Was the US’s killing of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard General Soleimani in Iraq justified? The Smerconish program on CNN this morning asked this question of its viewers. Surprisingly, 72% of respondents said it was NOT justified. This suggests that Liberals in general do not approve of this Trump decision ... not a surprise. But, was this a never-Trump knee-jerk or, perhaps, an indication of fear of Iranian retaliation?
Probably a bit of both. And yes, Iran might respond in kind. But the repercussions of Trump’s boldness will likely be felt in other spheres: North Korea, China, Syria, Venezuela ... maybe even Russia. And remember that Iran went quiescent for a number of years after President Reagan destroyed half its navy in 1988 after it had mined the Persian Gulf ... see: Operation Praying Mantis.
Maybe Reagan’s boldness was a template for Trump’s decision?
2 comments:
I tend to want to agree that the Soleimani killing was justified. No one disagrees that he was in Iraq to plan and carry-out more attacks on American lives/interests. His militia proxies would have killed or take hostages if the had been able to get into the embassy. Such aggression needs to be punished.
Yet I cannot escape the nagging fear that this is a wag-the-dog attempt to distract us from the upcoming Impeachment trial. This is the problem for a POTUS who habitually lies and acts rashly. How can we feel confident that he is acting per his Constitutional Oath and not simply to take the heat off his domestic problems?
If I was in charge, I would be planning to take-out the Ayatollah and all the Iranian nuclear facilities at the first sign of retaliation. (Let's finish this thing before my grandsons are of draft age.)
Retaliation to retaliation ... would that be wagging even a bigger dog? And what about Pelosi’s timing of the impeachment process? Is that wagging the cat?
Post a Comment