Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
January 03, 2020

U.S. Will Come To Regret Its Assassination of Qassim Soleimani

Today the U.S. declared war on Iran and Iraq.

War is what it will get.

Earlier today a U.S. drone or helicopter killed Major General Qassim Soleimani, the famous commander of the Iranian Quds ('Jerusalem') force, while he left the airport of Baghdad where he had just arrived. He had planned to attend the funeral of the 31 Iraqi soldiers the U.S. had killed on December 29 at the Syrian-Iraqi border near Al-Qaim.


The Quds force is the external arm of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. Soleiman was responsible for all relations between Iran and political and militant movements outside of Iran. Hajji Qassim advised the Lebanese Hisbullah during the 2006 war against Israel. His support for Iraqi groups enabled them to kick the U.S. invaders out of Iraq. He was the man responsible for, and successful in, defeating the Islamic State in iraq and Syria. In 2015 Soleimani traveled to Moscow and convinced Russia to intervene in Syria. His support for the Houthi in Yemen enabled them to withstand the Saudi attackers.


Soleimani had arrived in Baghdad on a normal flight from Lebanon. He did not travel in secret. He was picked up at the airport by Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes, the deputy commander of the al-Hashd al-Shaabi, an official Iraqi security force under the command of the Iraqi Prime Minister. The two cars they traveled in were destroyed in the U.S. attack. Both men and their drivers and guards died.


The U.S. created two martyrs who will now become the models and idols for tens of millions of youth in the Middle East.


The Houthi in Yemen, Hizbullah in Lebanon, Islamic Jihad in Palestine, the paramilitary forces in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere have all benefited from Soleimani's advice and support. They will all take actions to revenge him.

Moqtada al-Sadr, the unruly Shia cleric who commands millions of followers in Iraq, has given orders to reactivate his military branch 'Jaish al-Imam al-Mahdi'. Between 2004 and 2008 the Mahdi forces fought the U.S. occupation of Iraq. They will do so again.

The outright assassination of a commander of Soleimani's weight demands an Iranian reaction of at least a similar size. All U.S. generals or high politicians traveling in the Middle East or elsewhere will now have to watch their back. There will be no safety for them anywhere.

No Iraqi politician will be able to argue for keeping U.S. forces in the country. The Iraqi Prime Minister Abdel Mahdi has called for a parliament emergency meeting to ask for the withdrawal of all U.S. troops:

"The targeted assassination of an Iraqi commander is a violation of the agreement. It can trigger a war in Iraq and the region. It is a clear violation of the conditions of the U.S. presence in Iraq. I call on the parliament to take the necessary steps."

The National Security Council of Iran is meeting with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to "study the options of response". There are many such options. The U.S. has forces stationed in many countries around Iran. From now on none of them will be safe.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, issued a statement calling for three days of public mourning and then retaliation.

“His departure to God does not end his path or his mission,” the statement said, “but a forceful revenge awaits the criminals who have his blood and the blood of the other martyrs last night on their hands.”

Iran will tie its response to the political calender. U.S. President Donald Trump will go into his reelection campaign with U.S. troops under threat everywhere. We can expect incidents like the Beirut barracks bombing to repeat themselves when he is most vulnerable.

Trump will learn that killing the enemy is the easy part of a war. The difficulties come after that happened.

In 2018 Soleimani publicly responded to a tweet in which Trump had threatened Iran:

“Mr. Trump, the gambler! […] You are well aware of our power and capabilities in the region. You know how powerful we are in asymmetrical warfare. Come, we are waiting for you. We are the real men on the scene, as far as you are concerned. You know that a war would mean the loss of all your capabilities. You may start the war, but we will be the ones to determine its end.

Since May 2019 the U.S. deployed at least 14,800 additional soldiers to the Middle East. Over the last three days airborne elements and special forces followed. The U.S.has clearly planned for an escalation.

Soleimani will be replaced by Brigadier General Ismail Ghani, a veteran of the Iran-Iraq war who has for decades been active in the Quds Force and has fought against ISIS in Syria. He is an officer of equal stature and capability.

Iran's policies and support for foreign groups will intensify. The U.S. has won nothing with its attack but will feel the consequences for decades to come. From now on its position in the Middle East will be severely constrained. Others will move in to take its place.

Posted by b on January 3, 2020 at 9:05 UTC | Permalink

« previous page | next page »

I think we should begin calling this incident Soleimanigate. I
keep hearing absurd tales that Soleimani had gone rogue and was
concocting some nefarious plot without the knowledge of "Iran
central", without elaboration on what that plot was. If trump
was deceived into whacking Soleimani based on false intelligence,
most likely fabricated by Israel, then the americans need to shut their
fat, filthy fuckin mouths, apologize to Iran, pay reparations and start
withdrawing from Iraq in abject shame. Some enterprising journalist needs
to expose the Soleimanigate deception in all its satanic ugliness as a matter
of the utmost urgency before things get totally out of hand. I am not apologozing
for trump. He was probably willingly deceived to get a pat on the head from the despicable fiends.
IMO Iran should not retaliate in kind. It should take the matter to the ICC and expose
the vile disease of the whore of babylon in all its hideous nakedness.

Posted by: evilempire | Jan 4 2020 8:17 utc | 401

Gwynne Dyer isn’t exactly a wimp. Not many guys from Newfoundland are. Born during World War II, he has been fascinated by things military all his life, and has served in three navies — ours, Canada’s and Great Britain’s. He has university degrees from all three countries too, and a Ph.D. in military and Middle Eastern history. During the 1980s, he produced and narrated the best documentary series about the nature of war that I’ve ever seen.

And here’s what he says about what we are doing:

“The United States needs to lose the war in Iraq as soon as possible. Even more urgently, the whole world needs the United States to lose the war in Iraq. What is at stake now is the way we run the world for the next generation or more, and really bad things will happen if we get it wrong.”

Those are the opening lines of his latest and perhaps most important book, Future Tense: The Coming World Order (paperback, McClelland and Stewart, $12.95). If you plan on reading only one book this year, make this the one. In perfectly clear prose, with arguments as well-researched as they are compelling, this military expert explains why what we’re doing is mad.

Jack Lessenberry, 2005

Posted by: John Doe | Jan 4 2020 8:25 utc | 402

What made iraqi gov. so quick on stopping the protesters at the american embassy earlier this week? What hold do americans have on iraq?

On Wednesday, leaders in the Popular Mobilization Forces, an umbrella group of state-allied militias, called on demonstrators to end the protest after the Iraqi government asked them to do so, the AP reported.

Sure Iraq should tell american soldiers to leave but more importantly and realistically they should demand that the american embassy is closed down altogether.

Posted by: Zanon | Jan 4 2020 8:27 utc | 403

sounds interesting, john doe.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Jan 4 2020 9:07 utc | 404

Russia-gate and the Impeachment are just tools of the deep state to blackmail Trump into doing what Israel wants. Russia-gate ended suddenly, when Trump started behaving more like a Neo-con. Things calmed down for a short time but then Trump started talking about getting out of Syria, etc. Soon after the impeachment threats began. Nancy Pelosi holds the impeachment process up, now. She is an obvious Deep state tool all along.

Trump kind of asked for it, though. His ego was bigger than his brains. He walked into this trap. Now, he will make the best Scapegoat for all sides. He certainly cannot win in anything he does, now.

