Iranian General Sulemain and others reported killed in Baghdad airstrike

[Shadowferal]

If I understand the full scope here, the United States' was retaliating to an attack on our Embassy by Iran. Do you think we should just let that kind of thing go?

Pretty sure there are better ways to go about this.
Especially in light of the fact that this came about after a phone call with Putin.

- - - Updated - - -

Idiot-in-chief says Iranian commander was killed to 'stop a war'

----------------

Analyst: 'Everything the Trump administration has done has escalated Iran situation'

Under the Obama-era deal, Iran had agreed to curtail its nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief.

“The moment when it all started is when Trump pulled out of this, so if we’re actually looking for deterrence we know how that would work,” Parisi said. “It would mean proper diplomacy, trying to figure out how you can find some sort of a way of coexisting with elements that you may not like in any way, shape or form.”

Parsi is executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, a think tank with a focus on shifting U.S. foreign policy away "from endless war and toward vigorous diplomacy in the pursuit of international peace."

His comments come as lawmakers on Capitol Hill still reel from the news surrounding a targeted U.S. strike in Iraq that killed Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani among others. Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said a day after the attack that the action was not authorized and Congress was not consulted on the decision.

The Pentagon, meanwhile, has described the U.S. drone attack at Baghdad International Airport as a “defensive action,” but Parsi pushed back against this notion in his interview with Hill.TV.

“The mere fact that the State Department immediately issued a statement saying all Americans should leave Iraq immediately is Exhibit A that this made America less not more safe,” he said.

[I Push Buttons]

Lol, oh you want my taxes... you and people often on your side thrive on my tax dollars. I wouldn't go back to my home country, instead I'd aim for Canada.

What I find interesting is your wanting to chase people out of the country especially those who contributed, I thought your side was scared of well off people fleeing?

Chasing people out? Who am I chasing out? I said good riddance to a someone crying about being here and wanting to leave.

Also 'my side'? Establishment Democrats? The implication of me being a Republican and Republicans leeching your tax money is quite funny though. Its always nice to see the hypocrisy of fringe leftists on display as they lambaste people for utilizing welfare state services while simultaneously advocating for drastic expansion of said services and taxes to pay for it.

[Xyonai]

I mean on the one hand if you don’t retaliate in some fashion after being attacked you embolden those who already want to attack you.

On the other this was a fantastic way to start a war /sarcasm. An eye for any eye leaves the world blind and all that. I might have preferred a less high profile show of force but done is done now. If the US continues strikes without further provocation however it’ll justify Iranian escalation internationally imo.

That's more or less where I sit on this, in all honesty.

We can be in a situation where retaliation was necessary, but the level of escalation might not have been.

[Bismarck]

Chasing people out? Who am I chasing out? I said good riddance to a someone crying about being here and wanting to leave.

Also 'my side'? Establishment Democrats? The implication of me being a Republican and Republicans leeching your tax money is quite funny though. Its always nice to see the hypocrisy of fringe leftists on display as they lambaste people for utilizing welfare state services while simultaneously advocating for drastic expansion of said services and taxes to pay for it.

What a waste of brain capacity. You have learned the wrong things my dude.
Perhaps he's just somebody who dislikes contributing to this war through taxes, which the entire US population always contributed to, serving as an engine to a blood thirsty economy?
When will you consider the fact that you're Rothschild owned.

[Skroe]

No. But the escalation from that to full on assassination of top Iranian and Iraqi leaders is just insane.

The problem with this statement is you don’t take the sacking of our embassy as seriously as you should.

It’s a major deal. It’s a “people need to die for this” sized deal.

It’s absolutely mind boggling how folks want to pass it off as something the US should just slap some sanctions on in response or something.

[Endus]

The problem with this statement is you don’t take the sacking of our embassy as seriously as you should.

It’s a major deal. It’s a “people need to die for this” sized deal.

It’s absolutely mind boggling how folks want to pass it off as something the US should just slap some sanctions on in response or something.

No Americans died in that attack. So no; that "people need to die for this" is not a given, even remotely.

And even if you want to make that case, attacking a nominal ally's civilian infrastructure is not how you go about it.

[cubby]

No. But the escalation from that to full on assassination of top Iranian and Iraqi leaders is just insane.

The General that we killed was the person leading the group that attacked the Embassy. I'm not sure there could have been a better, more proportional response. Keep in mind Embassy's are legally (internationally) the soil of the country, so Iran orchestrated and perpetrated an attack on U.S. soil.

[Sorshen]

https://twitter.com/Mike_Pence/statu...89757708189699



Pence delivering some 'facts' on the matter, lmao

[Skroe]

That just makes you just as much of a rogue terror state as North Korea. Funny, since even the leadership seems similar.

On the contrary deterrence is an ancient and proven method of conflict aversion and it’s one that some folks are just dead wrong in their delusion we should somehow be past it.

The best way to avoid wars is create a perception that risky behaviors are not worth pursuing because their outcomes can’t be reliably predicted.

It’s the European way... the wrong way.... to lay it all on the table. Strategic ambiguity is priceless. That’s they whenever a reporter asks if “the Us will take X off the table”, I cringe. The answer should always be a coy smile and a wink.

[Themius]

If I understand the full scope here, the United States' was retaliating to an attack on our Embassy by Iran. Do you think we should just let that kind of thing go?

You do not assassinate state officials in another country.

This kind of escalation is worrisome.

[Edge-]

Keep in mind Embassy's are legally (internationally) the soil of the country, so Iran orchestrated and perpetrated an attack on U.S. soil.

