US kills Iran's General Soleimani

This twitter thread is quite interesting. Most of the big players who are backing up Trump by saying how necessary it was to take down the Big Bad have never before mentioned his name on Twitter:


Not totally a scientific measure of how much they knew of him or how sure they were he needed to be dealt with, but odd that they've never even mentioned this 'no1 bad guy' before.
 
Vern1961 said:
There isn't much global love for Iran or rather the Iranian regime but how would the Yanks react if, during the troubles, we had blown up a known IRA leader on the tarmac at JFK or Boston Logan airport? They'd have gone ape, not to mention warming up Old Sparky if they caught the perpetrator. And this guy was a serving high rank military officer, not a partisan like Bin Laden or the ISIS people.
Click to expand...

It's different on western soil, they just quietly assassinate him and make it look like an accident or a "drugs overdose"
 
NVP said:
It was a retaliatory warning shot, a reminder.
Click to expand...

But what will it achieve? Also. the US has been hitting Iranian-backed forces in Syria for months, so how is this latest strike supposed to be a reminder of anything?
 
robgmun said:
It's different on western soil, they just quietly assassinate him and make it look like an accident or a "drugs overdose"
Click to expand...

Yes because it was ever so quiet with those Church enthusiasts from Moscow not too long ago. At least Iran/Iraq will do something substantial, whereas May & Co flared their nostrils a bit and went back to being limp like nothing occurred.
 
StriderX said:
Yes because it was ever so quiet with those Church enthusiasts from Moscow not too long ago. At least Iran/Iraq will do something substantial, whereas May & Co flared their nostrils a bit and went back to being limp like nothing occurred.
Click to expand...

What substantial can they possibly do to the US? lol

Anything they do will come back on them 10 fold and they know it.
 
Is the arguement not that the west started it all by messing in Iran's sovereign affairs including their oil.

As I've just read the British government started the animosity by demanding that the Anglo-Persian oil company was majority owned by them, Iran refused and were heavily penalised.

From then on the US have meddled in their politics citing fears of communism spreading but the real goal was to control the oil supply in Iran.

So you can kind of see why they are so mad.
 
Nasher said:
What substantial can they possibly do to the US? lol

Anything they do will come back on them 10 fold and they know it.
Click to expand...

Whatever they've been doing that's worked since Iraq collapsed after the US/UK failed enormously by reducing every institution to rubble I suppose, that's been pretty substantial so far, again they operate asymmetrically because they aren't stupid. If they can get Iraq to evacuate US personnel democratically, that's pretty much a win for Khomeini, whether it's a fair trade for his general... that's up to him.

They've typically stayed away from foreign attacks beyond their immediate sphere as well, though that's probably because Sunni/Wahhabi terrorists do that without any need for Iran to waste effort/resources on it. Maybe they'll take a jab that way, but i doubt it.

Though I wonder if actually killing the general was a benefit for Khomeini, he was basically the military equal, had unrest went too far in Iran to such a degree the clergy was seen as needing overthrown, Qasem might have used it take power and a less potent figure might be less inclined to do that. Though conversely Qasem might also have been so loyal that any replacement is a danger.

Suppose it'll be interesting how this evolves, I do hope one day the Ayatollahs and IRGC get ousted, Iranians are such nice people.
 
Last edited:
Evangelion said:
But what will it achieve?
Click to expand...
I assume the want is an understanding from this slap that they need to sit back down again.

VincentHanna said:
A warning shot is exactly that and doesn't do any actual damage.
Click to expand...
Not everything said is to be taken as literal, the phrase can be used when there are no guns involved at all, for example.

Evangelion said:
Also. the US has been hitting Iranian-backed forces in Syria for months, so how is this latest strike supposed to be a reminder of anything?
Click to expand...

This showcase of ability was a warning that they should not start anything more serious in the form of retaliation for the attacks on the US embassy and bases, also a reminder that a full on war wouldn't be in their best interests.
 
Well at least lefty favourite Corbyn is consistent with his anti Western/American agenda by coming out on the side of the Iranians. Some folk just never learn. :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom