The US just assassinated...

gcomeau wrote:
There's a reason that nobody thought very publicly assassinating the Soviet Minister of Defense while he was on some foreign state tour and then bragging about it on international TV during that conflict was something that was appropriate or useful to do.

Generally because the bragging would be cut short by radar warning of multiple waves of Soviet warheads descending all across North American continent.

Dilandu wrote:

gcomeau wrote:
There's a reason that nobody thought very publicly assassinating the Soviet Minister of Defense while he was on some foreign state tour and then bragging about it on international TV during that conflict was something that was appropriate or useful to do.

Generally because the bragging would be cut short by radar warning of multiple waves of Soviet warheads descending all across North American continent.

That would be most unfortunate since it would virtually guarantee that there would be an equal number of missiles headed back the other direction. How about it...let's turn the planet into a radioactive wasteland. God forbid that anyone be crazy enough to punch those buttons.

Don

-

gcomeau wrote:

Dilandu wrote:


Seems that it's calculated attempt to provoke Iran for some drastic actions - that may be used as a cause for full-scale campaign against Iran.

Trump has been trying to provoke something with Iran from day one when he torpedoed the nuke deal...

God knows that it would be far better to do nothing so that Iran can eventually acquire nuclear weapons as allowed by the nuke deal.

Killing Bin Laden so publicly was a bad decision because it undermined a relatively moderate, secular Pakistani President who might have resisted the radical Islamists. Killing this asshole reveals that the current regime of Iraq is an Iranian puppet. This just might incite revolts in Iraq as well as Iran.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:]


God knows that it would be far better to do nothing so that Iran can eventually acquire nuclear weapons as allowed by the nuke deal.

The nuke deal specifically prevented nuclear weapons development.

That was the *entire purpose* of the deal.

And Iran was in compliance when Trump blew it all up.

gcomeau wrote:There is no formal state of war between the US and Iran.

No, they've just been 'informally' at war with us for the last 40 years. Attacking the U.S. Embassy was just another act of war perpetrated by Iran. We whacked the state-sponsored terrorist that did it.

gcomeau wrote:congressionally authorized military engagements

Try these on for size:

“Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Terrorists” (PUBLIC LAW 107–40—SEPT. 18, 2001)

“Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002” (PUBLIC LAW 107–243—OCT. 16, 2002)

Both of which are still in effect. Soleimani has been supporting terrorist activities for more than 20 years. Legitimate target, legitimate location, as authorized by Congress. Trump did his job as Commander In Chief of the United States Armed Forces.
———————————
Never throw shit at an armed man.

Imaginos1892 wrote:

gcomeau wrote:There is no formal state of war between the US and Iran.

No, they've just been 'informally' at war with us for the last 40 years. Attacking the U.S. Embassy was just another act of war perpetrated by Iran. We whacked the state-sponsored terrorist that did it.

gcomeau wrote:congressionally authorized military engagements

Try these on for size:

“Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Terrorists” (PUBLIC LAW 107–40—SEPT. 18, 2001)

“Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002” (PUBLIC LAW 107–243—OCT. 16, 2002)

Both of which are still in effect. Soleimani has been supporting terrorist activities for more than 20 years. Legitimate target, legitimate location, as authorized by Congress. Trump did his job as Commander In Chief of the United States Armed Forces.
———————————
Never throw shit at an armed man.

Never stand next to someone who is throwing shit at an armed man.

This airstrike would not have happened if Iran had not incited the attack on our embassy. Some of us remember the Iran hostages. Trump realized that he could not let it go.

It's not like there are no precedents for these types of strikes regardless what we think of them and I guess some law-scholars are going to have some heated debates for some time.

Regardless if it was within US-law or not, I personally think the way they went about it is kind of stupid since it antagonized a lot of people in the Middle-East.

Using a sledgehammer to get the point through are sometimes valid, but not always.

Joat42 wrote:Regardless if it was within US-law or not, I personally think the way they went about it is kind of stupid since it antagonized a lot of people in the Middle-East.

They were already as antagonized as they could get. Blasting Soleimani had all the effect of throwing a lit match into a forest fire.
———————————
Wing: ”Have you ever heard the phrase, 'Living well is the best revenge'?"
Miles: “Where I come from, someone's head in a bag is generally considered the best revenge."

Imaginos1892 wrote:

Joat42 wrote:Regardless if it was within US-law or not, I personally think the way they went about it is kind of stupid since it antagonized a lot of people in the Middle-East.

They were already as antagonized as they could get. Blasting Soleimani had all the effect of throwing a lit match into a forest fire.
———————————
Wing: ”Have you ever heard the phrase, 'Living well is the best revenge'?"
Miles: “Where I come from, someone's head in a bag is generally considered the best revenge."

Not really because this pretty much forces Iran to retaliate. It probably won't strike directly at the US, but US allies in the region are another matter.

And frankly, the US could have reduced the risk of that fairly easily. One of the other people killed in the strike was the militia leader actually responsible for the recent attack on the US embassy, among many other misdeeds. The US could have said he was the target, and that Suleimani's death was the unfortunate result of palling around with terrorists. That would have had pretty much all of the benefits while not forcing Iran's hand (at least not as hard). Instead, the US openly declared Suleimani was the target.