Iranian General Sulemain and others reported killed in Baghdad airstrike

[Draco-Onis]

Well there you go, what's even the point of your Congress? You boys really need to work out a better system.

A system is only as good as its people and the American people were fine with this along giving up a lot of liberties in the name of security.

[Acidbaron]

Congress pretty much handed the executive all its war powers after 9/11 there is no check on the president when it comes to war all he has to do is not call it war.

Figured as much, A new decade a new series of cowboys doing dumb shit globally oh well.

[D3thray]

But now you are trusting the Trump admin in being honest. The administration that lied about every small and irrelevant events (trump swearing-in crowd sizes) let alone major events.

People should be questioning everything that comes from the Trump admin, this government who's argument boils down to ''don't believing your lying eye's'' suddenly turns honest and provides the world with an honest evidence that an Iran backed group attacked the US?

And even if an Iran backed group attacked the US that does not mean that Iran had any role in that decision. If we took this line of though then the US should also start killing off it's own politicians because they support BLM for example (not that there is anything wrong with BLM but just for argument sake since the right-wing hates them).

The intelligence establishment seems to agree with the assessment that further attacks were being planned by this guy. Really otherwise zero reason to just kill this dude out of the blue. Say what you want about Trump but I don’t believe he’d authorize lethal force without a good reason.

[KaPe]

Figured as much, A new decade a new series of cowboys doing dumb shit globally oh well.

On a plus side, maybe they'll finally realize that leaving all this power in hand of a single man isn't a brilliant idea. Otherwise, they'll one day wake up to a tweet going "I just started WW3 all on my own, #whatimpeachment, #whosgonnastopme". It didn't quite come to that point yet, but having almost no oversight over the most powerful war machine in the world is just bonkers.

[Collegeguy]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ks/1850582002/

Whatever you say.

If you want to, I guess you can pretend Trump himself woke up every night and searched for Sulemain on Google maps, but it would still be a silly assessment.

The strike was most assuredly considered necessary to the Pentagon and the military, otherwise they wouldn't have planned it.

[Thepersona]

You overthrew their democratically elected government and installed a dictator. That is a “people need to die for this” sized deal.

Are you pretending the US didn't start this entire conflict?

Well... The US did not in fact, start that conflict. Brittish oil barons did (AFAIK). They dragged everyone into this clusterfuck because capitalism

[Shadowferal]

This may not be a smokescreen but it sure as hell is quite the distraction from what is going on in Syria.

[ConstantinetheGreat]

When you go around exclaiming that you're a sociopath then act like an ass hole you project the image that being an ass hole is mutually exclusive with being a sociopath.

It isnt. If you wanna clear up stereotypes go for it, but dont reinforce others.

Well, the comment about me being a sociopath was meant tongue in cheek, so you ought not to take it too seriously. As for being an asshole being mutually exclusive with being a sociopath, I'm not sure how me stating I'm one and acting like another brings you to that conclusion.

Either I'm misreading what you're trying to say or you've misspoken. Something being mutually exclusive with something else means they cannot exist in the same context. Please clarify.

Oh, and I'm very much an asshole. Guilty as charged. It doesn't mean I'm wrong though, as being an asshole isn't mutually exclusive with being correct about something.

[ringpriest]

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.

Like the way the People's Republic of China had General Wesley Clark assassinatedgrudgingly accepted President Clinton's apology and financial settlement over the US airstrike on the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade?

[Breccia]

Terrorists are non-state actors, that's not what he was. He might be a monster, that's for an International Court to decide.... not Trump.

What Trump did wasn't to "provoke" a war, but an act of war.

I was speaking purely in the terms of legal-ese. I agree with you in spirit. I'm just curious what it takes for one country to, well, disqualify someone else from being a state actor so you can kill them without it legally being an act of war. And, yeah, I don't think whatever requirements are needed were met.

[Draco-Onis]

The intelligence establishment seems to agree with the assessment that further attacks were being planned by this guy. Really otherwise zero reason to just kill this dude out of the blue. Say what you want about Trump but I don’t believe he’d authorize lethal force without a good reason.

I hate to break it to you he has always planning attacks, that's what he does nothing changed from his assessment from back when Bush or Obama could have killed him but were smart enough not to. The good reason Trump has is his election in 2020 nothing else there's enough war hawks in his inner circle to tell him that this is a good move. He probably think a 9/11 type of event or war will guarantee him winning which mathematically is accurate, if you haven't caught on by now he will do whatever it takes to win.

[Breccia]

if god forbid this does escalate into a war.. what would you guys think the scale will be?

It depends solely on how the rest of the world -- most notably Russia -- views the first real move. Apparently killing off a general isn't quite there yet, who knew?

Iran has pretty good relations with Russia and China, but probably not enough that if, say, Iran sent planes and soldiers to attack the US mainland without asking first, for them to get in on that action. Which is part of the reason Iran won't do that.

Far end of the spectrum, if we wake up tomorrow to the news of "Trump bombs every Iran oil field in the country and kills thousands of civilians doing so" not only would Russia and China respond in earnest, likely so would a few other countries, but most importantly every ally we have would stay out of it. We still have...um...tepid relations with the UK, France and Germany, but not enough for them to sign up on that.