I would not doubt it if Israel gets Donny to push the Nuke Button on Iran at some point; likely after a major False Flag directed at Western Civilians (or low level military grunts) where Iran is blamed and which would enrage the ignorant masses and get them onboard for a full scale war. If that happens, I can see Donny baby dropping a nuke on Iran at Israel's urging.

Posted by: Memie | Jan 4 2020 9:08 utc | 405

Your piece finishes with " The U.S. has won nothing with its attack but will feel the consequences for decades to come. From now on its position in the Middle East will be severely constrained. Others will move in to take its place." It will be interesting to see who those " others" will be. Biblical prophecy indicates that it will be the EU.

Posted by: Ross | Jan 4 2020 9:10 utc | 406

Both sides have dug a massive hole to the point where there's no way out - nobody wants to lose face.

From poppus Pompeo's tweets, one can tell a guy desperately seeking a way out so he's contacting anyone he knows to gain some sympathy. Trump wants a negotiation but doesn't know how to say it in a tweet without offending his MAGA base.

Now I hear is Trump sending a couple 1000 more troops. WTF is that going to do? Even at the hieght of the occupation when they had over 100k troops, they still couldn't hold things down.

Posted by: Zico | Jan 4 2020 9:17 utc | 407

What made iraqi gov. so quick on stopping the protesters at the american embassy earlier this week? What hold do americans have on iraq?
Posted by: Zanon | Jan 4 2020 8:27 utc | 408

Is that a question? The US has a veto over the choice of Iraqi PM, since the time of al-Maliki and the Iraqi election in 2005 (before that the US nominated the Iraqi leader without bothering with elections, but were caught out, and forced).

Why did they stop the siege of the embassy? Because it no longer served a purpose. The first day they nearly took the whole embassy, but didn't succeed. Then the US flew in reinforcements, and there was no longer a chance. Bear in mind that most US embassies, and in particular Baghdad, are built like fortresses, and can resist a long siege. I was surprised the demonstrators got as far as they did.

Posted by: Laguerre | Jan 4 2020 9:23 utc | 408

A prediction: before 2020 is done there will not only be no US forces inside Iraq, but there will also be the beginnings of a formal Iran/Iraq/Syria military alliance, with joint forces stationed at the very edge of the border.

And all of it protected by a multi-layered and unified air defense network provided at a knock-down price by Russia.

The "Shia Crescent" on steroids, driving Israel utterly bat-shit crazy.

And all of it thanks to whacky ol' Trump and his Israel-first neocon advisors.

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Jan 4 2020 9:28 utc | 409

Another comfirmation that the USA together with Europe is done for. Whatever party or personality in power will always be Zionist. The White Supremacists cabal who put Donald Trump in power must be having a second thought now, if they think at all. Just like the UkraNazis who carried out the Maidan coup in 2014.

Posted by: Steve | Jan 4 2020 9:40 utc | 410

A senseless, cowardly act that hopefully, will cost Trump the Whitw House.
No more foreign wars was the most compelling part of his platform. Escalation and picking a fight with the most powerful ME country while he slashes social programs is not going to play well.
Few people seriously thought that triple bankrupt hustler would ever Make America Great again. They are sick and tired of the brutality and violence America projects around the world.

Posted by: CD Waller | Jan 4 2020 9:57 utc | 411

Veritas X @318 with the claim that Schuster is a Jewish surname

That's the most moronic thing I've ever read. Schuster like Schusterer or Schuhmacher are surnames that hark back to job designations. It just means that some forefather has been a cobbler once. It's like saying the name Smith would be a typical Jewish surname, unless you can convince me that cobblers were typical professions of Jewish people.

Posted by: vato | Jan 4 2020 10:39 utc | 412

Posted by: Yetanotheranon | Jan 3 2020 23:02 utc | 300

Well, Suleimani was part of the Trump-Khamenei twitter war after the US embassy stand off when Trump threatened Iran on January 1. Khamenei was channelling his inner Khomeinei "America can't do a thing" and explaining that American actions made nations hate the US.

It is an intercultural discussion on the limits of purely military power.

US troups won't survive in Iraq in a hostile environment. They need supplies and Iraqi security. And Iraqis fighting - they only "train", remember. Already non military US citizens are advised to leave Iraq (though it is not clear how, Baghdad airport being closed), the American embassy is safe but out of function.

It is an end to the political Iranian vs US fight for influence in Iraq (link is to the Intercept story on "leaked" Iranian files) and a summary of the fight for Iraqi politicians and the Iraqi and Iranian protest movement) - and again - the US have done Iran a big favour.

There is a Memri translation of Suleimani making fun of Trump talking like a man standing at a bar and not like the president of a country.

In the end Trump and Iraqi politicians are posturing for their own audiences with very different mentalities, what works for one, does not work for others.

In the US killing a hyped up villain feels like victory, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, Suleimani .... in countries with veneration for martyrdom this is reversed.
And the real fight is for cultural and economic influence.

China and Russia have become alternative economic models countries can turn to, though the attractiveness of Western lifestyle is still high (though becoming ecologically obsolete). The sanctioning power of the US is on the vane. As with Ukraine, Iraq might turn the other way.

Posted by: somebody | Jan 4 2020 10:42 utc | 413

Look at the Democrats crying that Trump was supposed to come to Congress for authorization on this assassination. What a joke. They already gave him authorization; they just passed, in the last week or so, the latest Pentagon budget and NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act] which still contains the clause that allows the sitting president the absolute right to assassinate anyone he deems as a "terrorist". He can kill the so-designated party anywhere in the world by any means he sees fit. Remember Obama and "Terror Tuesdays"? Remember the "kill list"? Remember when Obama used the NDAA clause to kill the American, Anwar al-Awlaki, and his teen-aged son? The kill list still exists and the authority to use it still exists. There were people who warned what would happen if we had a president who would use it to kill foreign leaders or to start a new war, but Congress did not ever get rid of this astonishingly unconstitutional power. Trump can fucking kill you if he decides you are a terrorist, and you won't get an arrest warrant or a trial first.

You hear Pompeo and Trump repeatedly referring to Soleimani as a "terrorist" now. This is because that will be their defense against the accusations that he needed Congressional approval.

In April of 2019 (i.e., 9 months ago), Trump had the State Dept. designate Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its Quds Force as "foreign terrorist organizations". No doubt he did this with some nudging from Pompeo, who is rabidly unhinged about Iran. I believe this was the first time that the US has designated another country's military to be a terrorist group.

Nobody in Congress made objections to this action, as far as I can recall, although one should consider that it was basically a declaration of war against Iran.

Now Trump is using his Congressionally-granted powers to kill people he has decided are terrorists - and it just so happens that he already declared months ago that Iran's military forces IN ITS ENTIRETY was a terrorist organization and so can be assassinated one by one or as a group without further approval needed by anyone.

And Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren, et al had nothing to say about it then and can't really do jack-shit about it now.

Sure, it is illegal by international standards, immoral, stupid, misguided, and may start another new war, but they gave away the high ground a long time ago. Like, when the first NDAA that included the "kill list" clause was approved by them, and again each time they renewed it, and when they remained silent as the buffoon (Trump) and his snarling guide dog (Pompeo) took the first steps to make this particular assassination, and the ones that will surely follow it, "legal" by naming a foreign power's military branch a terrorist organization.

