01-03-2020, 08:50 AM
(01-03-2020, 07:59 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ](01-03-2020, 06:57 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]At first glance, it appears that the United States assassinated a foreign leader. The question is, is it worth it? Iran will certainly respond very forcefully. They could choose a cyberattack, or they could support major acts of terrorism in the United States, or any of a lot of other options. And since we have now assassinated one of their top people, does that bring open season on our top people? Will one of our top generals in the region be assassinated by a car bomb, or a suicide bomber? And what happens then?
I don't have any faith that the Trump administration has thought this through. We've chosen to go down a road, and we don't know what's at the end of it. Or if there even is an end to it.
This will no doubt strengthen the hand of the hard liners in Iran, and possibly unite the people of Iran against the United States. This at a time when Iranians have been in the streets protesting against their government. This will end those protests.
At first glance, this looks like a major blunder by the Trump administration.
Of course they won’t be protesting their government, Marty. They were mowed down with machine gun fire the last time they did. Are these the protesters you believe will take up your banner of ‘Orange Man Bad’ and storm the ramparts against Trump’s imperialist aggression? Help me understand.
There's nothing in my post that is hard to understand.
Yes, this was a bad guy. But...
Assassinating a foreign leader means open season on foreign leaders, including American leaders. This is a major escalation, and Iran cannot and will not back down. Killing this guy makes him a martyr, and I don't think Iranians will be celebrating it any more than I would celebrate the killing of an American leader, no matter how much I detested said American leader. The natural reaction is going to be uniting the people of Iran against the United States. Even moderates in Iran, of which there are apparently many, will say it is not up to the United States to pick Iran's leaders.
Would you tolerate the assassination of an American general by a foreign government?
This is the kind of action that will reverberate for the next 30 years among middle easterners. It's not something we can take back. It's done. The toothpaste is out of the tube.
Trump came into office decrying the endless wars in the Middle East. What he did yesterday could very possibly get us involved in a bigger, wider Middle Eastern war than we have ever been involved in.
The only way this is not a blunder is if Iran backs down, and that won't happen.
Again, this is my opinion at the moment, as always subject to change.
(01-03-2020, 08:41 AM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ](01-03-2020, 06:57 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]At first glance, it appears that the United States assassinated a foreign leader. The question is, is it worth it? Iran will certainly respond very forcefully. They could choose a cyberattack, or they could support major acts of terrorism in the United States, or any of a lot of other options. And since we have now assassinated one of their top people, does that bring open season on our top people? Will one of our top generals in the region be assassinated by a car bomb, or a suicide bomber? And what happens then?
I don't have any faith that the Trump administration has thought this through. We've chosen to go down a road, and we don't know what's at the end of it. Or if there even is an end to it.
This will no doubt strengthen the hand of the hard liners in Iran, and possibly unite the people of Iran against the United States. This at a time when Iranians have been in the streets protesting against their government. This will end those protests.
At first glance, this looks like a major blunder by the Trump administration.
The US took out the foreign military leader who led an attack against the US outside his own country. It was a measured proportional response that avoided killing Iranian citizens. This is exactly what should be done. It was perfectly in the purview of the President to respond to an attack on the US, and such a response doesn't need congressional approval like the idiot who JackCity quoted implied. I would have applauded Obama had he done something similar in Libya. Do you hate Trump so much that you will resort to defending Sulaimani?
As far as your question, if Iran initiates a further attack on the US then the entire Iranian navy is turned into artificial reefs.
Hey Iran, want to try another attack on the US? Make my day!
That's how you see it, but the more relevant questions are, how do the Iranians see it, what are they going to do about it, and is that what we want them to do? And what happens then?
Have we really thought this through?
In the run-up to the 2016 election, Trump was asking, why are we even over there? Now it looks like he has flipped from isolationist to war hawk, and is willing to spend another trillion dollars just like he criticized past administrations for doing. We've already blown several trillion dollars over there in these endless wars. Now we're going to do it again?
I'm not defending the guy who got killed. He was a bad guy. But the relevant question is, does this action advance our national interest? Or does it send us down another rabbit hole with trillions of dollars down the drain?