WAR?

Yesterday trump said he was against War, but today:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/02/world/middleeast/qassem-soleimani-iraq-iran-attack.html

The ball is in Iran's court. Hard to imagine that they won't retaliate - here's hoping they won't.

If I was Iran, I would start with terrorist attacks on European cities. At least two, either synchronized or very close to each other, time-wise. They apparently have sleeper cells all over the place, if anyone can be believed about Iran.

Watching cable news - OMG are they excited! They're almost giddy with excitement. a$$holes.

JFC.  What are we doing?  It literally doesn't matter who is in charge.  We repeatedly do this ****. 

drummerboy said:

If I was Iran, I would start with terrorist attacks on European cities. At least two, either synchronized or very close to each other, time-wise. They apparently have sleeper cells all over the place, if anyone can be believed about Iran.

I doubt they would do that, which would draw the Europeans to Trump's side.  We have more than enough vulnerable targets in Iraq, and the Persian Gulf.  And of course, there's Israel. 

This:

This is where having credibility — and having a president who didn’t lie about everything — would be really, really helpful. https://t.co/3haoOtmEWM

— Samantha Power (@SamanthaJPower) January 3, 2020

nohero said:

drummerboy said:

If I was Iran, I would start with terrorist attacks on European cities. At least two, either synchronized or very close to each other, time-wise. They apparently have sleeper cells all over the place, if anyone can be believed about Iran.

I doubt they would do that, which would draw the Europeans to Trump's side.  We have more than enough vulnerable targets in Iraq, and the Persian Gulf.  And of course, there's Israel. 

I don't think that would necessarily draw Europeans to Trump's side.  European citizens hate Trump - they could just as well blame Trump for this escalation as Iran. That's why I said Europe. I even think government reaction, except for G.B. , would not be much of a rush to Trump's side.

gaaa - I hate doing this.

And then you have too many people like this a s s h o l e from "The Grayzone", who thinks this is the perfect time to go with "Bernie's tweets against the war are better, he's so awesome."

This statement from Bernie is much better than Elizabeth Warren's. There is no prevarication and qualifications about the empire's bogeymen. It is a firm stance against war. Good to see. We need much more of it, from many more people with political powerhttps://t.co/sL1EV7o3hV

— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) January 3, 2020

nohero said:

This:

 There are people who actually believed Obama and Dubya?  Who are these idiots?

Gotta wonder if this guy was on the kill list that Obama started. 

terp said:

Gotta wonder if this guy was on the kill list that Obama started. 

it's amazing that you're obsessing on Obama, when he spent most of his admin successfully negotiating with Iran to quell animosities, only to have Trump come in and sh!t all over it.

I'm not obsessing with Obama.  I'm taking issue with the fact that this is exclusively a Trump issue while it is clearly SOP for the American Empire and has been for over 30 years. 

terp said:

Gotta wonder if this guy was on the kill list that Obama started. 

In killing General Suleimani, Mr. Trump took an action that Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama had rejected, fearing it would lead to war between the United States and Iran.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/02/world/middleeast/qassem-soleimani-iraq-iran-attack.html

terp said:

I'm not obsessing with Obama.  I'm taking issue with the fact that this is exclusively a Trump issue while it is clearly SOP for the American Empire and has been for over 30 years. 

Yeah, but in this case it is clearly all on Trump. If the treaty had still been in force, none of this crap would have happened. To talk about today without talking about how Trump has steadily escalated tensions with Iran since his first day in office is a bit blind, to say the least.

terp said:

I'm not obsessing with Obama.  I'm taking issue with the fact that this is exclusively a Trump issue while it is clearly SOP for the American Empire and has been for over 30 years. 

 A fair bit longer than that -- I'm not sure I can point to a single moment from European contact through today that the US or its colonial predecessors could not be characterized as militantly expansionist.

drummerboy said:

terp said:

I'm not obsessing with Obama.  I'm taking issue with the fact that this is exclusively a Trump issue while it is clearly SOP for the American Empire and has been for over 30 years. 

Yeah, but in this case it is clearly all on Trump. If the treaty had still been in force, none of this crap would have happened. To talk about today without talking about how Trump has steadily escalated tensions with Iran since his first day in office is a bit blind, to say the least.

I don't disagree that this one is on Trump.  Clearly it is. And I was not for revoking the treaty.  

But what is the evidence that the treaty would have stopped this?  We have been fighting proxy wars for over a decade as part of our redirection policy. As part of this, we got involved in Syria, unleashed ISIS, backing the Saudis in their genocidal attacks against the Houthi's.   It's not like there was this emerging peace in the area until Trump came along. 