Posted by: teri | Jan 4 2020 10:53 utc | 414

Events such as these, create opportunities. Usually, the opportunities are not understood, or they are ignored, or they are mishandled. This act of Trump is ultra-crass. Obama, who was the champion of drone murder, used it exclusively as a perverse expression of what he championed "American Exceptionalism". But while the world reacted in disgust, Obama focused on murdering inconsequential actors, or even better, non-actors,...just "folks" as he called them. So while Trump is continuing Obama's drone murder policy, this act was unbelievably crass, in the sense that the benefits are zero and the consequences mind-blowing. The opportunities this ridiculous act provides, fall both to the American people, and to the Democrats. It is hard, of course, for a Democrat Party still under the sway of Hillary Clinton, to behave piously in condemning this act, because Hillary was such an important part of Obama's drone murder programme. But Americans generally dont much care about inconsistency and hypocrisy, which are rife in the political life of the nation. The Democrats, today, have the ONLY weapon they have and are likely to have, to defeat Trump in the forthcoming election. They are almost certain to blow it, and hand Trump perhaps an even bigger victory. For the American People, the lesson is: "Stop Israel running the foreign policy of your country." If you believe that the American People will take that lesson on board, you probably believe Superman will fly in and save you all.

Posted by: Leedon | Jan 4 2020 10:56 utc | 415

add to

Posted by: somebody | Jan 4 2020 10:42 utc | 418

Interestingly enough, in that Memri translation, Suleimani started a discussion with Trump on who is a real man.

Which is probably what all this is about.

Posted by: somebody | Jan 4 2020 11:03 utc | 416

somebody @418, memri translation: I get the feeling Seulimani baited Trump into killing him, left it open and baited him into doing it. With help from the Israelis and their friends of course. Of course it's a memri translation ...

"We are a nation of martyrdom". I've had that feeling since it happened and the circumstances became clear, so maybe I have some confirmation bias happening, but ...

Posted by: Bemildred | Jan 4 2020 11:06 utc | 417

The national security adviser Robert O'Brien asked about the possibility that the Iraqi parliament vote to expel all the american troops from Irat, he said: "We would certainly be very disappointed if there was some sort of adverse decision by the Iraqi parliament", so later some in the cabinet would consider this act as "hostile" to US (they are supposed to be there to protect the Iraqi people, Democracy, Freedom, Sovereignty and Human Rights, of course all only for the well being of the Iraqi people.

Right now the leaders of the political parties in the Iraqi parliament must be passing the clasical mafia style pressure: stick & carrots, but knowing the extreme corruption, weakness and cowardice of the iraqi politicians I do not discard some "condemnations" of the killing of Muhandis & Suleimani, but nothing near an ultimatum for a complete withdrawal of the US troops of all the country. In any case the US army will not move, they would say they are there under the umbrella of the UN, and USA has the veto power inside the UNSC, and as a good globalist Trump knows that the UN has more legitimacy than any sovereign country.

Of course the US army will only leave Iraq under fire (like in Vietnam), and after stone aging Iran and Iraq (as they made with South and North Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, etc..)

Posted by: DFC | Jan 4 2020 11:14 utc | 418

Posted by: Patroklos | Jan 3 2020 23:08 utc | 304

Real Trump is bound to be somebody else not his image. His image talks directly to people's hormons.

The US have great people but are through and through capitalist, meaning that basic necessities are not free. This includes schools: A large part of the US electorate are semi-literate.

It still needed computer gaming voters with fake news to bring him to power - that is what Cambridge Analytica did.

Hitler's Nazi party had in the last free election 38 percent of the vote - and - when he was brought to absolute power by an elite conspiracy in a vote including several parties but impeding the Social Democrats and excluding the Communists - 44 percent of the vote.

Democracies are vulnerable, it is as simple as that.

Posted by: somebody | Jan 4 2020 11:24 utc | 419

Posted by: teri | Jan 4 2020 10:53 utc | 419

Congress... already gave him authorization; they just passed, in the last week or so, the latest Pentagon budget and NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act] which still contains the clause that allows the sitting president the absolute right to assassinate anyone he deems as a "terrorist". Remember Obama and "Terror Tuesdays"? Remember when Obama used the NDAA clause to kill the American, Anwar al-Awlaki, and his teen-aged son? The kill list still exists and the authority to use it still exists. There were people who warned what would happen if we had a president who would use it to kill foreign leaders or to start a new war, but Congress did not ever get rid of this astonishingly unconstitutional power. Trump can fucking kill you if he decides you are a terrorist, and you won't get an arrest warrant or a trial first.

Yes, that's classic Democratic politics and the rot is total. Let's not forget to include Sanders' fake Yemen resolution which included an exemption for US actions which allegedly were for fighting "terrorists". Of course that's all Obama or Trump ever claimed the US was doing in Yemen, as Sanders knew perfectly well. That was a loophole big enough to drive an army through, deliberately so.

And Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren, et al had nothing to say about it then and can't really do jack-shit about it now.

Ah well, none of the Demscum want to do anything anyway since the whole lot of them are imperialist war-mongers. They have to be, by definition, since the Democrat Party, just as much as the Republican, is a hard core pro-imperial pro-war party. In response to this Trump action the Dems do nothing but strike idiotic poses while lying about Soleimani and who the aggressor is in the first place. Warren's pro-imperial pro-war vileness is typical:

"Soleimani was a murderer, responsible for the deaths of thousands, including hundreds of Americans."

Posted by: Russ | Jan 4 2020 11:25 utc | 420

The Americans might do well to ponder on the origin of the word “assassin”. It originally referred to members of an Ismaili sect living in the Elburz mountains (in Persia) who became famous for conducting suicide missions, mainly against the Franks (this was at the time of the Kingdom of the Franks in Palestine, after it had been taken over by the Crusaders).

It was often thought that “assassin” was derived from a word meaning hashish eater, but more probably means one of the Faithful. Marco Polo wrote about them and their most famous leader, Hassan-I-Sabbah, “the Old Man of the Mountain”, secure in his fortress in the high Elburz - Alamut - the Eagle’s Nest.

The Mongols got them in the end, but they caused endless havoc for a time. So many echoes today of the last time West Europeans invaded the eastern shore of the Mediterranean. I would imagine that the Iranians will take their revenge cumulatively, maybe in a way Hassan-I-Sabbah would have approved of.

Posted by: Montreal | Jan 4 2020 11:26 utc | 421

In the fall of 2015, when the only supporters Trump had were alt-right Bannon folks and racist Obama-haters, Trump's entire platform was erasing every one of Obama's "achievements." He had not yet wooed the neocons and Christian Right. He opposed all US wars -- except with Iran. He wanted to throw out Obama's JCPOA and "get tougher" with Iran. One could argue that he's been dragged by generals, Adelson and the Deep State into other conflicts since then. Yet, even if this was not the manner in which he had anticipated confronting Iran, he loses nothing with his hardcore base by killing Soleimani -- they'll interpret it as his keeping yet another of his promises, whatever the consequences.

Posted by: Rusty Pipes | Jan 4 2020 11:32 utc | 422

@416 - "A senseless, cowardly act that hopefully, will cost Trump the White House."

Likely to cost him more than that. As a man with a lot of business towers to protect he has certainly set himself up as a target into the foreseeable future. I certainly would not risk staying in any of his accommodation now that he's ventured outside the normal rules and kicked that wasp's nest.

Posted by: imo | Jan 4 2020 11:32 utc | 423

@ Russ, #425:

Re: Warren's statement, "Soleimani was a murderer, responsible for the deaths of thousands, including hundreds of Americans."