They're actually not - https://www.king5.com/article/news/v...2-562116b540bf

Got citations including a 9th Circuit ruling on the matter. They get tons of special protections and other rights, but they remain the territory of the home nation.

I thought so until about 5 minutes ago when I started looking into it.

[Bismarck]

The problem with this statement is you don’t take the sacking of our embassy as seriously as you should.

It’s a major deal. It’s a “people need to die for this” sized deal.

It’s absolutely mind boggling how folks want to pass it off as something the US should just slap some sanctions on in response or something.

You sacked all of Iraq and left it in ruin but your embassy is a Mecca.
Okay friend.
If you value a building over human lives, and you respond to having 0 of your personnel killed by potentially declaring war against a country that already despises you and loathes your presence in the region, then you're either a massive idiot or a lunatic.

[caervek]

Trump and his administration have lied so often we can't possibly trust anything they have to say about this.

One thing that worry's me is that the timeline essentially goes like so:

1: An American working at an Iraqi base is killed when the base is attacked by extremists.
2: Trump blames it on Iraqi forces funded by Iran, so attacks a random Iraqi army base (one with no American contractors working at it).
3: The Iraqis get mad at their "ally" bombing their countries base and violent protests ensue at the US embassy.
4: Trump blames the protesting on Iran and has the leader of Iran's military assassinated via an illegal airstrike.
5: ...

Trumps asking for quite a leap of faith here and it's worrying where it may end

[Skroe]

Respect? how? we've just set a precedence you can now target heads of state in foreign countries without their approval even when they are allies.

Most countries that we want respect from will get over it In short order. This will not override our mutual interests.

[Edge-]

https://twitter.com/Mike_Pence/statu...89757708189699

Pence delivering some 'facts' on the matter, lmao

It depresses me that Twitter is an "official communications channel" for members of the government now.

It's fucking not. Write a memo. Write a report. Write a statement. Post it on the respective agency website, and link to it. This fucking "governing by social media" nonsense, even if it's Pence sharing justification, is bullshit.

[cubby]

Pretty sure there are better ways to go about this.
Especially in light of the fact that this came about after a phone call with Putin.

- - - Updated - - -

Idiot-in-chief says Iranian commander was killed to 'stop a war'

No one is less happy than me that it was Trump who did this, but the incident and response, to my understanding at least, was the right thing to do. Especially considering we killed the General who ordered the attack - isn't that precisely who we want to kill? Rather than just the soldiers who carried out the attack?

And there is no doubt that Trump fucked the international relations aspect of this six ways to Sunday - if it was possible to screw up, he will and did.

But that doesn't change the fact that Iran attacked a U.S. embassy. For us to let that go would set a bad precedent. Moreover, it gives other potential outlier countries and fringe groups pause, now that they see the U.S. will retaliate if attacked so brazenly and openly.

[Skroe]

No Americans died in that attack. So no; that "people need to die for this" is not a given, even remotely.

And even if you want to make that case, attacking a nominal ally's civilian infrastructure is not how you go about it.

I mean, no offense but that’s just you not taking the breaking of the one rule if International relations that is not to be broke As seriously as you should. If a firm line isn’t drawn, our people will die.

[Draco-Onis]

The General that we killed was the person leading the group that attacked the Embassy. I'm not sure there could have been a better, more proportional response. Keep in mind Embassy's are legally (internationally) the soil of the country, so Iran orchestrated and perpetrated an attack on U.S. soil.

We've had several chances to kill him but other administrations though it would be incredibly stupid to do so because of his status. We've just killed a head of state with 80%+ approval rating in Iran and throughout the middle east among his sect basically making him a martyr. We've also effectively guaranteed that the Iraqi government will kick us out because they didn't give the green light.

We've just unilaterally united Iran silenced the dissenters in the regime by doing this whatever happens next they will have the support of the people something that was wavering. This was just a knee jerk reaction for Trump's poll numbers and election with zero long term plan on how to bring the temperature down. Trump is probably hoping for an 9/11 style attack to win the election he's already established he doesn't give a flying fuck about intelligence or national security this is all about himself.

- - - Updated - - -

Most countries that we want respect from will get over it In short order. This will not override our mutual interests.

They will get over it by strengthening their ties to our rivals like China because the US looks like the crazy kid playing with a gun without a plan. We've already fucked them over by walking away from the Iran nuclear deal this doesn't gain us any respect we are just fucking up our relationships around the world.

[ati87]

https://twitter.com/Mike_Pence/statu...89757708189699



Pence delivering some 'facts' on the matter, lmao

So we got to the point that Iran is helped the Taliban and al qaeda.

SO yea, if I needed any more confirmation that the Trump admin is making up shit then this is it.

[beanman12345]

No one is less happy than me that it was Trump who did this, but the incident and response, to my understanding at least, was the right thing to do. Especially considering we killed the General who ordered the attack - isn't that precisely who we want to kill? Rather than just the soldiers who carried out the attack?

And there is no doubt that Trump fucked the international relations aspect of this six ways to Sunday - if it was possible to screw up, he will and did.

But that doesn't change the fact that Iran attacked a U.S. embassy. For us to let that go would set a bad precedent. Moreover, it gives other potential outlier countries and fringe groups pause, now that they see the U.S. will retaliate if attacked so brazenly and openly.

In a vacuum i'd maybe agree, but the world we live in is complex, and this was not the right play for this situation imo. It's classic Trump being stupid Trump, and Putin most likely has his finger in the pie.