1588

I don’t think there is any conflict necessarily involved here in both realizing that US politicians and military structure have sparked this current round of instability, and at the same time wishing that the US forces remain safe, and the US response be towards bringing stability to this messed up situation.

Even if US suddenly attacks Iran, at least for me there will no ambiguous feelings. I’ll not support such action, nor the troops. My only hope would be that such a conflict (war) ends quickly, instead of going for months and years wasting American lives and at the same time killing any remote chances that Iranian people would throw off the iron grip of their thug rulers, and have a government moving towards moderation.

1589

That deal wasn’t enough to stop Solemani’s goons trying to set off a huge bomb in London. Solemani was nothing to do with a deal and the deal did not prevent Iran escalating, against both western targets and in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen.

The sad thing is, the deal was pretty much, for all its flaws, the only worthwhile success of Obama’s Iran policy. Obviously Trump’s policy (if it even deserves that term) on the Middle East is a shitshow disaster area, but Obama, though better intentioned and organised, also failed in the middle east, allowing the rise of Isis, the Russian involvement in Syria, and the unchecked growth of Iran’s proxy network. The situation in 2016 re: Iran was already utterly awful.

1590

Discourse only works when both sides can agree to have it, and when they can agree on the facts. We don’t have that anymore.

News we can agree with destroyed that concept.

1591

200w

Seemed appropriate.

1592

I think Trump is counting on people responding like this.

As in, “whether you think we were right or not to start this, we’re under attack now so come together.”

That doesn’t make your stance wrong, not at all, because I feel very much the same way (and I am in my military uniform in the mobilisation centre getting ready to go to Cyprus for the UN mission, but hoping I get reassigned to the current crisis!) but we are being manipulated.

1593

We’re already in Iraq, so we could more fully occupy them.

Winning the shooting war is doable, easy even.

The occupation and insurgency afterwards…

1594

They’ll pose as rich Saudis.

Or get the Russians to do it.

1595

Haven’t seen this mentioned yesterday, but Spain and Germany decided to withdraw some of their troops stationed in Iraq yesterday (before the Iranian attack).

1596

The last time I checked, the UK launched an invasion of a country in the Middle East on what they knew were false, trumped up charges of WMD; an invasion that killed tens of thousands, destabilized the region and led directly to the rise of ISIS and all that came afterward. Blaming that on Obama is, well, fucked up.

1597

I see youw ere lying when you said you would ignore me. It’s a shame because I was enjoying not havign my every post utterly misrepresented. Of course it wasn’t Obama’s fault, but making out like Obama left things in a good position is just as wrong.

1598

I think the background here is USA trying to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons. That is a whorty goal, everyone can respect.

I just hope USA official are smart about how to the do it, for minimal human suffering.

1599

A violent response doesn’t do anything to keep our personnel safe. Blowing up cultural sites is even worse (since it would harm civilians). You don’t have to wish harm on our troops to think the appropriate response is full-throated condemnation of Trump’s assassination strike and an end to hostilities. Ira. Should be allowed to present a case to the UN, and the US should present its own case about Soleimani and this retaliation strike.

The appropriate response is a soft power response. Anything else gets more people killed, including Americans.

1600

Hurr Durr. Get prepared for more of this bullshit [edit: referencing the bremmer tweet.]

We. Never. Learn.

1601

Also deeply strange and alarming as Timex pointed out up thread is the continued use of oblique references instead of calling a spade a spade. The US under the current administration is a bad actor doing intentional harm on all fronts resulting in human death and economic and environmental destruction at home and abroad.

1602

I didn’t realize that our Secretary of Defense is a lobbyist for the largest producer of guided missiles in the world. Jesus Christ.

1603

The ignore period expired. But go ahead, call someone a liar if that’s what makes you feel superior.

Given what he inherited, the reasonable position is that he left things better with respect to Iran than could reasonably have been expected; and that accomplishment has been thoroughly demolished by an insane anti-Iran jingoism on the right. I don’t think anyone suggests any more than that. Unless it is that if you want to complain that the UK is being targeted by Islamic terrorists, you’re going to have to acknowledge that the UK themselves volunteered to be a target, for no apparent reason other than to satisfy their desire to appear globally relevant.

1604

Oh, no argument there. But this administration isn’t the most logical, either.

1605

Well, that’s exactly what I’m saying. There are responses, and there are responses. But thinking this through requires both an actual goal, so you can balance actions with results, and intelligence (in all of its senses). Both are lacking for the USA at the top.

1606

Reports this morning are saying no U.S. or Iraqi casualties and that the missiles may have missed critical targets deliberately. Reports also say Iran claimed the attack was their official response to the killing of Soleimani, and that no further attacks would be forthcoming unless the United States provokes them.

So basically, Iran fired some warning shots across our bow, and are now waiting for Trump to fuck the situation up even further. The smart move is to dismiss the attack, focus on the “no casualties, minimal damage” aspects and pay lip service to deescalation.

So of course that’s not what Trump and the GOP are doing. According to sources in Washington, the GOP appears to be pressing Trump into a military response, which is pretty much exactly what Iran wants right now. If we laugh off the attack and walk away, Soleimani is still dead and we can gradually de-escalate tensions, saving face for everyone and perhaps eventually getting back on track to negotiations with Iran. If we respond with any sort of military response, it’s going to be seen as an official declaration of WAR, and America is fucked (except for all the rich guys who own defense contractor corporations, many of whom also happen to be senators and top Presidential advisors, funny how that works).

We’ve already lost one ally in the region (Syrian Kurds), expect the GOP and Trump to cost us another (Iraqi Coalition Government) and get us involved in a war we cannot hope to actually win by day’s end. The man who ran on promises of ending American involvement in the Middle East is now about to commit us to an action that will cost more American lives, money and reputation than any of the actions taken by his predecessors, Republican or Democrat, and all so he can win an election.

1607

So the rational thing to do is give him the election now, before people get hurt.

Do it!!!

Trump the peacemaker.

Edit. I’m watching the address. He just said a line about a deal allowing Iran to thrive…

Hmmm…

Regime change!

Edit: he concluded with some words about working together to take out isis…