I would say to her: Yeah, Elizabeth, it turns out that other countries have also killed some people during times of war. It turns out that other countries also have some "paramilitary" forces not too different from the US' CIA, special forces, clandestine forces and proxy forces we use in dozens of foreign nations to kill people. One might argue that the deaths of hundreds of Americans that Soleimani is supposedly responsible for occurred during the time that the US was engaged in blatantly illegal wars against Iran (since we engineered the fall of the Shah) and against Iraq (which we still occupy). One might argue that Soleimani's actions were justified as a response to US actions. One might point out that the US is responsible for MILLIONS of deaths just since the invasion of Iraq, and that the relatively few American deaths during this time of a "war" instigated entirely by the US is simply the cost of engaging in a freaking "war".

But if one pointed out these things, one would be called anti-American and disloyal to the brave warriors. It is to retch.

Posted by: teri | Jan 4 2020 11:46 utc | 424


Why did they stop the siege of the embassy? Because it no longer served a purpose.

It was the iraqi government that was pushed by the US to stop the protesters. Thats the issue here. I wonder what kind of threats, influence really have and specifically on whom in the government.

Posted by: Zanon | Jan 4 2020 11:59 utc | 425

@ karlof1 | Jan 4 2020 2:30 utc | 364 (Reserve Fleet) Thanks. The condition of the fleets implies an important point in Strategy.

The "Turbo Activation" of the RRF included also ships on the East Coast. They're also in poor shape, and being obsolete, parts are increasingly recycled scrap bits from shipbreakers. Similarly, the men who built and crewed those ships are either dead or retired. Because many are steamships there are not enough licensed or qualified men to crew them. A full activation is simply not possible without a lot of time and money. I doubt they can activate, even in 6 months, 20 ships well enough to operate in convoy "through mines and submarines". Assuming the old guys they do find are willing to go into combat as sitting ducks. My old friends include several guys from Cal Maritime, engineers and captains and a electronics guy (radio operator in the old days) . The captain is dead from hepatitis C. The engineer is a crippled lawyer who smokes pot all day, and the electronics guy is close to 80. That's typical. They'd have to train up new crews.

My take on this objective fact is that the US cannot mount an invasion force if it has to be supplied from the CONUS.

However that implies that US strategy is not to invade.

If they do not invade, they must smash to ruins.

The inflective factor in the example of Iran - the Iranian defense alternative set - suggests to me that the Strategy to Prevail over Iran then, must be to use nuclear explosives on the "deep targets" and to by this display, intimidate China and Russia such that they permit the ruin of Iran.

Groves said in March of '44 that the bomb was to "subdue the Russians". He said that to Chadwick at dinner with Rotblatt, up on the Mesa.

That's why they did Hiroshima and Nagasaki - to threaten USSR and make them pliable, afraid, subservient.

It didn't get the response Stimson, Byrnes, Truman and the gang dreamed of. And it won't work this time either.

Posted by: Walter | Jan 4 2020 12:01 utc | 426

teri | Jan 4 2020 11:46 utc | 429

All true. I just say that Iran and its allies have caused no deaths except among aggressors, and most of all no American died that wasn't an existential aggressor that had no right or business to be in the Mideast at all, period.

Posted by: Russ | Jan 4 2020 12:15 utc | 427

There is one person in Congress with intellect, conscience and courage: Tulsi Gabbard.

If you are a US citizen, please donate to her presidential campaign and vote for her - for all our sakes.

Posted by: PJB | Jan 4 2020 12:23 utc | 428

vk@236 :=>Soleimani murdered because USA losing.. against Iran.
SharonM@253:=>no, its a declaration of war.
Snake asks :=>Is it possible "THE SOLEIMANI EVENT [TSE]" should be understood in a completely different vain? Instead of revenge or unauthorized declaration of war (which on surface it appears to be), maybe TSE was an accommdation designed by those with the authority to push the war buttons to satisfy BIP complaints?
Maybe Bankers, Investors and war privateers (BIPs), unable to pillage Iraq or control Iran are depressed and angry?

Maybe TSE was path finding, looking for ways to force those with the WMDs to fix not the Iraq/Iran problem, but the surfs don't want to fight problem?
Maybe the private propaganda producers and the MSM have not yet been able to convince the surfs they must fight yet another war to make the BIPs the Trillions in profits likely to be in Iran and Iraq? (Don't forget the MSM is privately owned and the mind set of the masses is established by the message content found in the fake and misleading propaganda). Maybe the problem TSE was designed to solve is that those BIP puppets in charge at the nation states do not yet have support from their governed public_s; without more support, the mass destruction buttons for total war cannot be pushed, and without total war the profits in Iraq and Iran will never be realized by the BIPs?

Obviously the wealthy few, BIPs, and others want to clear the barriers that prevent privateering in Iran and Iraq?

In light of that logic, I offer for consideration that THE can be explained as

an invitation to the people in Iraq and Iran, please goes the invitation, get your governments to do something so outrageous that it will cause the surfs in the outsider BIP controlled nation states to support-in-anger or for revenge<= an investors' war against your Iran and Iraq.
Unless the surfs in the BIP nation states are willing to fight there will be no war, the BIP are after profits, not blood; so the BIP are not going to fight. Without governed surfs willing to be trained to shoot WMDs and to fight, and willing to leave their homes and families to fight, it will be difficult for the BIP owned nation states to deliver destroyed Iran and Iraq to the BIPs.

Unless the legislatures vote for war, and the public support that vote, the investors and privateers will not be able to take the natural resources they want or to make wage slaves of the populations they want to exploit.

The above is an inquiry seeking opinion. Thanks

Posted by: snake | Jan 4 2020 12:28 utc | 429

435 Snake.
If you believe the load of propaganda and excuses for an international act of barbarism and butchery - you are an example of total brainwashing.
I have to say I have never seen such written piffle in a long time.

Posted by: Emily | Jan 4 2020 12:41 utc | 430

'Patriotic' virtue signaling seems to be gearing up.

Weird how the 'international community' waits until after the US does something heinous to call for prudence.

Posted by: paul | Jan 4 2020 13:00 utc | 431

Great comment.
I think you will find Lebanon in on the deal

Posted by: Emily | Jan 4 2020 13:11 utc | 432

Re: "I read in Sputnik that Trump has said that Qassim "should have been taken out earlier" because he "was hated". Posted by: montreal | Jan 3 2020 15:52 utc | 147

Trump is actually a giant coward. He gets giggly and "irrationally exuberant" when he gets to kill or steal from foreigners because it's the only time his bosses let him act like he's the boss of anything. The fact that he's the boss of nothing was made pathetically clear when they made him do a televised retraction or "clarification" of one or two words he said during his televised Finland meeting with Putin. He'd said nothing wrong at the televised Putin meeting, but the media said Trump had been "treasonous." Trump's demeanor with Putin was easy and confident, the first time he'd acted like he was actually president. It was over in an instant and he was on television folding like a cheap camera because he's a coward.

Posted by: chili palmer | Jan 4 2020 13:15 utc | 433

Russ @425


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jan 4 2020 13:23 utc | 434

Veritas X #318

This is the first time I have noticed Miles Mathis being cited here.
I am very curious about this fellow and about what barflies think of him.
He makes strikingly apposite observations in numerous fields of study, yet a lot of his genealogies and theories that prominent figures have faked their deaths seem to go a bit off the track.

