In one of the series of blatant lies the USA has told to justify the assassination of Soleimani, Mike Pompeo said that Soleimani was killed because he was planning “Imminent attacks” on US citizens. It is a careful choice of word. Pompeo is specifically referring to the Bethlehem Doctrine of Pre-Emptive Self Defence.
Developed by Daniel Bethlehem when Legal Adviser to first Netanyahu’s government and then Blair’s, the Bethlehem Doctrine is that states have a right of “pre-emptive self-defence” against “imminent” attack. That is something most people, and most international law experts and judges, would accept. Including me.
What very few people, and almost no international lawyers, accept is the key to the Bethlehem Doctrine – that here “Imminent” – the word used so carefully by Pompeo – does not need to have its normal meanings of either “soon” or “about to happen”. An attack may be deemed “imminent”, according to the Bethlehem Doctrine, even if you know no details of it or when it might occur. So you may be assassinated by a drone or bomb strike – and the doctrine was specifically developed to justify such strikes – because of “intelligence” you are engaged in a plot, when that intelligence neither says what the plot is nor when it might occur. Or even more tenuous, because there is intelligence you have engaged in a plot before, so it is reasonable to kill you in case you do so again.
I am not inventing the Bethlehem Doctrine. It has been the formal legal justification for drone strikes and targeted assassinations by the Israeli, US and UK governments for a decade. Here it is in academic paper form, published by Bethlehem after he left government service (the form in which it is adopted by the US, UK and Israeli Governments is classified information).
So when Pompeo says attacks by Soleimani were “imminent” he is not using the word in the normal sense in the English language. It is no use asking him what, where or when these “imminent” attacks were planned to be. He is referencing the Bethlehem Doctrine under which you can kill people on the basis of a feeling that they may have been about to do something.
The idea that killing an individual who you have received information is going to attack you, but you do not know when, where or how, can be justified as self-defence, has not gained widespread acceptance – or indeed virtually any acceptance – in legal circles outside the ranks of the most extreme devoted neo-conservatives and zionists. Daniel Bethlehem became the FCO’s Chief Legal Adviser, brought in by Jack Straw, precisely because every single one of the FCO’s existing Legal Advisers believed the Iraq War to be illegal. In 2004, when the House of Commons was considering the legality of the war on Iraq, Bethlehem produced a remarkable paper for consideration which said that it was legal because the courts and existing law were wrong, a defence which has seldom succeeded in court.
(b)
following this line, I am also of the view that the wider principles of the law on self-defence also require closer scrutiny. I am not persuaded that the approach of doctrinal purity reflected in the Judgments of the International Court of Justice in this area provide a helpful edifice on which a coherent legal regime, able to address the exigencies of contemporary international life and discourage resort to unilateral action, is easily crafted;
The key was that the concept of “imminent” was to change:
The concept of what constitutes an “imminent” armed attack will develop to meet new circumstances and new threats
In the absence of a respectable international lawyer willing to argue this kind of tosh, Blair brought in Bethlehem as Chief Legal Adviser, the man who advised Netanyahu on Israel’s security wall and who was willing to say that attacking Iraq was legal on the basis of Saddam’s “imminent threat” to the UK, which proved to be non-existent. It says everything about Bethlehem’s eagerness for killing that the formulation of the Bethlehem Doctrine on extrajudicial execution by drone came after the Iraq War, and he still gave not one second’s thought to the fact that the intelligence on the “imminent threat” can be wrong. Assassinating people on the basis of faulty intelligence is not addressed by Bethlehem in setting out his doctrine. The bloodlust is strong in this one.
There are literally scores of academic articles, in every respected journal of international law, taking down the Bethlehem Doctrine for its obvious absurdities and revolting special pleading. My favourite is this one by Bethlehem’s predecessor as the FCO Chief Legal Adviser, Sir Michael Wood and his ex-Deputy Elizabeth Wilmshurst.
I addressed the Bethlehem Doctrine as part of my contribution to a book reflecting on Chomsky‘s essay “On the Responsibility of Intellectuals”
In the UK recently, the Attorney
General gave a speech in defence of the UK’s drone policy, the assassination
of people – including British nationals – abroad. This execution
without a hearing is based on several criteria, he reassured us. His
speech was repeated slavishly in the British media. In fact, the Guardian
newspaper simply republished the government press release absolutely
verbatim, and stuck a reporter’s byline at the top.
The media have no interest in a critical appraisal of the process
by which the British government regularly executes without trial. Yet
in fact it is extremely interesting. The genesis of the policy lay in the
appointment of Daniel Bethlehem as the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office’s Chief Legal Adviser. Jack Straw made the appointment, and for
the first time ever it was external, and not from the Foreign Office’s own
large team of world-renowned international lawyers. The reason for that
is not in dispute. Every single one of the FCO’s legal advisers had advised
that the invasion of Iraq was illegal, and Straw wished to find a new head
of the department more in tune with the neo-conservative world view.
Straw went to extremes. He appointed Daniel Bethlehem, the legal
‘expert’ who provided the legal advice to Benjamin Netanyahu on the
‘legality’ of building the great wall hemming in the Palestinians away
from their land and water resources. Bethlehem was an enthusiastic
proponent of the invasion of Iraq. He was also the most enthusiastic
proponent in the world of drone strikes.
Bethlehem provided an opinion on the legality of drone strikes
which is, to say the least, controversial. To give one example, Bethlehem
accepts that established principles of international law dictate that
lethal force may be used only to prevent an attack which is ‘imminent’.
Bethlehem argues that for an attack to be ‘imminent’ does not require it
to be ‘soon’. Indeed you can kill to avert an ‘imminent attack’ even if you
have no information on when and where it will be. You can instead rely
on your target’s ‘pattern of behaviour’; that is, if he has attacked before,
it is reasonable to assume he will attack again and that such an attack is
‘imminent’.
There is a much deeper problem: that the evidence against the
target is often extremely dubious. Yet even allowing the evidence to
be perfect, it is beyond me that the state can kill in such circumstances
without it being considered a death penalty imposed without trial for
past crimes, rather than to frustrate another ‘imminent’ one.
You would think that background would make an interesting
story. Yet the entire ‘serious’ British media published the government
line, without a single journalist, not one, writing about the fact that
Bethlehem’s proposed definition of ‘imminent’ has been widely rejected
by the international law community. The public knows none of this. They
just ‘know’ that drone strikes are keeping us safe from deadly attack by
terrorists, because the government says so, and nobody has attempted to
give them other information
Remember, this is not just academic argument, the Bethlehem Doctrine is the formal policy position on assassination of Israel, the US and UK governments. So that is lie one. When Pompeo says Soleimani was planning “imminent” attacks, he is using the Bethlehem definition under which “imminent” is a “concept” which means neither “soon” nor “definitely going to happen”. To twist a word that far from its normal English usage is to lie. To do so to justify killing people is obscene. That is why, if I finish up in the bottom-most pit of hell, the worst thing about the experience will be the company of Daniel Bethlehem.
