News Outlets: “Killing Suleimani Was Great, Buuuuuuut…..”

See, now, if Obama (or Clinton) had done this, they’d be cheering. Killing one of the biggest terrorist fish in the sea would have been considered super-awesome. They’d be writing hosannas, telling us that Obama (or Clinton) had safeguarded American lives and stood up for the hundreds, if not thousands, of Americans killed due to Suleimani’s actions, not too mention all the Iraqis and Syrians and Israelis. But, Orange Man Bad

(NY Times Editorial Board) The real question to ask about the American drone attack that killed Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani was not whether it was justified, but whether it was wise. Many pieces of the puzzle are still missing, but the killing is a big leap in an uncertain direction. (snip)

It may well be that General Suleimani had come to Iraq in part to plot the next move against United States military personnel or civilians when his car was blown up by a missile from an American Reaper drone. Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, a senior commander of a Shiite militia in Iraq, was also killed. But then, General Suleimani and his whereabouts have long been well known to American and other intelligence services, and Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama had resisted killing him for fear of setting off a greater conflict with Iran and further destabilizing a chronically volatile region.

Assassinating General Suleimani, moreover, was not the same as hunting down Osama bin Laden or Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leaders of Al Qaeda and the Islamic State, both terrorists who answered to no government. General Suleimani was a senior official of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and openly targeting him was a sharp escalation in the conflict between the United States and Iran, all but taunting Iran to strike back. And that by a president who had previously demonstrated strong aversion to American involvement in the Middle East, contempt for intelligence from the region and occasional reluctance to order the use of military force.

See, he was a horrible person, potentially involved in a plan to kill more Americans, but, it might not have been wise to stop this. Because….no matter what they are writing, it all comes down to Orange Man Bad.

Coming as Mr. Trump awaits Senate trial on his impeachment by the House of Representatives, the president’s ordering of the assassination raised discomfiting questions about his motive.

Timing questioning!!!! And then the Washington Post Editorial Board

Yes, Soleimani was an enemy. That doesn’t mean Trump made the right call.

MAJ. GEN. Qasem Soleimani was an implacable enemy of the United States who was responsible for hundreds of American deaths, as well as countless atrocities in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and elsewhere. His death in a drone strike was being cheered Friday by U.S. allies and progressive forces across the region, from Israelis and Saudis to the pro-reform demonstrators of Beirut and Baghdad. That, however, doesn’t mean that President Trump’s decision to assassinate him was wise, or that it will ultimately benefit U.S. interests.

Should have stopped after “Baghdad.”

The consequences of the strike are unpredictable, but there is no denying the risk that the United States will be pulled more deeply into the Middle East and its conflicts. Having made clear that he wants to pull the nation out of those conflicts, and having said as recently as Tuesday that he wanted peace with Iran, Mr. Trump has committed an act of escalation and now is deploying more than 4,000 additional troops to Kuwait as a hedge against Iranian counterstrikes.

It was clearly a message that said “don’t f*ck with the United States under Donald Trump. We won’t be sending a Strongly Worded Note.” Then there’s this silliness in the NJ Star Ledger by William Lambers

Instead of bombs, send diplomacy and food to Iran, Iraq, rest of the Middle East

President Trump ordering bombings in Iraq and the Middle East will do nothing to bring peace to the region. It will only escalate tensions and lead to more violence and war. We need a different approach.

We should use diplomacy, including reinstating the Iran nuclear deal. We should send more food to the starving peoples of the Middle East. We should do more to help the millions of refugees from Middle East wars. These are actions that can bring us stability and peace.

So, instead of whacking the guy responsible for American deaths, we should send food and Hallmark cards? Say, how’d it work out sending pallets of cash to Iran, as well as removing sanctions that allowed Iran to sell their oil and become flush with cash?

