From USA Today:
“Donald Trump showed restraint,
then resolve, in killing of Iran's Qassem Soleimani”
Faced with years of Iran's
escalating aggression in the Middle East, Donald Trump has been a model of
restraint. Finally, Iran had gone too far. Qassem Soleimani was a violent man
who lived a violent life. The Iranian major general lived by the sword and died
by the drone. Soleimani’s death was a long time coming, and it is chiefly
mourned by those who are seeking a similar end. We can dispense with questions
over whether the attack that killed Soleimani was an illegal assassination as
opposed to a legitimate act in the war on terrorism. The United States has been
conducting such strikes for years, and President Barack Obama faced no serious
pushback for using drones to prosecute the conflict. The Iranian Revolutionary
Guards Corps Quds force which Soleimani commanded was a designated Foreign
Terrorist Organization, which gave its members the same status as al-Qaida, the
Islamic State or any other such group. According to the Pentagon, Soleimani was
actively planning attacks against American forces, something he had done many
times in the past. Those politicians who question whether President Donald
Trump had the legal right to conduct the strike can suggest adding it as
another article of impeachment, if they dare.
Iran raised the stakes: The
criticism that this move was escalatory ignores the fact that Iran has been
escalating conflict in the Middle East for years. Iran supports insurgent and
militia groups in Yemen, Afghanistan, Gaza, Lebanon and Syria, among others.
Iran, using Soleimani’s Quds Force as its spearhead, was responsible for more
than 600 American deaths in Iraq from 2003 to 2011, 17% of all U.S. dead in
that conflict. President George W. Bush's administration never adequately made
Tehran pay, and the Obama administration was more interested in paying Tehran. Trump
had been a model of restraint in the face of increasingly aggressive moves
against American allies and interests by Iran and its proxies. These included
attacks on Saudi oil refineries and tankers in the Persian Gulf, as well as
aggressive moves against Israel in Syria, which the Jewish state has been
responding to ably with strikes of its own. Trump even called off a planned retaliatory
mission last June, after Iranian forces downed a US drone. So it’s difficult to
argue Trump was looking for pretexts for war. But the red line for Trump is and
has been attacks that threaten or take American lives. When an American
civilian defense contractor was killed by rocket fire in a Quds-backed Shiite
militia attack near Kirkuk, Iraq, in December, the United States mounted a
punitive strike, killing 25. When members of the militia group attacked the
U.S. embassy in Baghdad, Trump immediately sent in Marine reinforcements. The
president then issued a threat to Iran, to which Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali
Khamenei responded, “you can’t do a damn thing.”
Soleimani's taunts, Trump's
response: This was not simply a taunt; Khamenei employed an effectively
official slogan Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini used repeatedly against President
Jimmy Carter during the 1980 hostage crisis. The implication of another
election-year embassy takeover was plain. So when Soleimani brazenly traveled
to Baghdad, Trump demonstrated that the United States can do things, and damn
well. Tehran now threatens revenge, of course, and they will likely seek it
soon. Soleimani had boasted of Iran’s “power in the region and capability for
launching asymmetrical war.” Force protection is critical to prevent another
episode like the 1983 bombing of the Marine Corps barracks in Beirut. And there
is also the possibility of an Iranian-backed domestic attack, like the planned
bombing, according to U.S. officials, in Washington, D.C., which was broken up
in 2011. Attack on US Embassy in Iraq shows Trump is failing. He walked into
Iran's trap. "We are near you, where you can't even imagine,” Soleimani
had said. But it is safe to assume that any attack on the American homeland
that was traceable to Tehran would be met with a significant, 9/11-style
response. Despite Tehran’s bluster the U.S. maintains escalation dominance and
there is really no question about the degree of punishment America could
inflict on Iran should matters deteriorate further. Of course, maybe Tehran
doesn’t care about the “great and overwhelming force” President Trump threatened
last June. Tehran claims that its “strategic patience” is not a sign of fear.
“We are the nation of martyrdom,” Soleimani boasted. “Come; we are ready.”
President Trump’s response was, challenge accepted.
^ This article shows the whole
story (from Bush, Obama and now Trump) and what Iran has done to the US and
other countries over the years. Other Presidents and countries have either
ignored Iran’s attacks or worked to appease Iran. Ignorance may be bliss, but
when people are being killed and wounded you can not put your head in the sand
or keep appeasing and hoping things will get better. Iran has gambled over the
years and have crossed the line and the US has stood-up and shown that we will
no longer tolerate being attacked and having our citizens killed. The people
and countries that side with Iran tend to be either ignorant (like Rose
McGowan) or more concerned with being anti-America (like Russia, China, etc.) Iran
may try to revenge the killing of their highest terrorist, but the United
States of 2020 is not the United States of 1979. We will not allow Iran (or any
country) to threaten our Embassies, kill our citizens, etc. and those that do
will be severely punished. If Iran wants to rejoin the International Community
(and not just stay with the sad, decaying dictatorships of the world) then they
need to move away from their current policy of playing the victim while at the
same time attacking others and move towards a country that can live and trade
with the world (including the US) without threatening the stability of the
Middle East and the world in general. ^
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.