And yet our spooky world is full unexplained stuff, big *and* small. Big, e.e., Dallas; 9/11. Small: Perhaps Manson "murders"? Are the small ops evidence that there are ops going on at all levels of our society?

Is Mathis nuts? Or just more observant?
Truly perplexed. Just read his on Marx and New Trier High School, and what he asserts does seem to make sense, or at least what he has dug up seems to require *some* explanation.

Posted by: Really?? | Jan 4 2020 13:24 utc | 435


US billionaires started this war. US citizens are victims in a way too.

The best retaliation for Iran by far is directly against MIC executives and Wall Street grifters, the people who induced this war.

This policy may bring another global iron curtain finally crashing down.

Posted by: Stephen Merrill | Jan 4 2020 13:28 utc | 436

Karlof1 @325

"while Warren praised them in words no different than those of the Neocons thus finally revealing her true colors."

Ugh!!! Warren also endorsed the Bolivia coup.

Posted by: Really?? | Jan 4 2020 13:29 utc | 437

Re: Posted by: imo | Jan 4 2020 11:32 utc | 428

Interesting point, and why wouldn’t Iran go down that road in terms of its response?

Burn some Trump branded golf courses up and perhaps some Trump hotels?

That would certainly qualify as an asymmetric response.

Posted by: Julian | Jan 4 2020 13:37 utc | 438

US says they have "intelligence" that Soleimani was planning attacks on US forces. But they haven't provided ANY details about that "intelligence".

This leads me to believe that the source of the "intelligence" may be Israel. We've seen misleading "intelligence" from Israel before.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jan 4 2020 13:38 utc | 439

"Soleimani’s sobbing son next to a picture of Donald Trump gloating with broad smile while telling outrageus , delusional lies about imminent attacks on Americans"

Trump has out-Hillaried Hillary cackling about the torture-murder of Qaddafi.

The world recoils in outrage and disgust at these blasphemous displays of gloating.

They are invitations for retribution. And who would question such rough justice?

Posted by: Really?? | Jan 4 2020 13:41 utc | 440

Posted by: Really?? | Jan 4 2020 13:24 utc | 441

If you talk about Suleimani he has achieded some - small . immortality now. Getting killed like that at the age of 62 is what some guys I know would prefer to getting old.

Trump is a sales person. He will be able to sell "not escalating" or "withdrawing" or whatever. US army analysis of chances and risks in attacking Iran (or Syria) have been negative for quite a while - and their analysis tended to be heavy on the chances. Their policy has been trying to destabilize. The hit on Suleimani was counterproductive - it unifies and stabilizes. So you have to wonder what they were thinking.

Maybe they were pretending to fight Iran for the sake of US allies - Saudi and Israel, who have been looking for protection elsewhere. They probably are just going through the motions but don't really care. A lot will be due to the disfunction of the US administration. And not knowing what to do after Iran sanctions failed as Israel needs an agreement with Iran but conditions get less and less favorable.

Posted by: somebody | Jan 4 2020 13:45 utc | 441

For me the wave function has collapsed and trump and the qanon
phenomenon are revealed to be just another control node in the
matrix. The incredibly masterful manipulation of the qanon
phenomenon would be a lifetime study in itself. The main tactic
is to expose one corruption in order to seduce its followers into
another deeper corruption. Anyway, the reality creators have created
another reality while we were studiously examining their last nightmare.

Posted by: evilempire | Jan 4 2020 13:56 utc | 442

Yeah right 414

"but there will also be the beginnings of a formal Iran/Iraq/Syria military alliance, with joint forces stationed at the very edge of the border. "

Jeez, that seems to me to be the obvious next step. What is taking them so long?
When are the ME powers going to see that the Shia-Sunni thing, while certainly serious for believers, is really getting in the way of survival of anyone or any govt in the ME except the Yank-Zionist military terror regime? They must agree to disagree on uncles, cousins etc. of Mohammad and get their defensive s--- together.

Posted by: Really?? | Jan 4 2020 13:59 utc | 443

Y'know, I must be retarded, it suddenly dawned..this sitrep practically cries out for...drumbeat...a false flag. The Esteemed PM Herr N has only to say it, and a US target vaporizes...and presto, the yankees get the blame...what a bunch of stooges and marks!

Posted by: Walter | Jan 4 2020 14:02 utc | 444

If I remember correctly, Clinton became more militarily aggressive around the time of his impeachment, Obama around the time of the Bowe Bergdahl fiasco (impeachment was being discussed), and now Trump might start a war with Iran after being impeached. Maybe there's a pattern.

Posted by: Timothy Hagios | Jan 4 2020 14:05 utc | 445

It was the iraqi government that was pushed by the US to stop the protesters.

Posted by: Zanon | Jan 4 2020 11:59 utc | 430

It may be so. I don't much care. The siege of the embassy was either going to succeed the first day or not at all. Have you ever been in one of those embassies? They're more like bunkers than office buildings. I was reminded of the similarity to Douaumont, the fort outside Verdun, the only one of the 1WW front-line or Maginot-line forts I have visited. And that was the one in Amman, a US-allied state.

Posted by: Laguerre | Jan 4 2020 14:10 utc | 446

Bernie Sanders Stands Out in Anti-War Messaging After Death of Soleimani

Tragic but not surprising, democrats, republicans and their dumb voters back this attack by Trump no doubt.

Posted by: Zanon | Jan 4 2020 14:13 utc | 447

So, no one bringing up the notion that this attack could just as well be a distraction meant to get the impeachment hysteria off the news cycle and curry some favor with the vampires.
Posted by: Stumpy | Jan 4 2020 2:33 utc | 365

Actually, a number of commenters have brought this up. Including me.

Posted by: Really?? | Jan 4 2020 14:14 utc | 448

Posted by: Timothy Hagios | Jan 4 2020 14:05 utc | 451

"If I remember correctly, Clinton became more militarily aggressive around the time of his impeachment, Obama around the time of the Bowe Bergdahl fiasco (impeachment was being discussed), and now Trump might start a war with Iran after being impeached. Maybe there's a pattern."

Taking the typology at face value and ignoring the extraneous details (and of course the details always are extraneous*; by Nuremburg standards all three should be hanged), it would seem the underlying purpose of impeachment always is to drive a president to become more warlike and weapon-mongering.

*Ironically, by accident the details in Trump's case are quite telling: Cutting through the sanctimonious lies of the Democrats, they're impeaching Trump because he didn't give the Ukrainian neo-Nazis enough US taxpayer-funded weaponry.

Posted by: Russ | Jan 4 2020 14:19 utc | 449

@ Timothy Hagios | Jan 4 2020 14:05 utc | 451

Yes, indeed! Interestingly when one listens to the clownish naif attempting to rationalize the recent murder (for which PM N assigns all blame to the the I assume "they" were in on the hit, possibly primary) but when one listen to the guy in very recent video he's repeating from a prompt. "They" got him cold. Poor sap, the one mark he couldn't beat...the mark inside. Trump the clown puppet. Pity.

"They" can vaporize a tin can and yell (like Goering at the Reichstag)instead on "communists" they'll yell Iranians did it.

Then "they" watch the explosions. It's the plan.

You know. "you fellers go fight my enemy 'cause ah got some pictures of you that I might want to sell."

