Tweet
Re: Once Again, Ultimately a Bad Bet
There are just a few problems with that line of thought, only it takes just a tiny bit of nuance and discernment to square things away.
Trump asserted that Gen. Soleimani was responsible for the “deaths of hundreds, if not thousands, of Americans” and this line has been repeated endlessly across the media by Democrats and Republicans alike. Now it's one thing to claim that Iran is responsible for the deaths of "hundreds, if not thousands of Americans" and not at all unexpected to hear propaganda of this sort from an aggressor to justify its illegal use of force. The problem with this is that it's untrue.
Certainly, hundreds of Americans have been killed by state sponsored terrorism in the Middle-East and elsewhere. But if you take every American killed including and since 9/11 in the resultant Middle East related wars, conflicts and terrorist acts, the finger of blame points not towards our historical enemy Iran, but to our so called ally Saudi Arabia.
Well over 90% of Americans killed since 11 September 2001 have fallen at the hands of Sunni Muslims financed and supported by Saudi Arabia and its gulf satellites. Less than 10% of those Americans have been killed by Shia Muslims tied to Iran. Every journalist or aid worker hostage who has been horribly beheaded or otherwise executed has been murdered by a Sunni, every jihadist terrorist attack in the USA itself, including 9/11, has been exclusively Sunni, the Benghazi attack was by Sunnis, Isil are Sunni, Al Nusra are Sunni, the Taliban are Sunni and the vast majority of US troops killed in the region are killed by Sunnis.
Of course, this has been a stubborn and inconvenient fact for multiple US administrations going back to Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan. Regardless of party, they are beholden to Saudi Arabia and its money. It is, the USA affirms, the Sunnis who are the allies and the Shias who are the enemy. The fact that Sunni Muslims kill Americans 10 to 1 over Shia is not something they are prepared to discuss, considering the $50B USD in military aid sent to Saudi Arabia flows through major US banks, back to major US defense contractors, and a sizable portion is "recycled" into the campaign coffers of those same politicians ever eager to redirect our attention from the facts of who exactly is killing Americans.
And is it too much to ask precisely which are these hundreds of deaths for which the Shia forces of Soleimani were responsible? Is there a list we might examine? Well no, because it's a simple lie similar to attacks in the Vietnamese Tonkin Gulf or Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq. Whatever relationship the claim might have with the truth goes back to the Pentagon’s assertion that back during our invasion of Iraq, 83% of US troop deaths were at the hands of Sunni resistance and 17% of US troop deaths were at the hands of Shia resistance, but now all of whom taken together are conveniently laid at the door of Soleimani.
Since it's propaganda it would be better if it were true, but it doesn't need to be. It just needs to get us riled up and shut down our reasoning. But if we're speaking of idiocy, it does seem to me that its authors think rather little of our intelligence. Because we'd surely be idiots if we were to accept the propagandist's premise that Soleimani is personally responsible for every American soldier killed. And there's been precious little evidence presented that Soleimani had active operational command of Shia militias during our invasion of Iraq.
And even if we were to momentarily accept for the sake of argument the ridiculous premise that Soleimani had personally supervised every combat success, we're still faced with another problem. These were legitimate acts of war in defense against an invasion. Our soldiers were killed in combat during an invasion kicking off a war of convenience started under demonstrably false pretenses. Just as the Continental Army fought the British invasion and the French Army fought the Nazi invasion, the Iraqi Shia militias – whether Iran backed or not – fought George Bush's invasion.
Now some might wish for a world where the act of defending one's territory from invading American troops was somehow illegal or illegitimate, but even they would be unwilling to cite it as a principle in international relations, international law, or the laws of war. Because it's idiocy. The idea that any state has the right to execute or assassinate combatants who fight in defense of an invasion is an absolute negation and inversion of the laws of war and common sense. A state cannot simply assassinate opposing generals who fought it, years after it invaded. Well, it seem that we can, but it takes much of the shine off the City on a Hill, dimming its Beacon of Hope.
The final and perhaps silliest lie is Vice President Mike Pence’s attempt to link Soleimani to 9/11. There is absolutely no link between Soleimani and 9/11, and the most strenuous efforts by George W. Bush and his proxies to find evidence that would link either Iran or Iraq to 9/11 failed utterly. The bipartisan 9/11 report specifically stated that the Iranians no had foreknowledge or culpability for the WTC attack and made no claim that Soleimani was in any way personally involved. It is total bullshit and assumes we are idiots incapable of reading or comprehending the ever growing mountain of evidence that 9/11 was Saudi led and Saudi executed and had nothing at all to do with Iran.
Soleimani, in fact, was involved in intelligence and logistical cooperation with the United States in Afghanistan post 9/11 as the Taliban were his enemies too, and the Shia Tajiks were a key part of the US aligned Northern Alliance. Soleimani was a high official in Iran who was openly present in Iraq as a public guest of the Iraqi government, to which the US government is allied and shares diplomatic recognition. This greatly exacerbates the illegality of his assassination still further. He was an accredited combatant general of a foreign state which we and the rest of the world recognizes. We also recognize the illegality of assassination, both in international law and in our own domestic statutes. In no way was Soleimani a legitimate target for a U.S. attack. And no Orwellian State Department briefings or mindless two minutes hate campaigns in the media will ever change that simple fact.
But more than mere illegality, its greatest sin is stupidity. It puts Iran into a position where it has to counterattack, if only to prevent future assassinations of a similar kind. We broke the rules when we killed an active commander of another country outside of a declared war. Now new rules will be made to regain a balance.
Iran will likely prepare multiple venues and methods for retribution. It might execute only one or several of those. The targets will be of at least equal size and symbolic importance as Soleimani. Such idiocy as this now puts a target on even the most senior American officials. Fortunately, they are likely too well protected to be accessible and the Iranians are too strategic in their thinking to make such a move. Thankfully, that also rules out any counterattack within the American homeland, as that would be a direct attack and would be used as the casus belli for the long desired open war. But short of those, there are a number of other possibilities for unpleasant surprises. The sinking of a large U.S. combat ship, or the take down of an aircraft similar to the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 in retribution for the USS Vincennes shootdown of Iran Air Flight 655.
Killing Soleimani was a stupid, senseless act of self-defeat and one more in a decades long track record of military and political incompetence and failure. The fallout has already begun. This morning the command of our forces in Iraq ordered a halt to all US and NATO training activities for Iraqi government troops. The Iraqi government also issued an order that, for the time being, no further US operations may take place in Iraq. Tomorrow the Iraqi parliament will meet to consult over a law that would evict all US troops. There is currently some disunity within the Shia majority in the parliament. Should it fail to evict us, expect the Shia groups will act on their own since their comrades and leaders were also killed. I fear they will attack our soldiers wherever they can. The situation for the Americans in Iraq will soon become untenable.
Originally posted by kriden
View Post
Trump asserted that Gen. Soleimani was responsible for the “deaths of hundreds, if not thousands, of Americans” and this line has been repeated endlessly across the media by Democrats and Republicans alike. Now it's one thing to claim that Iran is responsible for the deaths of "hundreds, if not thousands of Americans" and not at all unexpected to hear propaganda of this sort from an aggressor to justify its illegal use of force. The problem with this is that it's untrue.
Certainly, hundreds of Americans have been killed by state sponsored terrorism in the Middle-East and elsewhere. But if you take every American killed including and since 9/11 in the resultant Middle East related wars, conflicts and terrorist acts, the finger of blame points not towards our historical enemy Iran, but to our so called ally Saudi Arabia.
Well over 90% of Americans killed since 11 September 2001 have fallen at the hands of Sunni Muslims financed and supported by Saudi Arabia and its gulf satellites. Less than 10% of those Americans have been killed by Shia Muslims tied to Iran. Every journalist or aid worker hostage who has been horribly beheaded or otherwise executed has been murdered by a Sunni, every jihadist terrorist attack in the USA itself, including 9/11, has been exclusively Sunni, the Benghazi attack was by Sunnis, Isil are Sunni, Al Nusra are Sunni, the Taliban are Sunni and the vast majority of US troops killed in the region are killed by Sunnis.
Of course, this has been a stubborn and inconvenient fact for multiple US administrations going back to Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan. Regardless of party, they are beholden to Saudi Arabia and its money. It is, the USA affirms, the Sunnis who are the allies and the Shias who are the enemy. The fact that Sunni Muslims kill Americans 10 to 1 over Shia is not something they are prepared to discuss, considering the $50B USD in military aid sent to Saudi Arabia flows through major US banks, back to major US defense contractors, and a sizable portion is "recycled" into the campaign coffers of those same politicians ever eager to redirect our attention from the facts of who exactly is killing Americans.
And is it too much to ask precisely which are these hundreds of deaths for which the Shia forces of Soleimani were responsible? Is there a list we might examine? Well no, because it's a simple lie similar to attacks in the Vietnamese Tonkin Gulf or Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq. Whatever relationship the claim might have with the truth goes back to the Pentagon’s assertion that back during our invasion of Iraq, 83% of US troop deaths were at the hands of Sunni resistance and 17% of US troop deaths were at the hands of Shia resistance, but now all of whom taken together are conveniently laid at the door of Soleimani.
