Um, that rebuts my statement… how? You are only repeating your simplification.
2 Likes
Right. Because this is about Bush. Not.
Is it US election year again already?
3 Likes
It is. Without Bush that whole region woudn’t be as destabilized as it is now. But denying this is very patriotic, as is pretending that US has some kind of moral superiority here. At least in the US definition of patriotism.
11 Likes
You raise an interesting point - but it wasn’t cepheus42’s point.
And I am not sure you are correct. The radical Islamist regime in Iran has been there since Jimmy Carter’s days. That’s a long time before Bush, and they have used huge amounts of oil money in their conquest in many countries. Bush’s foul war did not help, but Iran has been implementing their plans for half a century.
There is no way this will end well, but that was ordained by Iran. That regime is nuts, truly evil, and hellbent on apocalyptic confrontation. But the idea that we should interpret the outcome of this strike based on the way we might react, the way that we would expect it to, is quite possibly incorrect. Our cultures are different.
1 Like
Anyone can put someone on a list calling them terrorists. It’s just a statement that USA saw him as an enemy. Do you think Iran has the same right to make a “terrorist list” and murder anyone on it? CIA would certainly qualify as a terrorist organisation given all the shit it has been up to.
12 Likes
I don’t think anyone thinks Qasem Soleimani was a nice man; and all things considered, I think he would make for a valid military target.
But none of that changes the fact that this was a monumentally stupid act by the US. Iran will respond, and because they can’t (and won’t, because they’re not stupid) fight an open war against USA, they will use indirect means. Expect more terrorist bombings, targeted attacks on US troops and bases in Middle-East, and so on. It will not be good. And with a touchy, impulsive, narcissistic moron in the White House, who is likely going senile and under pressure from the impeachment, there’s a dismayingly high chance of Trump doing something even stupider, and much more bloody.
18 Likes
I can’t help but think that the “Mission” referred to was, “Operation: Extend the Massively Profitable War on Terror”.
Especially near the US-Iraqi Counter-Terrorism HQ?
6 Likes
It’s a brutal, theocratic regime, but if US activities in the region in lets say the last 30 years were aimed at de-escalating conflicts instead of endless aggression and ham-fisted meddling, that regime could probably be less hostile to US or even be toppled by it’s own citizens. Aggression provides fodder for propaganda and radicalization.
And such bombings can be used as a pretext for legislation like PATRIOT Act.
15 Likes
And you entirely missed my point. One country’s “terrorist” is another country’s “freedom leader.” Saying he’s “on our terrorist list” means jack shit when our terrorist list doesn’t include people like the leader of Saudi Arabia who had a journalist murdered and covered it up. We decide who is a terrorist based on our administrations political leanings, not an actual definition of terror.
29 Likes
Here’s a good example:
Also killed by a missile strike.
3 Likes
7 Likes
It’s cute that anyone thinks he or his acolytes care that he is massively hypocritical. Projection is like a superpower with these guys.
17 Likes
You are mixing up what I said with what @cepheus42 said. I merely stated that being on a “terrorist list” is not enough of a reason to summarily execute another state’s official without trial. What @cepheus42 stated was an example of how any state can declare someone a terrorist.
I expect this will backfire in a big way, and get the USA disinvited out of Iraq and Syria. It was a massive overstepping of bounds, interfering in Iraq’s internal affairs because the generals and admirals (and most importantly President Biff) believe they own the country and can do what they want.
11 Likes
Morally? Maybe.
Legally? No. There was no formal declaration of war between Iran and the USA, and this was an extrajudicial act. All indicators are that Iraq also did not know of the planned air strike. Worst case, he had been invited by the Iraqi government to come to Baghdad for talks, meaning the USA just flagrantly violated international law.
16 Likes
USA entered Iraq with a massive invasion, and Syria against the wish of the regime because it has been to weak to prevent it. There has been no invation. But you are right that the reaction in Iraq will be revealing. Are they going to be willing to try to force the US occupants out?
Just before this happened, the Iraqi government had calmed protesters attempting to storm the US Embassy by promising to consider exactly that.
EDIT: it should be noted that the current situation in Iraq is that US forces are officially there to support the Iraqi government, as part of a joint forces agreement. Before he left office, Bush 43 put the agreement in place, so the Iraqis have the power on paper to tell Americans that they are no longer welcome.
7 Likes
Not the most substantive commentary on this topic, but Lily Allen seems particularly apt this morning.
To you Donald, without love, or respect, or even the sympathy that I would extend to a sentient creature.
Sums it up for me.
8 Likes
HAHAHAHAHA!!!
No. They’ll back him even harder, and he’ll be re-elected.
1 Like
It was the death of an American contractor (mercenary) that kicked off the immediate chain of events. Who was he working for?
5 Likes