Let us now move on to the next lie, which is being widely repeated, this time originated by Donald Trump, that Soleimani was responsible for the “deaths of hundreds, if not thousands, of Americans”. This lie has been parroted by everybody, Republicans and Democrats alike.
Really? Who were they? When and where? While the Bethlehem Doctrine allows you to kill somebody because they might be going to attack someone, sometime, but you don’t know who or when, there is a reasonable expectation that if you are claiming people have already been killed you should be able to say who and when.
The truth of the matter is that if you take every American killed including and since 9/11, in the resultant Middle East related wars, conflicts and terrorist acts, well over 90% of them have been killed by Sunni Muslims financed and supported out of Saudi Arabia and its gulf satellites, and less than 10% of those Americans have been killed by Shia Muslims tied to Iran.
This is a horribly inconvenient fact for US administrations which, regardless of party, are beholden to Saudi Arabia and its money. It is, the USA affirms, the Sunnis who are the allies and the Shias who are the enemy. Yet every journalist or aid worker hostage who has been horribly beheaded or otherwise executed has been murdered by a Sunni, every jihadist terrorist attack in the USA itself, including 9/11, has been exclusively Sunni, the Benghazi attack was by Sunnis, Isil are Sunni, Al Nusra are Sunni, the Taliban are Sunni and the vast majority of US troops killed in the region are killed by Sunnis.
Precisely which are these hundreds of deaths for which the Shia forces of Soleimani were responsible? Is there a list? It is of course a simple lie. Its tenuous connection with truth relates to the Pentagon’s estimate – suspiciously upped repeatedly since Iran became the designated enemy – that back during the invasion of Iraq itself, 83% of US troop deaths were at the hands of Sunni resistance and 17% of of US troop deaths were at the hands of Shia resistance, that is 603 troops. All the latter are now lain at the door of Soleimani, remarkably.
Those were US troops killed in combat during an invasion. The Iraqi Shia militias – whether Iran backed or not – had every legal right to fight the US invasion. The idea that the killing of invading American troops was somehow illegal or illegitimate is risible. Plainly the US propaganda that Soleimani was “responsible for hundreds of American deaths” is intended, as part of the justification for his murder, to give the impression he was involved in terrorism, not legitimate combat against invading forces. The idea that the US has the right to execute those who fight it when it invades is an absolutely stinking abnegation of the laws of war.
As I understand it, there is very little evidence that Soleimani had active operational command of Shia militias during the invasion, and in any case to credit him personally with every American soldier killed is plainly a nonsense. But even if Soleimani had personally supervised every combat success, these were legitimate acts of war. You cannot simply assassinate opposing generals who fought you, years after you invade.
The final, and perhaps silliest lie, is Vice President Mike Pence’s attempt to link Soleimani to 9/11. There is absolutely no link between Soleimani and 9/11, and the most strenuous efforts by the Bush regime to find evidence that would link either Iran or Iraq to 9/11 (and thus take the heat off their pals the al-Saud who were actually responsible) failed. Yes, it is true that some of the hijackers at one point transited Iran to Afghanistan. But there is zero evidence, as the 9/11 report specifically stated, that the Iranians knew what they were planning, or that Soleimani personally was involved. This is total bullshit. 9/11 was Sunni and Saudi led, nothing to do with Iran.
Soleimani actually was involved in intelligence and logistical cooperation with the United States in Afghanistan post 9/11 (the Taliban were his enemies too, the shia Tajiks being a key part of the US aligned Northern Alliance). He was in Iraq to fight ISIL.
The final aggravating factor in the Soleimani murder is that he was an accredited combatant general of a foreign state which the world – including the USA – recognises. The Bethlehem Doctrine specifically applies to “non-state actors”. Unlike all of the foregoing, this next is speculation, but I suspect that the legal argument in the Pentagon ran that Soleimani is a non-state actor when in Iraq, where the Shia militias have a semi-official status.
But that does not wash. Soleimani is a high official in Iran who was present in Iraq as a guest of the Iraqi government, to which the US government is allied. This greatly exacerbates the illegality of his assassination still further.
The political world in the UK is so cowed by the power of the neo-conservative Establishment and media, that the assassination of Soleimani is not being called out for the act of blatant illegality that it is. It was an act of state terrorism by the USA, pure and simple.
——————————————
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
Alternatively:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.
Thank you for an informative and interesting article. There can be no doubt that Trump has had this in mind since he walked away from the Nuclear Arms Agreement with Iran. Once again, there can be no doubt Oil is at its heart given the chronic state of the USA economy. What I find interesting, taking a different angle, is how the MSM, i.e. the Official Propaganda wing of the Tory Government, are starting to roll the Propaganda about USA deaths, anti-Iran narrative (which suits the institutional Islamophobia of BoJo, his Cabinet and the majority of Tory MPs). The Sheeples will fall for it hook line and sinker. I don’t believe a word of it but the propaganda machine appears to be very powerful here. I am in no doubt, given Raab’s immediate support for the USA, that BoJo is going to drag us into this when the rest of Europe/the World is taking a step back and is not supportive. I also have no doubt whatsoever that the I****I Government have a huge hand in this.
This is an assassination on the scale of the Assassination of ArchDuke Ferdinand which sparked WW1. We are in deep doggy doo because of Trump’s actions. I understand there has been massive blowback by the American people against Trump about this. Iran have a right of retaliation. They are an intelligent country back by Russia, China and the SCO. I believe they will act wisely and proportionately.
That begs the question though, where is this Government going take this country? Jeremy Corbyn has requested an urgent Privy Council meeting. I suspect Bojo will do what Trump did, act alone or under the advice of Cummings, and then I truly believe the UK will be in the front line for serious repercussions arising from supporting this assassination. My Goodness, with a highly irresponsible Prime Minister, a far right Fascist Cabinet and their fawning relationship with Trump, these are very dangerous times indeed.
God Help us all.
If Iran are backed by Russia and China then the US and Israel are in big doo-doo.
But that’s a massive Spartan “if”.
So according to the press Pentagon officials were stunned by Trumps decision to assassinate Irans General Soleimani, especially since Trump rejected the idea of killing Soleimani as recently as December 28th last year.
Trump’s decision was made in spite of disputes in the administration over a new stream of intelligence that warned of threats to US embassies and military personnel in Syria, Iraq and Lebanon.
Disputes arose amidst officals of whom some thought Soleimani was about to implement a strike of some sort against the US in Iraq, however evidence for this strike was very thin.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Vice President Mike Pence, were said to have strongly urged Trump to take out Soleimani.
There you have it two warhawks (Pence and Pompeo) along with Pentagon officials who couldn’t produce enough evidence to show that Soleimani was about to strike the US in Iraq, and a thin skinned US president, who takes umbrage on Twitter at the drop of a hat, have set in motion events that could lead to a huge conflict in the ME, and revenge attacks in Europe.
Sturgeon has been very quiet.
Sturgeon never likes to rock the ‘establishment narrative’ boat on security matters. Still, I suppose that’s no bad thing here, as she’ll have no impact on decisions being taken in London and Washington and Johnson’s govt embroiling the UK in the calamity of a catastrophic war will speak for itself.