Since it's propaganda it would be better if it were true, but it doesn't need to be. It just needs to get us riled up and shut down our reasoning. But if we're speaking of idiocy, it does seem to me that its authors think rather little of our intelligence. Because we'd surely be idiots if we were to accept the propagandist's premise that Soleimani is personally responsible for every American soldier killed. And there's been precious little evidence presented that Soleimani had active operational command of Shia militias during our invasion of Iraq.
And even if we were to momentarily accept for the sake of argument the ridiculous premise that Soleimani had personally supervised every combat success, we're still faced with another problem. These were legitimate acts of war in defense against an invasion. Our soldiers were killed in combat during an invasion kicking off a war of convenience started under demonstrably false pretenses. Just as the Continental Army fought the British invasion and the French Army fought the Nazi invasion, the Iraqi Shia militias – whether Iran backed or not – fought George Bush's invasion.
Now some might wish for a world where the act of defending one's territory from invading American troops was somehow illegal or illegitimate, but even they would be unwilling to cite it as a principle in international relations, international law, or the laws of war. Because it's idiocy. The idea that any state has the right to execute or assassinate combatants who fight in defense of an invasion is an absolute negation and inversion of the laws of war and common sense. A state cannot simply assassinate opposing generals who fought it, years after it invaded. Well, it seem that we can, but it takes much of the shine off the City on a Hill, dimming its Beacon of Hope.
The final and perhaps silliest lie is Vice President Mike Pence’s attempt to link Soleimani to 9/11. There is absolutely no link between Soleimani and 9/11, and the most strenuous efforts by George W. Bush and his proxies to find evidence that would link either Iran or Iraq to 9/11 failed utterly. The bipartisan 9/11 report specifically stated that the Iranians no had foreknowledge or culpability for the WTC attack and made no claim that Soleimani was in any way personally involved. It is total bullshit and assumes we are idiots incapable of reading or comprehending the ever growing mountain of evidence that 9/11 was Saudi led and Saudi executed and had nothing at all to do with Iran.
Soleimani, in fact, was involved in intelligence and logistical cooperation with the United States in Afghanistan post 9/11 as the Taliban were his enemies too, and the Shia Tajiks were a key part of the US aligned Northern Alliance. Soleimani was a high official in Iran who was openly present in Iraq as a public guest of the Iraqi government, to which the US government is allied and shares diplomatic recognition. This greatly exacerbates the illegality of his assassination still further. He was an accredited combatant general of a foreign state which we and the rest of the world recognizes. We also recognize the illegality of assassination, both in international law and in our own domestic statutes. In no way was Soleimani a legitimate target for a U.S. attack. And no Orwellian State Department briefings or mindless two minutes hate campaigns in the media will ever change that simple fact.
But more than mere illegality, its greatest sin is stupidity. It puts Iran into a position where it has to counterattack, if only to prevent future assassinations of a similar kind. We broke the rules when we killed an active commander of another country outside of a declared war. Now new rules will be made to regain a balance.
Iran will likely prepare multiple venues and methods for retribution. It might execute only one or several of those. The targets will be of at least equal size and symbolic importance as Soleimani. Such idiocy as this now puts a target on even the most senior American officials. Fortunately, they are likely too well protected to be accessible and the Iranians are too strategic in their thinking to make such a move. Thankfully, that also rules out any counterattack within the American homeland, as that would be a direct attack and would be used as the casus belli for the long desired open war. But short of those, there are a number of other possibilities for unpleasant surprises. The sinking of a large U.S. combat ship, or the take down of an aircraft similar to the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 in retribution for the USS Vincennes shootdown of Iran Air Flight 655.
Killing Soleimani was a stupid, senseless act of self-defeat and one more in a decades long track record of military and political incompetence and failure. The fallout has already begun. This morning the command of our forces in Iraq ordered a halt to all US and NATO training activities for Iraqi government troops. The Iraqi government also issued an order that, for the time being, no further US operations may take place in Iraq. Tomorrow the Iraqi parliament will meet to consult over a law that would evict all US troops. There is currently some disunity within the Shia majority in the parliament. Should it fail to evict us, expect the Shia groups will act on their own since their comrades and leaders were also killed. I fear they will attack our soldiers wherever they can. The situation for the Americans in Iraq will soon become untenable.
Comment