I think Iran is only trying to save face. There will probably be no American casualties while Iran will claim to have successfully avenged the killing of Sulaimani.

Now that Iran has casually shot missiles at American bases in Iraq, and with Iraq already demanding that these bases be gone, I wonder what the next improvised response is supposed to be? The assassination of another Soleimani? — alcontali

Well, we have the promise from Trump to attack 52 targets, and luckily a flip-flop from him on the cultural targets, so I guess Persepolis will be intact (if ruins can be intact) after this war. It's a tit for tat, which others than the neocons, Israel and the Saudis aren't so excited about:

Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif tweeted that Iran was finished fighting and was not actively pursuing any kind of escalation to the conflict.

"Iran took & concluded proportionate measures in self-defense under Article 51 of UN Charter targeting base from which cowardly armed attack against our citizens & senior officials were launched," Zarif tweeted. "We do not seek escalation or war, but will defend ourselves against any aggression."

At least now it's obvious. Iran took the responsibility, Iraq and the US both noticed that the ballistic missiles came from Iran. So let's see what Trump does. And he is so insecure and inept we cannot know where he will take it. You see, it's all about his popularity, his base, the US elections, nothing else for him. And if there are even a few cracks in his base, it will show. That Tucker Carlson says what says below (qoute), really shouldn't matter at all, but in the case of Trump, it does:

“It’s hard to remember now, but as recently as last week, most people didn’t consider Iran an imminent threat,” Mr. Carlson said at the start of his Monday show, going on to mock Mr. Trump’s secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, for saying intelligence agencies had identified an undefined Iranian threat.

“Seems like about 20 minutes ago, we were denouncing these people as the ‘deep state’ and pledging never to trust them again without verification,” Mr. Carlson told viewers, eyebrow arched. “Now, for some reason, we do trust them — implicitly and completely.”

Iraq is now militia-land, just like Lebanon, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, and Somalia. — alcontali

Yes. It already was in a deep political turmoil and now likely will be a renewed battlefield with such confusion that nobody can figure it out. Which I guess is the objective. After all, the ISIS thing was just to be over, so what everybody needs is a new reason for fighting.

Zero reported US casualties. Now would be a good time to de-escalate. Iran has now saved face; lets get back to business as usual.

I suppose the American elections will dominate human history for a fair time. One-state world control is not inspiring, is it?

Iran gave Trump the finger, but did it in a smart way. They've called his bluff with a direct and open attack on US military forces, but done it in such a way that Trump has virtually no support internationally for further action against them. So, if he doesn't retaliate after all his bluster he'll look weak and be diminished. If he does, he'll be starting a war that no-one, including Americans, want, that none of his tradiional allies bar Israel will support, that everyone will blame the US for, and that America will lose in the same way it lost in Iraq and Afghanistan. Stupid strategic mistake about to be punished.

Iran gave Trump the finger, but did it in a smart way. They've called his bluff with a direct and open attack on US military forces, but done it in such a way that Trump has virtually no support internationally for further action against them. So, if he doesn't retaliate after all his bluster he'll look weak and be diminished. If he does, he'll be starting a war that no-one, including Americans, want, that none of his tradiional allies bar Israel will support, that everyone will blame the US for, and that America will lose in the same way it lost in Iraq and Afghanistan. Stupid strategic mistake about to be punished. — Baden

:down:

Baden, President Trump is a personality that I think you misunderstand. If you listen closely you will hear that he "streams of conscious" when he speaks. It seems like when he is serious he is dismissed but the moment he is factious or sarcastic, chisel those words in stone.
President Trump is inconsistently consistent.
I am watching history being written as are you. The question is how will history see President Trump's actions? Will he be on the right side of history? Will the USA's Redline of harming a USA citizen or one of our allies pass snuff? If not where do you believe the Redline should be drawn?
Will you be on the right side of history?
Is there a "right" side that you can see from here and if so, what is it?
Should the USA have let the attacks dictated by Iranian General Qasem Soleimani continue?

Yep. You have to give them a blow that kills no Americans. It's the price of doing business.