Johnson will have to go against JCPOA supportive EU leaders too; hardening opposition to him in European capitals and among MEPs, that’ll make trade and security negotiations very difficult indeed. Johnson’s govt could defeat itself within a year.
“Johnson will have to go against JCPOA supportive EU leaders too”
Its no secret the UK (England for sure) has been moving away from the EU in recent years and more towards the US.
Trump has reneged on the JCPOA deal with Iran, and now wants the EU to follow suit, which the EU clearly doesn’t want to do. Trump has raised tariffs on EU goods and a titi-for-tat game has broken out especially over Boeing and Airbus, the former is in big trouble due to its planes crashing, possibly design faults (Reminds of the British Comet) leaving hundreds dead.
The EU looks set to hit a tipping point on US relations, as Europe begins to embrace Russian gas via Nordstream II, the US wants Europe to reject Russian gas in favour of American gas.
Expect Johnson to be compliant to a fault with Trump with a US trade deal further down the road.
Many politicians in the UK bang on about the importance of Nato(used to attack Corbyn in the campaign), including the Labour leadership contenders. Many experts, in the know, don’t see Nato surviving another four years of Trump. An insane UK/US war – without a endgame or plan – against Iran, will just accelerate that desire to cut the defence ties to the increasingly rogue, erratic US, in Europe.
“Many politicians in the UK bang on about the importance of Nato”
No matter what Jens Stoltenberg says in the defence of Nato, its now obsolete, the 1948 Treaty of Brussels, was signed at the onset of the Cold war, it was set up as a Western defence system agains the Soviet Union/USSR, now that, that threat is no longer Nato has morped into a bully headed up by the US.
I’m all for the EU cementing its own EU force, rather than being a member of the US gang. I think (US aside) the EU would be quite happy to do business with Iran.
The French and Germans were starting to establish good business with Iran. Whereas the US, even under JCPOA promoter Obama, wasn’t really making good on the JCPOA, dragging its feet on sanctions relief and financial market access.
On Nato , yes you’re right, Europe (the EU) won’t have an independent foreign policy until Nato is no more. Trump hates the costs to the US, and European leaders hate the subservient role they play implementing the US’s foreign policy objectives. The UK has more sway than the typical Nato country thanks to the ‘special relationship'(intel sharing) but even that is a deeply lopsided arrangement .
I can’t believe that the Empire is reckless enough to cause deaths of millions of their own – never mind 10’s of millions of Iranians. Risking the wipeout of Israel, SA and UAE. While putting itself in a direct confrontation with the EuraAsian power of Russia/China and their allies.
I think that what they achieved with the assassination of THIS General (they have killed many other commanders of equal and higher ranks) is to nullify a modern day Alexander or Caesar who had defeated them in the field and over the years and forced them to retreat.
In effect ridding the new Eurasian world order of the General who would be King as a parting gift!
——-
I quote some insights from a highly detailed report by – I shall be quoting a lot more!
Ali Soufan…an FBI special agent, he served on the frontline against al-Qa`ida and became known as a top counterterrorism operative and interrogator.
@Ali_H_Soufan
He wrote this assessment over a year ago
https://ctc.usma.edu/qassem-soleimani-irans-unique-regional-strategy/
He explains in a tour de force of historical biography of the Great General, amongst many other, those things :-
1. Iran’s “Axis of Resistance” has been built on the efforts of proxies controlled by Soleimani in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen—and on the marriage between state and militant power that Iran has been able to broker in each of those countries. The success of this model will have repercussions across the Middle East for years, if not decades to come.
2. An historic realignment of Iranian politics may therefore be in the cards, and there is strong evidence that Iranians are increasingly willing to consider a third path: a military president. If so, Soleimani would be the natural front-runner. A University of Maryland poll found that almost 65 percent of Iranians hold a “very favorable” view of the general, giving him a commanding 28-point lead over his nearest rival, Foreign Minister Javad Zarif.
Among the many, many brave and resourceful warriors murdered by the US government are, of course, Givi, Motorola and Zakharchenko of Donbas. https://112.international/society/zakharchenko-buried-in-donetsk-next-to-givi-and-motorola-media-31746.html
Not to mention illustrious names such as Che Guevara.
How much longer can this be allowed to continue? In civilian life, if a serial killer murders 20 or more without being arrested, enormous pressure builds up for the police to catch him.
In political life, everyone just goes on watching TV and eating crisps.
Tom
Well said. The Donbass assassinations sprang to my mind as well. Funny how the US seem to target those who lead the fight against true evil. We see the same with their persecution of Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning.
” there is strong evidence that Iranians are increasingly willing to consider a third path: a military president. If so, Soleimani would be the natural front-runner.”
I think that is probably highly speculative, but if it were true, the assassination of Soleimani would look even more like the assassination of archduke in Sarajevo that sparked WWI, with the difference that the archduke wasn’t deliberately assassinated by the governments of France or Russia but by by a Black Hand terrorist who wasn’t even controlled by the Serbian government.
But I have a hard time imagining that the Mullahs would let go of control. The only way Iran can change from the inside is by letting Iran integrate with the international community. The constant threat from the outside reinforces the rule of the Mullahs.
Caught a bit of Nigel Farage on LBC earlier today where he spoke with a professor at the University of Tehran regarding recent events surrounding Iran.
Farage couldn’t wait to cut the guy off as he explained that EU sanctions on Iran were forced on the EU by the US. When asked by Farage how he knew this, the professor replied the Spanish Foreign minster told us.
Probably the wise Seyed Mohammad Marandi. This linked article gives a quote from Spanish Foreign Minister Josep Borrell. I have written to my MP three times since July asking him to obtain for me clarification of the legal basis for the detention of the Iranian Grace 1 oil tanker. My requests have been met with complete silence…we all know why.
One of the late night news programmes last night referred to the Royal Navy sending ships to the Strait of Hormuz to protect commercial shipping from Iranian attack or detention. The reporter said this was necessary because the Iranians had previously seized two British connected oil tankers, implying by omission that they were the aggressors – no mention of the trigger for their actions i.e. the preceding illegal detention of the Grace 1.
https://www.france24.com/en/20190704-iran-condemns-detention-oil-supertanker-gibraltar
“Royal Navy sending ships to the Strait of Hormuz to protect commercial shipping from Iranian attack or detention. The reporter said this was necessary because the Iranians had previously seized two British connected oil tankers”
It’s “necessary” because Pompeo recently said the British must take care of their own damn ships!
https://www.businessinsider.com/pompeo-strait-of-hormuz-uk-ships-mp-criticism-2019-7?r=US&IR=T
CM writes:
“But even if Soleimani had personally supervised every combat success, these were legitimate acts of war. You cannot simply assassinate opposing generals who fought you, years after you invade.”
YES – especially if the opposing general was sending your general text messages telling your general he was crap!
(More quotes from https://ctc.usma.edu/qassem-soleimani-irans-unique-regional-strategy/ )
‘In 2006, at the height of the bloodshed in Iraq, Soleimani took a break from managing Asaib and its sister groups in order to supervise another Iranian proxy, Hezbollah, in it’s escalating war with Israel. During his absence, U.S. commanders in the Green Zone noted a sharp decline in casualties across the country. Upon his return from Lebanon, Soleimani wrote to U.S. commanders, “I hope you have been enjoying the peace and quiet in Baghdad. I’ve been busy in Beirut!”
In early 2008, Soleimani sent General David Petraeus, then the most senior U.S. commander in Iraq, an imperious message:
“Dear General Petraeus: You should be aware that I, Qassem Soleimani, control Iran’s policy for Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, and Afghanistan. And indeed, the ambassador in Baghdad is a Quds Force member. The individual who’s going to replace him is a Quds Force member.”
This was conveyed to General Petraeus via a text message to Talabani’s personal cellphone—effectively relegating Talabani to the role of Soleimani’s mailman. The symbolism was not lost on anyone.
Legend has it that Petraeus’ piquant reply read, “Dear General Soleimani: Go pound sand down a rat hole.”
…..
One of these WAS a classy General,
Ah yes, more from the Controlling Terrorism Center of the US Military Academy. You should mention really, when you quote highly tendentious sources with an agenda, rather than simply use them as the truth.
Whats the agenda? It was written two years ago.
I gave a full link in a post above and who the author was.
It is the type of knowledge and history taught to future military leaders in all the best such institutions.
Just rubbishing it without looking at its citations is trolling.
Ok so 2 tweets from Magnier just out
1. Elijah J. Magnier
@ejmalrai
·
27m
We have learned today from #Iraq Prime Minister AdilAbdl Mahdi how
@realDonaldTrump
uses diplomacy:
#US asked #Iraq to mediate with #Iran. Iraq PM asks #QassemSoleimani to come and talk to him and give him the answer of his mediation, Trump &co assassinate an envoy at the airport
2. Elijah J. Magnier
@ejmalrai
·
37m
#Iran #IRGC commander #QassemSoleimani managed to reach with his death what he couldn’t reach when he was alive. That is his last spectacular act for Iran and for the “Axis of the Resistance”: legislation forcing the US to withdraw and cease all kind of collaboration.
5
53
84
Show this thread
Elijah J. Magnier
@ejmalrai
·
41m
#BreakingNews:
The legislation has been approved by #Iraq MPs to terminate the presence of the US forces and for the government to implement the resolution.
Pepe Escobar: “According to my best Southwest Asia intel sources, ‘Israel gave the U.S. the coordinates for the assassination of Qassem Soleimani as they wanted to avoid the repercussions of taking the assassination upon themselves.’”
The Iran Iraq War should be called the FIRST Gulf War. The USA supported Iraq in it.
The SECOND Gulf War was the Invasion of Iraq over the Iraq occupation of KUWAIT. So the USA moved from supporting Iraq to opposing Iraq.
The THIRD Gulf War was when the USA incorrectly blamed Iraq for the 9/11 attack on the USA. The UK joined in saying there was an imminent threat to the UK’s citizens.
I cannot believe that the US and UK spy services are so incompetent but can believe that government leaders lie for political reasons.
I suspect none of this would have happened if Iran’s prime minister Mossadegh had not been deposed in year 1953!
“The Iran Iraq War should be called the FIRST Gulf War. The USA supported Iraq in it.”
A kind of loose support I’d say as the US sold weapons to Iran to fund atrocities in Nicaragua ie the Iran-Contra Affair. Of course both Reagan and George H.W. Bush had denied any knowledge of it.
“The THIRD Gulf War was when the USA incorrectly blamed Iraq for the 9/11 attack on the USA.”
One wonders if the strike on Soleimani, will not so inadvertently lead to the collapse of more real estate (Chrysler Empire State buildings) in the US through “terrorist attacks” and who would gain financially from them.
I had to laugh when the Today Programme this morning told us about how far back hostility between Iran and the USA goes back. To 1979 when the Shah was overthrown.
What the hell? How about to the CIA coup in 1953 when the Shah was installed and democracy destroyed in Iran!
When an ex Sky News presenter, me with BBC News channel, retweets this
Lukwesa Burak Retweeted
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
10h
The United States just spent Two Trillion Dollars on Military Equipment. We are the biggest and by far the BEST in the World! If Iran attacks an American Base, or any American, we will be sending some of that brand new beautiful equipment their way…and without hesitation!
…can we assume that, without comment, she approves of his actions?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lukwesa_Burak
General Solimani and General Abu Mohandis were on their way to meet the Iraqi prime minster, to brief him. Having Flown from Damascus to Baghdad. Iraqi prime minister having contacted Pompeo to ask him what intelligence did he have and why had he not consulted the Iraqi government before the assassinations. To which Pompeo had answered it was none of the business of Iraqis.
It appears that Trump has not consulted anyone of the US intelligence agencies, though he had discussed the details of this assassination with the Israelis 3 days before it happened.
Iraqi government has already complained to the UN about the violations of her sovereignty post having summoned the US ambassador to raise the same point. Furthermore, Iraqi parliament have passed a law this afternoon making it illegal for foreign forces to be on Iraqi soil, ie to expel the Americans forces stationed in Iraq.
The simple fact is US is in no position to go to war with its spiralling deficit that is way above her gdp and its rapidly disappearing influence in the mid east. The anti-American movement has not only been strengthened but it is united in its aim of expelling the Americans form the mid east. Post the assassination of the two high ranking officials of Iran and Iraq.
Despite the post-modernist tripe that is being touted on the tweeter etc. that people are compelled to come out because if they don’t they will be either killed or imprisoned pap. The throngs of hundreds of thousands of people attending the funerals of the slain generals ought to be an ominous omen for anyone who entertains it is going to be another cake walk. As in the last cake walk to Baghdad that is now seeing the Yanks being expelled legally from Iraq.
If the U.S. lured Soleimani to Iraq with a promise of negotiations with the Iraqis as mediators and then took advantage of his arrival to kill him, that would be a genuinely impeachable offense. Particularly in view of the failure to brief Congress.
Suleimani was on a diplomatic mission, as an envoy conveying certain Saudi Proposals to Iraqi prime minister, he was travelling in a civilian aircraft and civilian cars with a minimum of a protection detail. Fact is his head was blown off and the subsequent recovery operation has been made difficult as to identification of the corpses from one another.
As you well know assassinating diplomats carrying out their duties is a reprehensible action against any and all current international conventions and laws. I am sure Craig can clarify this issue further.
Fact that Trump has been in touch with Israelis and not consulted anyone in US may give credence to your forwarded notion of : “luring him into the trap”.
but would the democrats have any interest in impeaching him for that?
German Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer said in a statement that it was up to Iran’s leaders to make sure that the conflict in the region did not escalate further.
http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-01/05/c_138680038.htm
Iran was just attacked but Germany warn Iran not to provoke?!
What the hell is wrong with these people?