Posted by: Walter | Jan 4 2020 14:24 utc | 450

@John Doe re: Gwynne Dyer - the man predicted the fall of the Berlin Wall at least 10 years before it occurred. Now, there are many skeptics here who will say that this was foreseeable, yet, as someone who scoured the newspapers and current events in the day, I can tell you, he was the only one I ever read to have made the prediction.

I read this book about Iran's "wars against the USA" once. The Secret War with Iran: The 30-Year Clandestine Struggle Against the World's Most Dangerous Terrorist Power. It made a very good point that Iran doesn't do aggressive military strikes against the USA. It uses hidden strategies and it may take a long time to take its revenge.

Posted by: Mischi | Jan 4 2020 14:25 utc | 451

Daniel has it dead right and you do need to grow up fast.
Samsel 43

You and Daniel both need to "grow up fast" and learn to debate and post like adults, not like catty high school girls who think they are clever and oh so grown up. Real men with balls have basic manners. So please, grow a pair. It is unpleasant to read such gratuitously insulting adolescent pot shots.

Posted by: Really?? | Jan 4 2020 14:26 utc | 452

The US seem to have lost any support in Iraq. This here is Kudistan, trying to be polite to Pompeo, pointing out that Suleimani saved them from ISIS.

The Kurdistan Region president noted that both Soleimani and Muhandis played a role in the war against the Islamic State (ISIS) and warned against giving ISIS space to regroup.

“The continuation of these complications, actions and reactions, will push Iraq and the region towards an abyss and an uncertain future; it will also lead to the resurgence and strengthening of extremist and terrorist groups, such as ISIS,” he stated.

Soleimani was the mastermind of Iran’s strategy against ISIS in Iraq. He had said that without Iran, Erbil may have been invaded by ISIS when the group emerged in 2014. Kurdistan Region officials have acknowledged Iran’s role in defending the Region against the extremist group.
Pompeo spoke to Kurdistan Region Prime Minister Masrour Barzani late on Friday to discuss the matter. "I thanked him for his steadfast partnership. We agreed on the need for continued, close cooperation," the diplomat said on Twitter.

Barzani added via Twitter that he and Pompeo "agreed on the importance of deescalating tensions in Iraq through restraint and dialogue."

Posted by: somebody | Jan 4 2020 14:31 utc | 453

Rather than a distraction from impeachment, I see the assassination more in line with Russiagate and impeachment in trying to deflect attention from things such as Biden's problems in the Ukraine and the unfolding of Spygate.  

I think the reaction to it will bear these things in mind.  

The CIA got way out of control in Syria and these abuses are starting to come to light.

Posted by: financial matters | Jan 4 2020 14:35 utc | 454

Following the #US assassination of #Qassem_Soleimani "The red flag was raised over Jamkaran mosque in #Qom #Iran & it won't be taken down until revenge against the US is fulfilled" via @Sara_Haj.

Any Muslim barfly know the meaning of this from an Eschatological point of view?

Posted by: Lozion | Jan 4 2020 14:38 utc | 455

It seems to me that "asymetric" translates to one has very limited conventional capabilties.

It would seem that US is getting info from inside.

Under the circumstances, I would suggest peaceful regime change and endeavor to play the game, maybe come back in another hundred years or so.

Meanwhile on bright side US is self destructing driven by its owners.

Posted by: jared | Jan 4 2020 14:46 utc | 456

My guess would be that the Houthis will shut down Saudi Arabia's cross country oil pipeline again and attack the Saudi export terminals on the Red Sea. This would mean that all exports from the Gulf States would have to be through the Straits of Hormuz.
Then the battleground will shift to the Persian Gulf and it will be for all the marbles!
Iran will make the Persian Gulf the main battlefield knowing well that even if the USA manages to absolutely clobber them, the Iranians can at minimum guarantee that oil and LNG shipments out of the Persian Gulf will be disrupted for the middle of winter.
The damage to the economies of American allies in Europe and Asia will be devastating and the unrest that will be generated in the Gulf States would likely see several governments fall. The sharp rise in oil prices would also put Trump's re-election in doubt.
Even if the USA were to "win" the military conflict it will face such hostility across the Middle East that it will be forced to drastically shrink its footprint in the region. Not just at a military level but US corporations will not be able to carry on business as usual...and God know's best.

Posted by: Othello | Jan 4 2020 14:51 utc | 457

@John Doe 407

I second that endorsement of Gwynne Dyer. The man knows his stuff and when he’s expounding on matters pertaining to military history and the nature of warfare he is well worth listening to.

Posted by: Daniel | Jan 4 2020 14:51 utc | 458

Posted by: Linus | Jan 4 2020 14:55 utc | 459

@Really? 458

You’ve run out of excuses for kissing Trump’s sphincter so you start babbling about politeness and arguing like “a real man.” Lmao You must be one of those snowflake people I’ve been hearing about.

Posted by: Daniel | Jan 4 2020 15:02 utc | 460

Laguerre 452

Its is important to understand which side Iraq stands on, its not clear nowadays:

Last year: Iraq warn armed-groups not to provoke the U.S.

Why do Iraq even care about the interests of the U.S. when U.S. working against Iraq, Syria and Iran?
I sense alot of corrupted pro-US politicians in Iraq.

Posted by: Zanon | Jan 4 2020 15:09 utc | 461


03.Dec. 2019: 5 rockets hit Ain al-Asad airbase.
No damage, no injuries, no casualties.
Nobody assumes responsibility.

05.Dec. 2019: 2 granades or katjuschas hit Balad air base.
No injuries, no casualties.
Nobody assumes responsibility.

09.Dec. 2019: 4 katjuschas hit airbase at Baghdad airport.
Rocket launcher found nearby.

27.Dec. 2019: K1 air base Kirkuk hit by 30 Katjuscha rockets.
1 US "civilian contractor" und 3 US service members killed.
2 iraqian soldiers injured.
Found a launchpad for Katyusha rockets in an abandoned vehicle nearby.
Nobody assumes responsible.

30.Dec. 2019: US air strikes against Kataib Hezbollah head quarter in Quaim,
in response to assault on K1 air base Kirkuk.
At least 24 iraquian and iranian soldiers killed.

31.Dec. 2019/01.Jan. 2020: US embassy attacked by protesters,
in response to air strike in Qaim on 30.Dec.2019.

03.Januar 2020:
General Qasem Soleimani killed by US drone strike near Baghdad airport.

Also interesting in this context:
"Iraqi Media To The Iran-Backed PMU: The U.S. Informed The Iraqi Prime Minister Of The Coming Airstrike"
If this is true: seems there are more than two bitches round there. The beast of escalation getting loose.

Posted by: Linus | Jan 4 2020 15:09 utc | 462

This may be one of the main true reasons behind Trump's desperate assassination of Soleimani:

Saudi Arabia at Crossroads

Evidence suggests that as of recent Riyadh is intent on improving ties with Tehran and has been negotiating to this effect in secret. Citing officials in Saudi Arabia, The Wall Street Journal (an informative American newspaper) has reported that the kingdom is engaged in behind-the-scenes talks with Iran with the view of protecting its energy resources, petroleum industry, and transportation and oil pipe lines. It wrote that Riyadh was negotiating with Tehran in order to prevent incidents similar to those on 14 September, when a large-scale attack on ARAMCO (the Saudi Arabian Oil Company) had been staged.

Looks a little bit far-fetched, but it's more food for thought.

Posted by: vk | Jan 4 2020 15:11 utc | 463

Posted by: Lozion | Jan 4 2020 14:38 utc | 461


The concept - and the colours - used to exist in Christianity, too, by the way.

Posted by: somebody | Jan 4 2020 15:13 utc | 464

Posted by: jared | Jan 4 2020 14:46 utc | 462

It seems to me that "asymetric" translates to one has very limited conventional capabilties.

As in Vietnam? Or Afghanistan?

"Conventional capabilities" don't mean much if geography and mentality are against them ie if people fight on even though they have "lost" the war.

Posted by: somebody | Jan 4 2020 15:18 utc | 465


The Shia Red Flag was raised on the top of the Jamkaran Mosque in the Iranian city of Qom, second largest in the Persian country, after General Qassem Soleimani, head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps’ (IRGC’s) elite Quds Force, was assassinated in an aerial attack when his vehicle was targeted in the Baghdad International airport. The Red Flag is the flag of Imam Hussein and marks the colour of blood which, many say, symbolises revenge and an impending severe battle.

Source: India National Herald

Other on-line sources characterize the flag more as a sign of an unjust death that must be avenged. There doesn't seem to be any particular universal rules of use among Shi'ia - depends on the mosque for specific meaning.

Posted by: PavewayIV | Jan 4 2020 15:22 utc | 466

@karlof1 384
Oh please. Putin looked away as his American partners got one of his own generals whacked in Syria. It is precisely this consistent, craven appeasement that has built up the American sense of impunity. One may call them "stupid" as often as one wishes, but then what do we call those PMU honchos who apparently continue to drive around Iraq in tightly clustered "Martyr me next please" convoys?

The Yanks have observed their enemies carefully, and apparently concluded "We can take 'em"; it'll be up to the unruly locals to prove them wrong.

Posted by: Ma Laoshi | Jan 4 2020 15:23 utc | 467

Iran and the USA have been at war since at least 1979, declared or not. Things have just heated up in the last few days.

Posted by: Mischi | Jan 4 2020 15:23 utc | 468

Is a highly metastatic condition. Numerous trigger mechanisms are open to hundreds of agencies, from Mossad to some obscure militia.

Imagine (insert name) airplane blows up.

Imagine boat blows up (Remember the Maine).

Remember operation Northwoods.

Or imagine some GI smoking in the ammo dump.

It's a turkey shoot to trigger a US bombing campaign on Iran. Even Boris and Natasha could pull this one off. (the cartoon on youtube under title "goof gas" is prescient, and funny).

Posted by: Walter | Jan 4 2020 15:38 utc | 469

Uh huh. LOL The ankle biters will bite out ankles Okay. I think we'll live. The only real question was what Russia and China would do and it appears that jack shit is the answer. Impotence is often loud. I expect things to tamp down in the region enough for Trump to make his long desired exit, and Iran's clear attempt to provoke a full out war to avoid their regime's demise has failed.

I do not consider the Russian perspective to be without value,. but it is highly limited in value.

Posted by: doodahman | Jan 4 2020 15:41 utc | 470

doodahman, it's not a football game. iran isn't provoking anything, and the "game" lasts a lot longer than 3 hours; some americans (most) have very short attention spans.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Jan 4 2020 15:55 utc | 471

Very interesting stuff recently on Elijah Magnier's twitter site.

He reports that US has asked Qatar to mediate with Iran over the retaliation to the assassination. Deputy PM/ FM Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani met with his counterpart Javad Zarif and offered "nuclear deal" and lifting sanctions in exchange for no Iranian retaliation.

Also, that US asked Iran, according to sources in Tehran, to limit its response to the assassination to a "similar response". This means, Magnier says, that Trump is offering to Iran the life of a US four-star general.

If true, looks like the penny may have dropped in Trumpland.

Posted by: expat | Jan 4 2020 15:59 utc | 472

@Really? 458

You’ve run out of excuses for kissing Trump’s sphincter so you start babbling about politeness and arguing like “a real man.” Lmao You must be one of those snowflake people I’ve been hearing about.

Posted by: Daniel | Jan 4 2020 15:02 utc | 465

I don't know what a snowflake person is.
Have a nice day babbling and dreaming of other people's sphincters.

Posted by: Really?? | Jan 4 2020 16:03 utc | 473


Lol thet claim floated around yesterday, its fake of course, there is no truth in it. That US would accept a retaliation on a high US general is of course pure nonsense.

Posted by: Zanon | Jan 4 2020 16:16 utc | 474

@ 479 canon, IMO that is a baited trap. Again IMO, ANY response Iran makes will be used as justification for yet another over-compensated retaliation/escalation. In fact, any event which can be blamed on Iran will also be used the same way.

Posted by: Sorghum | Jan 4 2020 16:24 utc | 475

Zanon @479

Maybe so, but I don't know about "yesterday". Magnier's post is from today, at least it seems to be. Also, the main claim is that it involves limiting to a "similar response". The part about a 4-star general is a form of color commentary by Magnier, I think.

Posted by: expat | Jan 4 2020 16:26 utc | 476

China on Soleimani killing: US should not abuse military power, we are watching

In this statement, China said it will counterattack this American aggression in the economic front, i.e. by stimulating even more the already existing trade and investment with and in Iran. The interviewed diplomat also stated that this aggression makes Trump's "maximum pressure" doctrine being extraofficially declared a failure (something I had already pointed out in one of my comments in this post earlier).

Eurasia is much smarter now. They learned with the decades of failure and defeat of the Cold War. From now on, every war against the United States of America will be asymmetrical. The cronies of the Pentagon will continued to atrophy by fighting epic wars in their imagination only.

Posted by: vk | Jan 4 2020 17:01 utc | 477

I've been reading all of the blogposts by *b* & comments here the past 2 weeks regarding Syria/Iraq/Iran.
There are alot of good comments but, very few possible 'future scenario descriptions'.
Well, I'll take a stab-at-it.
But, before doing so, I'd like to point out something here for everyone.
No one has mentioned, what I consider 2 *smoking gun* tell-tale signs/evidence on what the real game plan is from Nutandyahoo, his stooge the Dump and the Malignant Manatee Poopeeo.

1) The July 3, 2019 US Airforce RC-135V Rivet Joint provocation over Sirri Island and Abu Musa.
*b' was one of the very few that reported on the failed-attempt to start a bombing campaign, with nukes/bunkerbusters, on Iran:

***On Eve Of 4th Of July Parade U.S. Attempts To Lure Iran Into Shooting Down Another U.S. Plane***
"...Trump recently threatened to 'obliterate' some areas of Iran should it attack "anything American":

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump - 2:42 utc - 25 Jun 2019

....Iran’s very ignorant and insulting statement, put out today, only shows that they do not understand reality. Any attack by Iran on anything American will be met with great and overwhelming force. In some areas, overwhelming will mean obliteration. No more John Kerry & Obama!
This led to speculation that Trump was threatening a nuclear strike...."

Concerning the nukes well, nobody has mentioned the "new nuke doctrine" either i.e. the 11 June 2019 Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations" release by the Joint Chiefs of Staff :

Now here's the important part.
Who was in charge of the USAF when the Global Hawk-drone got shotdown the 20th June and this spy plane flew over Abu Musa & Sirri Is. on the 3rd of July?
A guy, not a goy, by the name of U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff David Goldfein.
READ these links even though it's wikipedia.