Trump is an ignoramus who knows nothing about international or military affairs. There is no 'there' there behind the stupidities apparent in his interviews and his rallies. He wasn't even aware attacking cultural heritage sites was illegal. He indicated this himself in his most recent comments. Let that sink in Tiff. The commander-in-chief of the most powerful army in the world knows less about military affairs than the average man on the street. At least this time he has had the sense, after being put in his place by the Pentagon and others, to shut up and back off. He needs to leave this stuff to the experts in future.

In the (Dis)information war is on...as usual. But on full steam now.

Victim: Kuna (through Reuters page)

DUBAI (Reuters) - Kuwait’s defense minister said it has received a letter from the Commander in Chief of a U.S. military camp in Kuwait “declaring imminent withdrawal of all U.S. military forces in three days,” state news agency KUNA said on Wednesday.

“Receiving such [a] letter from Camp Arifjan was unexpected and we are communicating with U.S. Department of Defense for more details and information,” KUNA reported the minister as saying.

Yet Star & Stripes (via AP) reports:

TEHRAN, Iran — Kuwait says its state-run KUNA news agency’s Twitter account was hacked and posted false story on US troops withdrawing from the nation.Kuwait made the announcement Wednesday after the fake alert went out on its account, drawing widespread attention.

Interesting to see how the news media handle obvious fake news on real time.

We still don't know how the airliner came down in Tehran lastnight with Brits, Germans and over 50 Canadians on board.

Also Israel is bristling with Nuclear Weapons, this might be their opportunity to attack.

The other player we are not hearing about, who might now fill the void is Russia. They could give Tehran a nuclear bomb, in return for influence in the region. Russia tightening its grip on the Middle East.

Trump is an ignoramus who knows nothing about international or military affairs. There is no 'there' there behind the stupidities apparent in his interviews and his rallies. He wasn't even aware attacking cultural heritage sites was illegal. He indicated this himself in his most recent comments. Let that sink in Tiff. The commander-in-chief of the most powerful army in the world knows less about military affairs than the average man on the street. At least this time he has had the sense, after being put in his place by the Pentagon and others, to shut up and back off. He needs to leave this stuff to the experts in future. — Baden

Baden, our President has not been groomed to hold the office he currently holds and that is a double edged sword but one we knew before electing him to office. Let that sink in. We did not want status quo. We didn't want to continue look the other way when our embassy was being breached. We didn't want our ambassadors around the world to meet the same fate as John Christopher Stevens did in Libya.

What are you missing in our right to defend our citizens when the host country, charged with protecting our embassy and our people while in their country,.allows the embassy's perimeter to be breached?

(a) So it doesn't trouble you - a patriotic American - that your president sold out his country's national security in an ill-advised attempt to personally benefit from extorting a foreign power to "dig-up oppo-research" on a political rival?

(b) Do you really think the same president who assassinated the second highest official of a sovereign state (& regional hegemon!), and who also took credit for it publicly (self-incriminating testimony against interest with respect to Executive Order 12036 - evidence of guilt: lack of prior notification to both NATO Allies (or even Israel, Saudi Arabia, et al in the region) abroad & the Congressional "Gang of Eight" at home ... for starters), only then to threaten, again publicly, to follow-up that strategically useless act with a campaign of no less than "52" war crimes (i.e. Violations of International Law according to the Geneva Convention, to which the United States is a treaty signatory) if that assassinated official's regime retaliates (or responds in kind - which they may yet do as per "eye for an eye" logic, etc) is now acting to make his country safer and not just, as usual, trying to distract (this time) from his pending trial in the U.S. Senate with another self-inflicted crisis?

(c) What values and/or historical principles do you really think you're defending, Tiff, when you defend this president?

On your first day in McDonald's, you learn to flip burgers or you're out. That principle of employee competence might be worth applying to the most important job in the world. On the rest, I defer to 180 except to add the context of America dumping the Iran deal and imposing sanctions (more today). Trace that line. The Iranians are no innocents but there are reasons for their behaviour which could be dealt with in ways that don't put your own people at such extreme risk.

Yes, they missed. But at the same time demonstrating, to those with the wits and sense to comprehend, that they can hit what(ever) they want.