That’s like saying Poland should not have fought back against Hitler’s invasion.
She’s kinda right.
In that Trump/Pompeo are clearly itching for war. The US public like to believe they are acting in righteously with good on their side. That might be a million miles from the truth , but the US does still need the semblance of acting only after being provoked.. in self-defence. Then, like our media here in the UK, their highly controlled corporate media can do the rest of the propaganda.
Iranians have summoned the German ambassador to Tehran to protest against : Untrue, derogatory and malicious statements by some German officials
Trita Parsi:
> Wow, wow, wow!!!
> According to the Iraqi Prime minister, Soleimani was not planning an attack. He was in Iraq carrying a message to Saudi on how to REDUCE Iran-Saudi tensions, as part of a Iraqi mediation effort!!
https://twitter.com/tparsi/status/1213839002366861317
Jane Arraf:
> This is stunning – #Iraq prime minister tells parliament US troops should leave. Says @realDonaldTrump called him to ask him to mediate with #Iran and then ordered drone strike on Soleimani. Says Soleimani carrying response to Saudi initiative to defuse tension when he was hit.
https://twitter.com/janearraf/status/1213823941321592834
Amir Amini MD:
> This is the largest crowd I’ve ever witnessed in my life. I’ve never seen Iranians so unified, ever.
> This is Suleimani’s funeral in Ahvaz, Iran.
> Trump has no idea what he has done.
[VIDEO]
https://twitter.com/AmirAminiMD/status/1213828930458804224
This is the big miscalculation among the cabal of overreaching hawks in Washington, who think Iranians will respond to being attacked, by rising up against the Clerics. Countries under attack tend to rally, they don’t turn inwards unless their societies are riven by ethnic or religious division .Iranians may not love their regime, but they are fairly united against external aggressors trying to bomb them into a revolution.
Oh, the bad orange man killed a sweet grey haired old grandpa on his way to the office…. that’s how the anti Trump media are painting this, to hell with escalating, Iranian sponsored, attacks on US interests in the area or intelligence to suggest he was about to be engaged in more of the same. At just what point is action required? Trump Delusional Syndrome at it’s finest.
So what about the escalating, US sponsored, attacks on Iranian interests? That doesn’t count, does it? Why should the US not be free to slaughter everyone in sight, without retort?
Tit for tat, only the US are much better at it than the Iranians.
You mean the US is worse at it, though very expensively equipped. How many wars has the US won recently, compared to the losses and stalemates? Kuwait’s the only one won.
I’m sure the Iranians know to eat their revenge cold. And not to interfere when their enemy has made a mistake !
At what point action required?
I suppose, as Mr. Suleimani was a general, then maybe, let me think… Maybe at the battlefield? No?
Or, if he is a terrorist, then maybe, during his mean terrorist attack? No?
Then, perhaps he must be captured and trialed for preparation for terrorist attacks? I think it’s rather easy to stop a car on the road, or even to seize the plain. Americans have military there in Iraq and Iraq is cooperating, so no great trouble to do it, at all.
Tatyana. Before you label Solemani a Terrorist you should gather your information about him. No doubt we learn about his role as an Iranian General from obituaries on his life from respected journalists like Robert Fisk and Patrick Cockburn. From what I have learned so far he was key to defeating Isis in Iraq and Syria. The huge crowds in both the Arab and Persian world seem to not think him a Terrorist.
I’m not saying he is terrorist, it is abstract reasoning about dealing with armed people, in general.
He was stopping attacks on Israel – now he won’t be able to.
What are they going to threaten – nukes?
Like the sheriff in Blazing Saddles holding a gun to his own head and claiming he’ll let the n***** have it!
Wake UP you just got sold down the river by your ancient masters. It has nothing to do with religion and everything with power.
Tony Riley. Israel is an aberration. It was never satisfied with stealing Palestine and staying within its original borders. Huge cleansing of Palestinians who still live in refugee camps with the keys to their hoses and deeds to their stolen lands by murderous armed to the teeth squatters. When you say Israel, what do you mean ? Pre 1967 borders or all the stolen and squatted on land since.
Why all the military bases around the world?
Why prop up brutal dictators in Egypt, KSA and an Israel’s near apartheid-like policies?
The Iranian regime may be oppressive and awful. But do you honestly think you are the good guys?
That question was to @Spencer Eagle
Goose
@Spencer Eagle doesn’t “think” they are “the good guys”. @Spencer Eagle clearly doesn’t think anything. He/she believes what he/she is told to believe. That’s good enough for him/her.
or the bot believes what it is programmed to “believe”.
Spencer Eagle. The US has been trying to emulate the British Empire for ever. It is the American dream, culture less, decadent, greedy, brutally violent and now in bed with ISIS. Nothing is beneath it. No soul. It can however bomb from great height in great numbers, poor countries to destruction and kill millions. Yet back at home it’s poor and deprived live in abject poverty and are modern day slaves. The US should go back and fix its own house and leave the rest of the world alone.
Wikikettle, the US elites’ greatest fear is being shut up in the continental USA with the tired, the poor, the huddled masses yearning to breathe free. With the 80% of US citizens whose lives have got decidedly worse since 1970.
If the elites couldn’t blame distant foreigners and send a proportion of the huddled masses abroad to kill them, they might be forced to explain why they enjoy such luxury and wealth while most of the inhabitants of their “democratic” Golden City on a Hill languish in grinding poverty.
But of course they can always get into their private jets and fly away to their estates in Hawaii, New Zealand, Argentina…
Unless the mob catches them first and has a necktie party.
Rather than write a whole book refuting Spencer Eagle’s various lies and straw men – which would bore me severely – I will just point out that he does not know how to use apostrophes.
A fairly reliable guide to the uneducated.
Is it not likely that “Spencer Eagle” is a Civil Servant or a member of the Armed Forces? And that what he does on the internet is what he is employed to do.
Don’t mask inability as boredom…
don’t mask shilling as honest debate.
Moronism must be contagious.
The US is a hostile occupying force and should reasonably expect to be regularly attacked in Iraq by whomever.
Can you confirm you are aware of America’s long and rich history of duplicity, murder and mayhem, from the Mexican war to the current morass?
Some highlights here: http://davidswanson.org/warlist/
Can you confirm that America has around one thousand military bases around the world while Iran has none?
Can you confirm that while America currently spends $750 billion a year on murder and mayhem, Iran by contrast spends a measly $13 billion a year on defence?
omg you mean iranians are resisting the u.s.? how dare they, kill them all right? fuck both warmonger parties and their paid media liars.
Planes must be fully booked leaving the Gulf States and Israel. Those murderous cretins that kept provoking Iran and whispering in Trumps ear to do Israel’s bidding, have done their job. Now they will fly off somewhere safe like Germany and Russia. Just as the alliances led to WW1, the decades of seige on Iran are about to come to the end of the fuse. I am filled with dread and there is nobody or institution capable of stopping this slaughter. Where are our so called leaders ? Where is the UN ? Which Western Leader dare speak out ?
Iraqi Parliament just voted Yankee-go-home.
Iran turns to UN.
On the one hand I’m happy they do it in right way. On the other hand, their civilized manner of dealing with the case leaves the room for Russia to participate.
I don’t know where are your Western leaders, though I can guess, but… we say А что подумал Кролик, никто не узнал, потому что он был очень воспитанный 🙂
“Nobody found out what the Rabbit thought, because he was very well-mannered”???
yeah 🙂
“After that visit Pooh decided there’s no reason for staying too long in someone’s place if you don’t want to get stuck…And what was on rabbit`s mind nobody could tell, because Rabbit was really well mannered”
“Would you like some more?”
“Is there any more?”
“No”.
“Then no thank you”.
Your words seem to translate:-
If you do not have a document, you do not have a photo, you do not have a file of this type
They seem not to have any evidence of ” imminent attacks”
Planes entering Israel, more like, and probably including many that are chartered. Although maybe not a large number of planes, because much of the Zionist war is fought outside Occupied Palestine and has been for many years. No IDFer disrespects those who serve in hasbara units or as sayanim.
But where will all the corrupt British civil servants, officials and medics go when Dubai isn’t on the list any more?
There are quite a few things that “should” be happening now and aren’t. “Deafening silence” is the cliché. My hunch is that Russia will do something that may surprise many. A lot depends on Russia now.
N_. I am so affected by the mess we are in. It would be a chance for Peace, IF both Russia and China literally fly into Iran (with an invite) with huge numbers together with S400 regiments. Then the US will back off and only then. As all bullies are cowards.
Oh, is it really hard to imagine? Iran or Syria would invite Russia to ‘rent’ a military base and place russian nuclear weapons there. Like americans do in Incerlic, Turkey.
Tatyana. Iran, believe it or not, does not believe in nukes. Does not want to make them or have anyone elses based on its soil. This was ordered by their supreme leader Khomeini, and is still the law after his death. But the whole world thinks it’s after having its own nukes according to Western and Israeli proppoganda. If it wanted nukes it could have made them years ago. S400 is a air defense missile that can deny US air superiority over Iran.
I didn’t know, Wikikettle. Thank you.
“Ali Khamenei’s fatwa against nuclear weapons”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Khamenei%27s_fatwa_against_nuclear_weapons
My hunch is that Israel will use this as an opportunity to run a false flag attack against a US asset and make it look like Iran was behind it, throwing fuel on the flames and putting Trump in a corner.
Trump, ever the innocent victim.
From the Observer(Guardian) editorial:
“It seems Mike Pompeo, Trump’s bully-boy secretary of state, expected the White House warrior to be showered with congratulations. That speaks volumes about Pompeo’s limited understanding of what he and his boss have just done.”
Scarily true.
The Observer did shower the White House with congratulations when bombs started raining on iraq and Libya.
As Iranian Foreign minster has twitted; “Pompeo is an ill-informed Clown”
Something very Chicago outfit about Pompeo…
All that’s missing being a pinstripe suit and trilby, capo di tutti capi.
Obsessive pandering with crocodile tears for their deluded longtime hardcopy readers who STILL believe it to be a social justice warrior, like them. Fools. (They also believe the BBC)
ii’s Codswallop teamed up with Steele, the dodgy russiagate dossier mi6 chap – to distract from election fixing – by intimating that it was limited to far-away countries and TrumpsElection and re-election! Nowt about OUR very own elections and referendums.
It was better under Alan Rusbridger’s editorship. He didn’t do Assange any favours, but the Snowden stuff was brave, given it went on for weeks and the powerful enemies it made him.
I reckon present editor kath Viner presented with material of a similar nature, would not only refuse to publish, but inform on the whistleblower. She’s a sucker for what Snowden called the ‘people will die’ scary lecture, from the intel agency folks.
“She’s a sucker for what Snowden called the ‘people will die’ scary lecture, from the intel agency folks”.
The folks who represent governments directly responsible for over 10 million deaths.
As long as they are in charge, of course people will die. Many, many, many people.
Sorry Goose, Snowdens stuff was controlled not much made it out. You have to go to wikileaks to get the real deal. Same with Panama papers.
But you know about it. Many multi decade readers who still get their news from their hardcopies and never from sites such as this will NOT believe they are being lied to. I know many like that. They have some hard truths coming their way. It will be messy.
Protesters in London mourn Solimani
https://twitter.com/sadiqwasi1/status/1213856339287367680?
They were most likely bused in, all paid for by some lefty council.
Most likely ..
Sorry not most likely ….more like most definitely. ‘Controlled spontaneity’ has been a tool of the British government for some time. Controlled reaction, sympathy or anger, all paid for and directed by dubious organizations. The example below shows how fake outpourings of sympathy are manufactured, it’s not difficult to see it being pushed into controlled protest.
https://www.middleeasteye.net/video/controlled-spontaneity-how-western-governments-plan-aftermath-terrorist-attacks
You have forgotten your boilerplate again. The government-approved term is “highly likely”.
> Iraqi Kata’ib Hezbollah warning Iraqi Security Forces should stay away from US bases starting Sunday evening.
https://twitter.com/aldin_ww/status/1213516878070632453
We should really get the hell out of most of the Middle East immediately, maybe keeping some US/UK/NATO authorized presence in allied regimes such as Saudi Arabia, Oman…
And we should even comply with all international law from now on, but that’s probably too much to ask. So just get the hell out now.
The US forces are going to be holed up in their bases on their own, all 6000 of them spread around the country. There’s going to be some some rapid concentration of forces. They can hold out for a while, but then what?
The more they concentrate, the more food they will need. Not to mention Coca-Cola, hamburgers, ice cream, caramel sauce, videos, music, etc.
What will they do when supplies – including food – stop arriving?
And – oh dear – such a lot of people clustered together in one place. I only hope no one attacks it with salvos of rockets. That would be too bad.
Oh, yes, and even more bad if Russian military computer were suddenly attacked by evil hackers, you know they are everywhere, Russia is particularly damn full of them! Those hackers could make some missiles to be launched from Kaspian sea when no one expects.
Which would be particularly harmful because, once launched, Russian missiles do tend to strike their targets with great precision. Whereas US missiles…
Which would be particularly harmful because, once escaped death sentence, Mr. Snowden may feel threatened by US state and even
censored by Snowden! Just imagine that! Oh, my, oh my…Quid pro quo. US leaves it’s Embassy in Baghdad and bases in Iraq and Afghanistan. Lifts all sanctions on Iran, Russia and Europe (Nord Stream). Come back into the civilised community of Nations and a rules based order. Or is that too much to ask ?
Quid pro quo.
What did the Romans do for us?
If only the hyena could turn into a graceful antelope and eat grass…
Wow! This is truly unprecedented, a major international crisis that could herald an inextricable march towards a major war in the Middle East and the BBC’s Marr Show is still right on message obsessing over drumming home the fake news of Labour’s big loss due to Brexit. No probing focus on the charlatan who stole the recent election and whether he might take the UK to war on Trump’s orders.