2) And what about Poopeeo, unintentional let slip that he's been bombing the PMU-Iraqi Shia Militias many times before!!?
HERE at 38 seconds he fucks-up and says it(!) :
*USA: Pompeo, Esper confirm airstrike on Iran-backed forces in Iraq*
How did I find this?
Because this guy mentioned it and, I finally found the video-clip:

Now, let me ask 1 question.
What would You do if someone just murdered your father and said with gun in hand and putting new ammo in it, "I'm not gonna hurt You"?
I don't think there is any choice here.
Expect the same from Iran.

Posted by: Veritas X- | Jan 4 2020 17:01 utc | 478

Oh give me a break!

Mike Pence: Soleimani part of 9/11 attack

Posted by: Zanon | Jan 4 2020 17:20 utc | 479

@ veritas x 483
Nice post. We are on the same page with the repeated attempts to lure Iran into giving the US an excuse to use nukes. I suspect Iran and Russia have no illusions about what Trump plans, hence the rumors of Russia swapping warheads.

Posted by: Sorghum | Jan 4 2020 17:25 utc | 480

@JC (340) I hate to break it to you, but a terrorist attack inside the United States would be the greatest electoral gift that Trump and the Republicans could ever want. Not only would it rally the citizenry (as after 9/11), but it would provide the pretext for a draconian crackdown on all who stand in opposition to the ruling elite. Whatever freedom is left in the country would become but a fond memory. Be careful what you wish for.

Posted by: Rob | Jan 4 2020 18:41 utc | 481

Iran's response, if strong enough, might cost Trump his reelection by dragging or appearing to drag us into another quagmire.

Posted by: Mateo | Jan 4 2020 18:42 utc | 482

Indeed IRan cannot really do anything, whatever they do, they risk getting attacked more and more powerfully, any response will also generate even more support for Trump/US.

Posted by: Zanon | Jan 4 2020 19:05 utc | 483

Zanon, doing nothing will also bring a stronger response and Iran knows this. War is the goal and the only variables are when and why.

Posted by: Sorghum | Jan 4 2020 21:43 utc | 484

Iran realizes that revenge is a dish best served cold.

Posted by: David Krenshaw | Jan 5 2020 0:51 utc | 485

In my opinion, a proportionate response to all Trump provocations would be to enter CSTO and announce 2 levels of enrichment in the nuclear program.

Posted by: Marjorie | Jan 5 2020 1:52 utc | 486

All nations that currently support the USA should re-evaluate their stupid short sightedness. The USA criminal War machine has been invading & killing at will for the past 60+ years. They have achieved NOTHING except destruction. These blatant murdering bullies must be made to realise that their rule is over - it's finished.
I'm Australian & our stupid Governments( both majors) follow the USA war machine like a puppy!! I am not proud of Australian Governments -their Yank ass licking make me sick. The MSM & especially the ABC publishes only the American slant on everything. BUT -I can tell you now that the majority of Australians intensely dislike America & by extension most dumb Americans.

Posted by: James | Jan 5 2020 2:11 utc | 487

If I were a US 4 star general I'd be leary of any off-shore trips and even taking extra precautions within the continental US. They can't possibly be safe in Iraq or anywhere in the ME after January 2nd 2020. I'd definitely fear any ventures aboard ships.. Snall craft, carrier-size, or otherwise. Maybe a 1 start general on a craft with 100 servicemen making up for every star? I imagine the response will be without proof but known to all, I don't see some vague random rocket barrage sufficing. Restraint yes, coordinated with powerful allies and thoroughly contemplated including all the empires possible reactions.

Posted by: NJH | Jan 5 2020 2:23 utc | 488

The person who wrote this an IDIOT.

Posted by: Roger P Gauthier | Jan 5 2020 2:29 utc | 489

you scum shit.

Posted by: juke | Jan 5 2020 2:41 utc | 490


- Do you have proof of Iran supporting the Houthis ?
- When I heard of the attacks on those saudi oil production facilities (Abqaiq ??) then the blame was put on the Houthis which didn't make sense to me.
Yes, Obama (& G.W. Bush ??) poured lots of weapons into Yemen before the saudis started to attack Yemen. Did the US also give Yemen sophisticated weapons like drones ? Very unlikely, IMO. These drones were (supposedly) used for attacking the oil facilities in Saudi Arabia and - most important of all - handled by the Houthis ? Very unlikely, IMO. It takes considerable (technological) skills to operate these drones and I consider it to be unlikely that the Houthis have all these skills. That's why it would A LOT more sense that someone else (Iran ? .... ?) was handling/controlling the drones that caused that damage of the saudi oilfields.

Posted by: Willy2 | Jan 5 2020 4:05 utc | 491

Now thats what I call the effective use of American Power! Hoo-rah! I was never a supporter of Donald Trump until now. Trump 2020!

Posted by: Get Outa Dodge | Jan 5 2020 6:24 utc | 492

Gulf coast base may be target

Posted by: Hi,mer | Jan 5 2020 8:14 utc | 493

Didn't General Clark declared USM will take out 7 countries in 5yrs(for Israel Empire Yinon plan). They did completed all the targets, except Iran, the hardest nut to crack.

Israel wanted US to do its dirty job, but Obama knew the cost is too high as Iran is not another failed state, it has ability to retaliate.

Trumps is installed by Israel Zionists, he has to bid their order.

Posted by: TTdr | Jan 5 2020 12:37 utc | 494

Iran is a very old Persian civilization with great intelligence. They survive very well even under West ganster triad sanction & Israel sabotage, with patents filing ranked World Top9, higher than India that is bragging everywhere like No1 superpower.

An asymmetrical retaliation will be planned. Every sign of atack will put all US interests all overthe world in great stress. That alone will wear out Murikhans, as they fear their own lifes more than anyone.

There are simply too many US targets to feast at. If Al Queda & ISIS are not US created child, they will have long taken out many US targets instead of only attacking Islamic nations.

Posted by: TTdr | Jan 5 2020 12:47 utc | 495

Seems to my old eyes that the US attacks are part of a war plan, not a one off. The "Why" would seem to be a zionist question. And making war on Iran does not benefit the there's some other reason.

And the US is liable to lose.

In History losing a war brings revolution.

Accordingly one might plan for that, plan to suppress a revolution when you expect defeat.

So, is this being planned. see> Why a Shadowy Tech Firm With Ties to Israeli Intelligence Is Running Doomsday Election Simulations

@ mint press news

Posted by: Walter | Jan 5 2020 12:51 utc | 496

Suleimani and Abu Mahdi were killed by an MQ-9 Reaper. Which organisation controlled it? Was it CIA or Pentagon? Because I would think that since the Pentagon resists war they would resist it but the CIA has its own parallel warfare branch. Of course how high up do you need agreement before sending a drone, it could be a pentagon drone without common approval.

Posted by: Tuyzentfloot | Jan 5 2020 16:10 utc | 497

I didn't mean to suggest that the Pentagon would resist war in general..
but in specific cases like Iran yes.

Posted by: Tuyzentfloot | Jan 5 2020 16:15 utc | 498

@188 "USA isn't wanted in Syria but they stay anyway."

And then there's Guantanamo. Cuba has surely politely asked the US to leave at least once...

Posted by: Gene Poole | Jan 5 2020 16:23 utc | 499

To IRAQ he should have been killed years ago, he is a F.d waste

Posted by: don | Jan 5 2020 19:34 utc | 500

« previous page | next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.