But Trump's mantra is, "hit them back harder." No room for subtlety there. His is the art of doing it the wrong way. So consistently does he achieve this standard that I'm persuaded he's subject to direction, or at least powerful suggestion. The best of this, if such exists, is that Iranians and we can share a seeking for justice. That might entail the arrest and prosecution for various crimes of various people, nor would I have a problem with that.

but one we knew before electing him to office. Let that sink in. We did not want status quo. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

I've always supposed that people voted for Trump because they really did not know what he is. After all, most folks have little or no experience with his degree of evil or the potential of its toxicity. But you say you knew. If that's true, then shame on you! Your vote was a disgrace! For so many reasons and in so many ways! Here, take a lesson: the bad man is not going to be good to you or for you. And if he's bad enough, even the two+ thousand miles between you and him will not protect you - and Trump has already been that bad!

The most likely explanation is that Iran made a mistake and shot it down.

So it doesn't trouble you - a patriotic American - that president sold out his country's national security in the ill-advised attempt to personally benefit from extorting a foreign power to "dig-up oppo-research" on a political rival? — 180 Proof

The whole "But he did it first so I have to respond harder" is not my personal mantra. I have never been in a fist fight but I have always believed that if I was pushed to that point, I would be the one to end it.
Having said that I believe that not all are Doves nor are all Hawks. Is my (duely noted that you do not consider the President of the USA as yours despite living here) President not doing exactly as he said he would do?

Do you really think the same president who assassinated the second highest official of a sovereign state (& regional hegemon!), and who also took credit for it publicly (self-incriminating testimony against interest with respect to Executive Order 12036 - evidence of guilt: lack of prior notification to both NATO Allies (or even Israel, Saudi Arabia, et al in the region) abroad & the Congressional "Gang of Eight" at home ... for starters), only then to threaten, again publicly, to follow-up that strategically useless act with a campaign of no less than "52" war crimes (i.e. Violations of International Law according to the Geneva Convention, to which the United States is a treaty signatory) if that assassinated official's regime retaliates (or responds in kind - which they may yet do as per "eye for an eye" logic, etc) is now acting to make his country safer and not just, as usual, trying to distract (this time) from his pending trial in the U.S. Senate with another self-inflicted crisis? — 180 Proof

Are noted terrorists "assisnated" or are they killed?

No, I do not believe that we are seeing a "Wag the Dog" scenario play out.

What values and/or historical principles do you really think you're defending, Tiff, when you defend this president? — 180 Proof

I am not sure "historical principals" are serving the people as well as they once did. That can be seen across our society; a change in respecting and repeating our historical principals but that is for another thread and likely too controversial for the boards.

I've always supposed that people voted for Trump because they really did not know what he is. After all, most folks have little or no experience with his degree of evil or the potential of its toxicity. But you say you knew. If that's true, then shame on you! Your vote was a disgrace! For so many reasons and in so many ways! Here, take a lesson: the bad man is not going to be good to you or for you. And if he's bad enough, even the two+ thousand miles between you and him will not protect you - and Trump has already been that bad! — tim wood

Sorry if my honesty is surprising to you but I try to be as honest as possible. I don't consider what the popularity factor is when it comes to choosing my positions or my President.

What I knew about Trump before his run for president probably fits in the same thimble size cup as what I knew about President Obama. That is to say that I believe I can see "hustle" when it's headed my way and both are Master Hustler's. One came from my home town and the other comes from the city of BIGGLY town but both are Hustler's.

Is considering a Presidential candidates "hustle" factor important to me? When I can see it? You betcha :wink:

I deffered my response to you by responding to 180. :shade: Come on Baden, you can do better :sparkle:

Are noted terrorists "assisnated" or are they killed? — ArguingWAristotleTiff

He helped the US fight the Taliban. He also fought ISIS, Al-Nusrah, and Al-Qaeda in Syria. He was a high-ranking military official of a sovereign nation. He was doing his job the same way your generals do. That includes supporting insurgent groups, something the US has been doing all around the world for the past couple of generations. That doesn't make him a good guy, but if you want to designate him a terrorist, you'll have to apply that to Reagan, Bush, Obama, and Trump, the latter who killed him in what much of the world outside your bubble considers an act of terrorism (illegal under international law in the absence of evidence of an imminent threat). So again you're failing the basic test of even attempting to get beyond your bias here. First step, give me an ideologically neutral definition of 'terrorist' and accept the consequences of who falls under that umbrella.