If you watched Andrew Marr grill two of the five potential candidates for leadership of a thoroughly toothless opposition, spiced up by an interview with recently knighted Sir Sam Mendes, including a liberal dollop of action clips from his new film about the Second World War, you might have guessed the elephant in the room…
My quest for knowledge on what to expect from the Tories as the prospect of war looms large was not satiated by the pathetic “I agree with Trump” spin from Dominic Raab. As Boris relaxes on a Caribbean beach the public want answers. Who is running the country and, perhaps more importantly, on whose behalf? We all know the BBC cannot be trusted to present real news: we need to stop drinking the Koolaid!
We must focus the attention of Labour MPs on the very real threat that the Tories will lead us into another illegal foreign war in the Middle East unless we immediately and aggressively challenge the legitimacy of their rigged parliamentary majority. There is no effective opposition if we fail to overturn this stolen election. The appalling consequences could extend well beyond a “No Deal Brexit,” increasing homelessness, poverty and growing inequality to now include war, sooner rather than later.
We must contact all MPs urging them to change their defeatist narrative and relentlessly start to question the unfathomable results of the December 2019 vote before it is too late. If your suspicion over the validity of recent elections is setting off alarm bells please join us on the Discussion Forum Election Aftermath.
“The political world in the UK is so cowed by the power of the neo-conservative Establishment and media, that the assassination of Soleimani is not being called out for the act of blatant illegality that it is. It was an act of state terrorism by the USA, pure and simple.”
This made me wonder if this was a reason why Trump interfered in the British election. Corbyn’s latest outcry is the reason: he will not engage in illegal wars and murder.
Not very popular with the patriotic working class, the Red Tories would have you believe. Apparently they are all for murderous and piratical forays into other people’s countries and affairs. Well, they certainly voted for someone who is, yet again.
The “Red Tories” hate the working class, patriotic or otherwise in part at least because they do not enthusiastically support “murderous and piratical forays” abroad. Which is one set of reasons why, after 2003, Labour support began to crumble in its heartland. New Labour has never been popular among the much derided working class, just among the bien pensant pseuds who invariably support imperialism and neo-liberalism while holding the folk with the sense to understand that both work only for the wealthy, in contempt.
What just happened in December is that the working class realised that the Blairites were back in full control of Labour and intended to reverse the referendum result if given the chance to do so.
The notion that the northerners are so daft as to expect anything from Boris and the Tories is all of a piece with the general idea that poor people are stupid. The related idea-shared by those who spend too much time watching TV- that Trump has any credibility in the Brexit heartland is even more extravagant. The vote against the EU, far from being a vote for greater subservience to the USA, indicates a long held impatience with NATO and a patriotic disgust at the ruling class’s eagerness to follow Trump, or any other President’s orders.
Tony Riley. Corbyn still got more votes than Blair ! Prominent Jews who you would call self hating Jews despair at Israel’s barbarick actions and expansion. Yes Israel can bomb Gaza and tell US what to do. Get huge arms free from US tax payer. BUT it’s on a road to nowhere. The biggest critics of its actions being Jews themselves.
Who do you think supports the Saudis?
3rd of my summary of the @Ali_H_Soufan piece.
The Iranian shias and AQ Sunnis could never be bosom buddies!
‘It is not surprising, therefore, that no convincing evidence has ever been adduced showing cooperation between Iran and al-Qa`ida on specific operations or attacks. A senior jihadi who was once detained in Iran wrote that both the United States and the Islamic Republic are enemies of al-Qa`ida; the difference being that, whereas the United States is the “current enemy,” Iran is merely the “postponed enemy.” In the meantime, Iran and al-Qa`ida find themselves in what former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper has aptly called a “shotgun marriage.” The divorce, if and when it comes, will be messy.’
‘After 9/11, al-Qa`ida members initially sought refuge in Pakistan, historically a haven for the group. But the regime of Pervez Musharraf, appalled by the carnage bin Ladin had inflicted, agreed to cooperate with the United States to hunt down jihadis in its territory. Pakistan was no longer safe. In response, many al-Qa`ida members, including some of the group’s most senior leaders, migrated to the one remaining country in the region that America could not reach—the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Abu Hafs al-Mauritani, formerly al-Qa`ida’s leading cleric, headed the first wave to flee into Iran. In December 2001, al-Mauritani reportedly met Soleimani in person, only for the general to turn down his offer of cooperation against America.
This, as we have seen, was the period during which Soleimani was sharing intelligence with the United States and contemplating an overhaul in relations with the “Great Satan;” and part of his motivation for doing so, according to one of the American diplomats involved, was the opportunity to destroy al-Qa`ida, as well as its Taliban hosts. Recall that the quid pro quo for Soleimani’s cooperation with the United States was information from U.S. intelligence on the whereabouts of an al-Qa`ida fixer in Iran, who was swiftly arrested and handed over to the U.S.-backed authorities in Kabul’
https://ctc.usma.edu/qassem-soleimani-irans-unique-regional-strategy/
Isn’t the Daesh line straightforwardly that all Shias should be killed? Not sure whether Al Qaida “think” the same.
Yup. And Soleimani stopped them everywhere the 5+1 eyed Empire set them loose! Read the long piece it is stunning.
‘The Iranian shias and AQ Sunnis could never be bosom buddies!’ ..never a truer word spoken. The clan like enmity in the Middle East will likely go on for milenia, there can be no end to it, it cannot ever be managed. The two videos below clearly demonstrate this
Jordanian TV studio argument… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMzCps7xXEU
More measured debate… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-xYG6DTedo&has_verified=1
Talk about out of touch to the nth level!
The postmodernist notions of unreason is the neoreason guradi*n carries this bullshit headline;
”
Suleimani’s death is a huge blow to Iran’s plans for regional domination
Hassan Hassan
”
This is in the face of protest marches across Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria against the assassination of Soleimani. Amidst votes for kicking out yanks of Iraq, and the whole region gearing up for come what may getting revenge for the martyred.
What kind of bubble/echo chamber do these idiots live in?
“What kind of bubble/echo chamber do these idiots live in?”
I don’t care – and unless you reproduce their nonsense, I don’t even know.
Just ignore them. If you get withdrawal symptoms, try reading OffGuardian instead.
Tom my time is far too precious to waste on reading the mind emetic vulgarities in guradi*n. Furthermore, the author is another one of the think tank hacks in Washington.
I was highlighting about the obtuse mindset that can be so out of touch with actualities, and yet pushed by the corporate media as current. Despite the images on TV screens to the contrary.
Given US history since 2000, there is no way they could not be claimed to be going to commit an ‘imminent’ attack somewhere in the Middle East. They did it in Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Iraq and they have funded plenty more besides.
How about taking out Mike Pompeo due to him ‘going to issue new torture orders imminently’? We know he organised US torture in SE Asia, that was how he got his current post. He installed his Rosa Klebb sidekick as his successor running the CIA, FFS.
How about bombing the US senate as they are ‘going to issue new anti-Russia actions inminently’? Lindsey Graham, Nancy Pelosi et al have form as long as a giraffe’s neck where anti-Russian actions are concerned. BOMB CAPITOL HILL ON SOTN NIGHT!!
There is no end to legitimate bombing targets in the USA using the Bethlehem doctrine.
Which international judges will issue a ruling declaring precisely that?
I was thinking what if they really snatched him and took him to a black site?
All that was at the scene of the assassination was a smoldering ball of wreckage, right; no corpses, identification near impossible.
It seems that would’ve been far more productive, in terms of actionable intelligence for the US than killing him.
I have no evidence supporting this theory, merely trying to be logical; as it seems killing him is a lose, lose situation in Iraq and Iran . With few upsides for the US in the region, as seen with the vote in Iraq’s parliament and the turnout of mourners in Iran.
There”s supposed to be CCTV coverage of the zttack.
‘Given US history since 2000, there is no way they could not be claimed to be going to commit an ‘imminent’ attack somewhere in the Middle East’….
So it follows even if there was very real intelligence that this guy was planning an attack, you would dismiss it as a matter of course?
As Henry Kissinger is alleged to have once said: ‘even a paranoid can have enemies’.
Spencer Eagle
You are new here, people realize what you are trying to do, behave or I believe mod. will take care of you.
Claim Soleimani Targeted Due to Imminent Attack Reportedly Based on “Razor Thin” Evidence
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/01/claim-soleimani-targeted-imminent-attack-razor-thin-evidence.html
With your logic Iran has the right to strike Israel, US, after all they plot and threat to do just that. No? Well there you go.
I’m not new here my any means. Typical lefty, if anyone opposes your viewpoint they must be silenced, eh?
Well I just served you good with that link debunking your claims. No need to be bitter, we all learn.
“As Henry Kissinger is alleged to have once said: ‘even a paranoid can have enemies’”.
Well, obviously Kissinger would know. Seriously paranoid, and hated with a deadly corrosive hatred by every decent person in the world.
It’s actually William Burroughs: “Just because you’re paranoid, that doesn’t mean they’re NOT out to get you.”
Thanks, Rowan. The Web is simply crawling with false quotations and attributions. It’s a shame, because some sources (such as Wikiquote) are very conscientious and quite reliable. It only takes a minute to check.
My custom is to correct particularly insidious or misleading misquotations, and ignore others. This particular one, I think you will agree, boils down to simple logic. You may or may not be paranoid, and they may or may not be out to get you. Four possibilities, none of them ruled out by any obvious fact or logic.
The worst case, actually, is “you aren’t paranoid and they are out to get you”.
Daniel Bethlehem would have no answer to the charge that as his doctrine caused 0.5 million or so Iraqis to die, and has he the UK, US and Israel are as murderously belligerent as ever, then his doctrine will ‘imminently’ cause some Middle Eastern Actor to die.
Ergo: taking him out in a pre-emptive extrajudicial killing is entirely legal in international law.
It would serve the unprincipled scumbag right.
Similar arguments could reasonably be framed against Tony Blair, Jack Straw and Hillary Clinton.
Thank-you for this most informed article.
Lawyers are slimy.
Read it ’til I got to ‘Saudis .. did 9/11’.
Then burst out laughing.
Sorry, could not read on after that!
I suspect the whole terrible 9/11 event will NEVER be understood or properly explained. Too much uncertainty that only grows over the years and now it is just fodder for pointless ejaculations. Although, at the time there was some excellent discussion and perhaps there may be clues there to unravel who orchestrated what.
But if you can’t read past something you disagree with then are you really reading in the first place? Typically learning requires one to read the entire piece. So now, I’ve must go back and do what I just said.
Later,
Ken
I tried to explain, but got told off by the moderators because apparently this blog does not allow any discussion of 9/11.
Really!
Go to the 911 thread. It’s still open I think.
It seems to me a pity that Craig’s moderators forbid us to discuss 9/11 in his blog; but he himself feels free to make unsupported assertions about it with which many of us would disagree (if we were allowed to). It feels a tiny bit like being back in school.
Still, worse things happen at sea… and in Baghdad.
This is delicious terrorism by Trump. Threatening to behave just like isis/AQ when they destroyed Palmira and so much ancient civilisations archeology in Iraq, Syria and Libya.
“….targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!”
CULTURE!!!
That means CIVILIAN. That is TERRORISM.
Tch tch Twatter needs to take his blue tick away.
Granted Trump can be easily misinterpreted by those who want to ‘important to Iran & the Iranian culture’ ..he’s referring to Iranian infrastructure, power and water, not museum and antiquities.
infrastructure, power and water are important for health and physical wellbeing, not to culture.
You missed the point, I’m pretty sure when he said ‘culture’ he’s using it in place of the ‘Iranian people’. The pedantry exhibited by the media is astonishing when it comes to anything said by Trump, more childish than they portray Trump himself, they know fine well that he’s not referring to archaeological sites. The denial of infrastructure has been standard US military doctrine since WWII, it’s so they can award lucrative contracts to the likes of Haliburton to build it all up again.
I read it with my own eyes on Trump’s twitter. There is no word “infrastructure”, there is “culture”. Perhaps if he can’t be clear using these simple words as you claim, maybe then he should not write on Twitter at all?
“The pedantry exhibited by the media”
Isn’t it amazing how pedantic people can be? Not understanding that X really means Y. Quite unlike the great Alfred Korzybski who used to say, on such occasions,
“I have said what I have said. I have not said what I have not said”.
I also would like to know, Spencer Eagle, your opinion. Do you think it is adequate to target Iranian sites as revenge for the hostages released many years ago?
If Lockheed Martin get to make more cruise missiles at $850,000 a pop, then yes.
Do you think you personally are exceptional, Spencer Eagle?
Got the full list of non-civilian targets to share with us dingbat?
Your guys and gals just got dumped into a worse place than when the vietcong came to town by your uncaring aristo overlords or Little Big Horn.
The only way they get out safe, is by being very very sorry and promising to remain sorry for ever more.
Watch my lips – ANY direct attack on Iran means DIRECT assymetric attack on ALL US targets EVERYWHERE including in your deepest flyover redneck gun infested bunkered shithole.
Doh – Trump is threatening IRAN.
ONLY AN IDIOT WOULD ATTACK IRAN.
George Galloway just called the murder of Soleimani state terrorism on his radio show. Rightly.
name one of them Tony, knock yourself out and be specific, why don’t you. Or stop sounding like the MSM.
Saudi led in the sense most of the hijackers were Saudis and funding was Saudi-linked.
Nationality : Saudi Arabia 15 ; United Arab Emirates 2 ; Egypt 1; Lebanon 1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijackers_in_the_September_11_attacks
Why would they be dancing over an act of terror by Saudi?
Pretty obvious: i. It soured support for the Palestinians in the US among the public and US politicians. ii. It allowed the Palestinian resistance to be painted as similar to AQ and other terror groups. iii. It provided justification for the US to go after Israel’s regional foes – to attack Iraq (despite Iraq having no part in 9/11).