I'm not even saying you are wrong.  But what evidence is there that the treaty prevents any of this?

PVW said:

terp said:

I'm not obsessing with Obama.  I'm taking issue with the fact that this is exclusively a Trump issue while it is clearly SOP for the American Empire and has been for over 30 years. 

 A fair bit longer than that -- I'm not sure I can point to a single moment from European contact through today that the US or its colonial predecessors could not be characterized as militantly expansionist.

 touche

BG9 said:

terp said:

Gotta wonder if this guy was on the kill list that Obama started. 

In killing General Suleimani, Mr. Trump took an action that Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama had rejected, fearing it would lead to war between the United States and Iran.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/02/world/middleeast/qassem-soleimani-iraq-iran-attack.html

 It's a good thing those guys were so cautious.  One lied about WMDs in order to overthrow the country where this occurred creating this mess in the first place.  The other one oversaw the overthrow of Libya(where there is now slave trade) and backed Al Queda in Syria.  

BTW:  Totally on board if the Dems want to impeach this turd for this assassination.  This was an overreach of power.   Just drop the other nonsense.  This one is real. 

.

It is the latter https://t.co/p2hcZsVWht

— Daniel Larison (@DanielLarison) January 3, 2020

terp said:

BTW:  Totally on board if the Dems want to impeach this turd for this assassination.  This was an overreach of power.   Just drop the other nonsense.  This one is real. 

 now this would be great way to guarantee his re-election.

Since Lawrence of Arabia, the Middle East has been a minefield. This general had very grandiose ideas for further conflict, a Hitler with medals?

From BJ9’s Times link:

“The United States and Iran have long been involved in a shadow war in battlegrounds across the Middle East — including in Iraq, Yemen and Syria. The tactics have generally involved using proxies to carry out the fighting, providing a buffer from a direct confrontation between Washington and Tehran that could draw America into yet other ground conflict with no discernible endgame.

“The potential for a regional conflagration was a basis of the Obama administration’s push for a 2015 agreement that froze Iran’s nuclear program in return for sanctions relief.

“Mr. Trump withdrew from the deal in 2018, saying that Mr. Obama’s agreement had emboldened Iran, giving it economic breathing room to plow hundreds of millions of dollars into a campaign of violence around the region. Mr. Trump responded with a campaign of “maximum pressure” that began with punishing new economic sanctions, which began a new era of brinkmanship and uncertainty, with neither side knowing just how far the other was willing to escalate violence and risk a wider war. In recent days, it has spilled into the military arena.

“General Suleimani once described himself to a senior Iraqi intelligence official as the “sole authority for Iranian actions in Iraq,” the official later told American officials in Baghdad.

“In a speech denouncing Mr. Trump, General Suleimani was even less discreet — and openly mocking.

““We are near you, where you can’t even imagine,” he said. “We are ready. We are the man of this arena.”

You can always count on Terp to bring a big serving of Whatabout to the potluck. 

There is one politician in all of this who has a passing resemblance to Hitler. You voted for him. A Hitler with bone spurs. 

I hope that whatever happens here, Congress finds the cajones to demand a formal declaration of war. 

mtierney said:

Since Lawrence of Arabia, the Middle East has been a minefield. 

T.E. Lawrence arrived in Arabia with the start of World War I.  Hostilities involving Europeans and other outsiders have been taking place there since long before then. 

Can't you hear him at the next rally claiming we are going to take the oil. Actually his oil buddies are watching the prices go up today. Right in time for winter. Wonder which one of his friends he tipped off to go long.

Klinker said:

You can always count on Terp to bring a big serving of Whatabout to the potluck. 

This is a common and silly refrain.  To argue otherwise would be to state that context does not matter.  Every adult knows that context is extremely important. 

Here's a metaphor.  We all tend to exceed the speed limit by a bit when we drive. Technically we are breaking the law.  

Let's say there's a 35 MPH zone.  And traffic is moving at say 38.   If you get pulled over for doing 38, obviously you are going to ask why nobody else got pulled over.  Now, technically you were breaking the law.  But isn't it still fair to ask if there was a reason the police chose to pull over that particular car?  Were they profiled? Etc? 

Klinker said:

I hope that whatever happens here, Congress finds the cajones to demand a formal declaration of war. 

 Never going to happen. 

terp said:

This is a common and silly refrain.

 Nope. It’s you to a T.