He was doing his job the same way your generals do.

Do American generals also murder and imprison their own people when they protest? This happened by the hundreds maybe a month or two ago. I feel like you're one of those people who would wear a Che Guevara shirt because, hey, he's just sticking it to the Americans, right?

You could not discern a difference between Barack Obama and Donald Trump? Our forefathers felt that the many weren't competent to vote, the electoral college their attempt to provide a means to remedy an atrocious choice, should one have been made. I invite you to weigh in private whether, on reflection, you should allow yourself to vote. You say "the 'hustle' factor matters." How about the track record for integrity, or the lack of it? Education, or the lack of it. Honesty, or the lack of it? Preparation/training, or the lack of it? Knowledge, or the lack of it? Manifest appreciation for family values, or the lack of it? Respect for justice and law, or the lack of it? Or pretty much anything else.

Perhaps your thinking was that you wanted a kind of junk-yard dog to do some damage in those areas that you wanted to see damaged. I can see that. But you allowed yourself to confuse an honest junk-yard dog with a bad man. Or whatever, but in any case, for whatever reason, a truly terrible mistake, and given your profession of knowledge and understanding of your choice, unforgivable. But it's you who ought to feel the full weight of the mistake, and in such terms as you yourself come to understand it, and can avoid making any like mistake in the future. That, or please do not vote in the future. Not because I do not want you to, but because you clearly cannot even vote your own interests!

The American military has tortured and sponsored torture and the murder of innocent civilians in Iraq and elsewhere. You think because they don't do it to "their own people" that makes them morally superior?

(duely noted that you do not consider the President of the USA as yours despite living here) — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Au contrair, mon amie - he's very much mine too! Thus, my visceral - and vociferous - critical reactions to him. But you mistake my rhetorical emphasis for disavowal when really I'm just trying to keep front & center that it's (MAGA-supporters like) you who claim tRUMP (so much more than the majority of Americans - me included) enough to defend his indefensible conduct. Yeah I claim him as "my president", Tiff, and accept my duty, in solidarity with my fellow citizens, to resist (i.e. civilly disobey) tRUMP's pathological perfidy & various abuses of power in the near-term and hold him criminally, constitutionally & electorally accountable in the long-term. So yeah, "my president", my national disgrace, My Cosmopolitan Duty to take out the presidental trash! Care to join me, chère? :flower:

If anyone wants to argue about war crimes in the context of America vs Iran, I'll give you ten American atrocities for every one Iranian. Despite that, I'd take America over Iran as a better overall country under most metrics. It's just that only a complete fool would claim the US is morally superior in terms of its military activities.

I am not the one labeling him a terrorist:
"Even so, the Pentagon said “General Soleimani was actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region.” It pointed out that Iran’s Revolutionary Guard is a “US-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization,” and added that Soleimani and his Quds Force “were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American and coalition service members and the wounding of thousands more.”

You realize most Iranians do not like Soleimani? Head over to r/iran if you don't believe me. I literally haven't heard anyone sympathize with him the way you have. It's absurd to the point where I feel like you're on the Ayatollah's payroll. It's just kind of funny because no one really sympathizes with this mass-murdering monster EXCEPT YOU and the Iranian regime. American Democrats and European liberals certainly don't. Normal Iranians don't support him. Only you seem to sympathize with him for some reason.

I could see the difference between the two and voted appropriately with that knowledge.

A "junk yard dog" hnmmmmm.....

What breed are we talking?

Ok, he's not a terrorist then.



I sympathize with him because I compared him to scumbags like Trump and Bush? Are you serious?

Could you tell me the last time Bush or Trump used machine guns on hundreds of peaceful protesters protesting the government? That happened last month in Iran.