That’s enough hot-takes for the moment.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

6 Responses to “News Outlets: “Killing Suleimani Was Great, Buuuuuuut…..””

  1. Kye says:

    The Trump hate is so deep, so ingrained these pinkos can’t even bring themselves to say “good job” when he does the same thing their Brown Messiah did when he killed Bin Laden. I love the idea that now the mooslems will hate us for killing one of their pig leaders and will retaliate. What have they been doing to the West for 200 years, a joke? What have they been doing to America since Jefferson fought the Barbary Pirates? Their entire reason for living is to convert of kill non-moooslems. Read their book for shit sake!

    Trump 2020 There’s still more mooslem terrorists to kill.

  2. Winston St. John says:

    What one must remember is at this moment it is the campaign season. The Democrats are pandering to their anti-war, far-left, progressive base. In reality, the Democratic party is as much in bed with Corporations who stand much to gain by endless wars as do the GOP.

    So the outrage is confusing. On the far left, you have the outrage. The corporate-owned media is more tepid with their responses and in fact, are attempting to give the operation some lipstick. The GOP, of course, is defending Trump and the democratic establishment(those who are not progressives) are basically silent on the operation barring comments from some of their leaders which are designed not to impeach Trump but rather take away executive authority which they themselves have ceded to the executive branch for the last 50 years.

    My only “gut” feeling of negativity on this action is not that it was carried out but that Trump admitted to it and boasted about assassinating a top General from another country in which we are not in an official war. Not because the man was not bad or known to be doing the things he did. The confusing aspect of the entire episode is just weeks ago the left was screaming at Trump for wanting to pull out of Syria. Not responding to attacking Iran over the missile strikes against an ally in the Middle East. The left has been upset with Trump for his handling of most things in the Middle East because, in reality, he has been doing a decent job in cleaning up the intractable mess created by Obama and Bush.

    This, of course, cannot stand and must be denigrated rather than embraced. To see our sons and daughters return to our shores should be a good thing but that would simply give Trump another four more years. So it is inevitable that the left will find something to dislike about anything President Trump does. This is just another example of power in DC overriding the common good of the typical man on the streets in the USA.

  3. formwiz says:

    When the Torch landings went in, Franklin Roosevelt was mad because he’d just taken a bath in the ’42 midterms and wished he could have bragged about them to do better electorally.

  4. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    NYT asked: “The real question to ask about the American drone attack that killed Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani was not whether it was justified, but whether it was wise. Many pieces of the puzzle are still missing, but the killing is a big leap in an uncertain direction.”

    A few observations…

    bin laden was global enemy #1 having directly attacked the US killing thousands of Americans AND traumatizing the nation. His crimes were public: The WTC, the Pentagon, Flight 93. Osama died “resisting” arrest and now rests in Davey Jones locker.

    Few had heard of Suleimani before he was blown to bits. What was the traumatizing act (equivalent to 9/11) committed by Suleimani that galvanized Americans into tracking him down and bringing him to justice? He fought against ISIL in Iraq and Syria. Like Putin, he supported Assad in Syria’s war against rebels. Cooperating with the US, his forces fought our mutual enemies of al queda and Taliban in Afghanistan. T

    Suleimani was the main force behind Iran’s history of asymmetric warfare (terrorism) and pushed for an Iran-Syria-Lebanon axis and restored Shia domination of Iraq, saying if Syria falls, so does Tehran. The world won’t miss him, but his assassination does not make the middle east either stable or safer.

    https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/09/30/the-shadow-commander

    Disrupted an ongoing, imminent, “very major” and sinister attack? And assassinating just one man stopped that? Not believable.

    It does tell Iran (and others), that the US knows where you are and what you’re doing (thanks to CIA spycraft and DOD dronecraft).

    It does let the likes of Rocketman Kim know he’s vulnerable at any time.

    Does any of this stabilize the world or even the middle east? Was it wise? The Trump campaign is gambling it will help his favorability.

  5. Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

    Again …

    Since everyone is playing the “what if” game with the President”s legitimate and lawful actions:

    Had President Clinton in the 90s taken out Bin Laden when he had the chance would the Twin Towers still be standing today?

    #Lolgf https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

Bad Behavior has blocked 10866 access attempts in the last 7 days.