The best way for this to end is if the violence just flat-out ended, but I'm not sure that's realistic either.

Failing that, the escalation we've seen here could easily continue, with each step of the way being effectively handwaved as not much worse than the last one, nobody jumps in, and Iran uses proxies to harass US interests in the area and the US slapping any Iran military that dares leave its borders. Headline-grabbing deaths of innocents that go on for months, but never leading to rank-and-file boots on the ground style invasion. I believe this is the most likely result of the current setup, but doesn't really answer your question.

My real concern are the US soldiers duct-taped to Saudi oil fields. If the Iranians hit them, Trump will yell "Bigly!" and declare war National Security Lol and send everything he can afford to the region, leading to yet another US incursion that lasts for 3 years or so.

Unless US forces push into Iran, in which case, @Nelinrah is probably right.

[Skroe]

A system is only as good as its people and the American people were fine with this along giving up a lot of liberties in the name of security.

Indeed. Brexit and the instability in Italy and Israel’s inability form a government don’t exactly make for great advertisements for parliamentary systems either.

Many forms of Democratic governance works. It’s entirely about the people populating that form at a specific time. America’s form under Obama les to a much more robust response to the financial crisis than in Europe, for example. It helped kee austerity focused forces at bay to a much greater degree.

[zealo]

if god forbid this does escalate into a war.. what would you guys think the scale will be?

Worst one since Vietnam.

Iran is a country roughly four times as big as Iraq, about double the population, and has a lot of mountainous terrain running straight through it. They're also a much more nationally united people, unlike e.g afghanistan.

The US could topple their government, but the insurgency afterwards would sting them hard.

[Orbitus]

It’s more likely he heard the name from one of his unofficial advisors, aka right wing “news” personalities. We know he retains very little from his single page briefings.

Don't forget that it is mostly pictures, since he most likely can't read very well.

[I Push Buttons]

Worst one since Vietnam.

Iran is a country roughly four times as big as Iraq, about double the population, and has a lot of mountainous terrain running straight through it. They're also a much more nationally united people, unlike e.g afghanistan.

The US could topple their government, but the insurgency afterwards would sting them hard.

Its extremely unlikely, even in the worst case scenario and highest levels of escalation, that the US would occupy Iran and attempt another nation building boondoggle.

There are plenty of people pushing for a war, but they aren't that retarded.

[Ihavewaffles]

But the US absolutely had to respond when an Iranian backed militia stormed out embassy in Iraq. That is the one rule of international relations that is not to be broken, but Iran has never felt bound by it. In responding this way, the US has shown that there will be severe consequences for such an audacious action.

Ehm, did you forget that you bombed the Chinese embassy?



Does anybody wipe their butt on international law more than the US?..

Whining about an embassy when you have walked over iraqi territory for how long now?..

"America is like Irish relatives, we never leave!" -Bill Maher

As for who is the biggest supporter of terrorism in the middle east...eh..Iran doesn't come close to the amount of groups supported by countries like Saudi-Arabia, USA (moderate head-choppers), Turkey.

Remember this guy u supported against Assad? Then he declared for isis. Now he fights for Turkey in wiping out Kurds..


Gtfo of iraq, its Shia like Syria, u have no right to be there. Iran is shia, ur the invader in the region, not iran. You only make things worse.

[ati87]

The intelligence establishment seems to agree with the assessment that further attacks were being planned by this guy. Really otherwise zero reason to just kill this dude out of the blue. Say what you want about Trump but I don’t believe he’d authorize lethal force without a good reason.

Are you referring to Pompeo? Because Trump and his goons are claiming that Iran was going to attack the US but since they also started to blame Iran for 9/11.

And can you tell me the reason why Trump, the guy that lied about the weather, deserves any benefit of the doubt?

[Draco-Onis]

Its extremely unlikely, even in the worst case scenario and highest levels of escalation, that the US would occupy Iran and attempt another nation building boondoggle.

There are plenty of people pushing for a war, but they aren't that retarded.

Have you heard of John Bolton and Mike Pompeo? regime change, nation building is what they are pushing the only reason they didn't get along was their giant egos.

[Somewhatconcerned]

If you want to, I guess you can pretend Trump himself woke up every night and searched for Sulemain on Google maps, but it would still be a silly assessment.

The strike was most assuredly considered necessary to the Pentagon and the military, otherwise they wouldn't have planned it.

It's funny watching the posters here clutch their pearls about whether to give Trump or his top advisors credit for the strike. TDS is a real. Just call it a good decision and move on with your day. It's like they are paralyzed by the thought of having to give him credit for something.

[Infraction]

Worst one since Vietnam.

Iran is a country roughly four times as big as Iraq, about double the population, and has a lot of mountainous terrain running straight through it. They're also a much more nationally united people, unlike e.g afghanistan.

The US could topple their government, but the insurgency afterwards would sting them hard.

Most of their population is young, poor and desperate for Western policies. I don't think it would be nearly as bad as you claim.