice is not required, but is given nevertheless!

Donald J. Trump Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 5, 2020

[LadyTevar]

These Media Posts will serve as notification to the United States Congress that should Iran strike any U.S. person or target, the United States will quickly & fully strike back, & perhaps in a disproportionate manner. Such legal notice is not required, but is given nevertheless!

Donald J. Trump Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 5, 2020

One does not Notify Congress via a damn TWEET.

[Gandalf]

One does not Notify Congress via a damn TWEET.

Why not? I can't imagine there's a law against it.

[TimothyC]

No, Shep is masturbating to violence, as he usually does.

<Sigh>

Broomstick, I've met Shep. Heck, I'm the guy that got a picture of him.... fondling* a nuclear bomb. That wasn't the context here.

* Yeah, the rest of you should have to suffer as I did.

[Knife]

One does not Notify Congress via a damn TWEET.

Why not? I can't imagine there's a law against it.

Because it's not notification. It's broadcasting in one direction. I can jump on a Ham Radio and transmit vital information about you, if you aren't listening or don't get the message for one reason or another, it's not notification. Besides the notion of expecting the rest of the US government of sign up to Twiter to receive notice of classified happenings in US foreign relations.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Why not? I can't imagine there's a law against it.

"Well, there's no rule saying a dog CAN'T play basketball."

[Col. Crackpot]

Why not? I can't imagine there's a law against it.

"Well, there's no rule saying a dog CAN'T play basketball."

At the risk of derailing this serious thread with further nonsense...

[link] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Bud [/link]

In my defense someone posted a pic of Shep fondling a thermonuclear warhead.

God I missed this place.

[Gandalf]

Because it's not notification. It's broadcasting in one direction. I can jump on a Ham Radio and transmit vital information about you, if you aren't listening or don't get the message for one reason or another, it's not notification. Besides the notion of expecting the rest of the US government of sign up to Twiter to receive notice of classified happenings in US foreign relations.

"Well, there's no rule saying a dog CAN'T play basketball."

All the more reason to pass some nice laws stating not just what a president must do, but also the means by which they must do. Otherwise it's just asking for this to keep happening.

Granted, those laws need to be enforced, but that's another thing.

[Ziggy Stardust]

All the more reason to pass some nice laws stating not just what a president must do, but also the means by which they must do. Otherwise it's just asking for this to keep happening.

Granted, those laws need to be enforced, but that's another thing.

To be perfectly honest, I wasn't even disagreeing with you, I just really wanted to make an Air Bud reference.

[Gandalf]

To be perfectly honest, I wasn't even disagreeing with you, I just really wanted to make an Air Bud reference.

I wasn't 100% myself, but I thought I'd include you anyway. I got a good chuckle from that though.

[Ralin]

All the more reason to pass some nice laws stating not just what a president must do, but also the means by which they must do. Otherwise it's just asking for this to keep happening.

Granted, those laws need to be enforced, but that's another thing.

It's not like rule by precedent/tradition/unspoken understanding is unique to the US. It's worked in many places over the years. Until it doesn't. But that's all political systems.

[Straha]

No, Shep is masturbating to violence, as he usually does.

This is not that. In a weird and deeply uncharacteristic turn of fate, this is him bemoaning a set of very specific acts of violence.

There's no denying that the 21st century has seen a terrible reversal of non-proliferation norms, worse than anybody could reasonably expect.

The capricious invasion of Iraq, which lacked any sort of WMD despite that being the operative reason to invade, made it seem like the norms were nothing more than tools of direct imperial control instead of internationally set norms respected by the global community.

Ghaddafi gave up his weapons of mass destruction and was put through an almost debutant's ball of being re-welcomed into the brotherhood of nations by Blair, the EU, et al. All of whom turned on him with explicit military force the second there was any sort of domestic dispute, while similar ruthless regimes across the Maghreb and Middle East who had the same sort of unrest were left to their own devices or clandestinely propped up. (Egypt is a striking counter-example.) Which sent the message that giving up weapons is a fool's errand because that sort of naked display of force is, at the end of the day, the only thing that other countries will recognize.

Speaking of, Assad has held onto power by not giving up such weapons and then using them. For which there was no wrath of god judgment, and now the international community has let that transgression slip into the mists of hazy memory, rupturing what should be one of the ultimate international taboos.

Now, Iran adds to that disaster. A deal was struck and then unilaterally violated because of a deranged man's pique, which undercuts what was left of the idea that negotiation offers a long-term solution to any problem. And a high ranking official in a democratic government has been assassinated without warning or pretense. One wonders what the Trump administration's response to someone assassinating Gina Haspel would be.


This is all complicated and requires engagement and nuance, but there's no way to deny that at the end of the day it's more of a dumpster fire than not.