The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Qasem Soleimani Is Dead
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Journalism is announcing Qasem Soleimani is dead when you never knew he was alive.

(By the way, this is a riff on the old joke, sometimes attributed to Chesterton or Lady Astor, that “Journalism is announcing ‘Lord Jones Is Dead’ to people who never knew Lord Jones was alive.” I was simply admitting that I’d never heard of the late Mr. Soleimani before.)

 
Hide 639 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. when you never knew he was alive.

    Just shows how parochial you are, no wonder when you spend all your time whining about Latino littering or similarly important issues. Anybody who followed Mideast affairs was at least vaguely aware of the man.
    Anyway, this is very bad, it will probably lead to a terrible war and also inundate Europe with millions more refugees (genuine ones actually!). And if the Iranian regime survives somehow, they’re now bound to build nukes, they would be stupid not to.
    Thanks Trump, thanks America! Hope you MAGA guys will be drowned in Mexicans, since you’ve learned nothing at all since 2003, it will be better for the rest of the world when you’ve become disenfranchised.

  2. El Dato says:

    “Everybody gangsta until the Green Zone is a smoking crater.”

    You just don’t assassinate top generals of countries with which you are not in a live war relationship. Before yesterday the live war relationship was still a bit deniable. No longer.

    OTOH, you also don’t occupy embassies of countries with which you are not in a live war relationship (and even then), but that no-go zone has been nonchalantly entered last year and nobody seemed to care all that much.

    > Voted in Trump because wars in the Middle East are reaching the “tiresome” stage
    > Trump (or at least, the US under Trump) really puts a dick into the Hornet’s nest

    Might as well have chosen Hillary at this point.

  3. General Soleimani’s name was frequently in the news over the years. He was the Commander of the Quds Force, which has been mentioned very often over the years.

    Soleimani seems to be a huge figure in Iran’s military. He wasn’t obscure by any means.

    Here’s what Wikipedia says about him.

    Qasem Soleimani (Persian: قاسم سلیمانی‎) (11 March 1957 – 3 January 2020) was an Iranian Major General in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and since 1998 commander of its Quds Force, a division primarily responsible for extraterritorial military and clandestine operations.

    So America just assassinated one of the most powerful men in Iran.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Anonymous
    , @Altai
  4. I never liked that guy. During the embassy attack, I saw his name painted on the wall. Worldwide sponsor of terror was bad enough, but I draw the line at poorly drawn graffiti. Dude had to go.

  5. From the halls of Montezuma

    To Qasem Soleimani

    We will fight somebody’s battles

    Though we won’t know what they’re for.

    .

    .

    .

    General and President George Washington is rolling over at Mount Vernon.

    From His Farewell Address:

    [MORE]

    Observe good faith and justice toward all nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all. … In the execution of such a plan nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations and passionate attachments for others should be excluded, and that in place of them just and amicable feelings toward all should be cultivated.

    The nation which indulges toward another an habitual hatred or an habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur.

    So, likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill will, and a disposition to retaliate in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld; and it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country without odium, sometimes even with popularity, gilding with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

    Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy, to be useful, must be impartial, else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people to surrender their interests.

    The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. …

    Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand, neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the Government to support them, conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that by such acceptance it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.

    • Replies: @MB
  6. anonymous[405] • Disclaimer says:

    Dumb post. Are you implying the media is just hyping a not too important story to make Trump look reckless or at fault somehow? He was a popular hero in Iran. This will determine Iran’s willingness to hit back at the US military. The media is treating this story in proportion to its huge consequences / exposure of the US military to revenge attack.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  7. @European-American

    Test failed, man.

    We have to fight a war with Iran now.

    • Replies: @European-American
    , @Ragno
  8. anon[353] • Disclaimer says:

    There is something odd about continually hectoring the US and/or Trump, the later of whom claim to want out of the Mid-East. This looks like the idea is now to turn up things in Iraq, but who really cares?

    WTI was up $1.60 last I looked.

  9. Anonymous[249] • Disclaimer says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    The “Quds” [i.e. “Jerusalem”] force is Ayatollah-Iran’s implementation of the National Socialists’ Waffen-SS, i.e. an elite force loyal to be party apparatus existing in competition with the regular military.

    The Soviet Union had countless weaknesses when the German Reich attacked it in 1941. Germany’s elite forces were no match for the people, the topography and the climate in the USSR.

    The U.S. and Israel would do well to remember that for all its economic and social weaknesses, Iran is a real country.

  10. Flaming fish. Every European in the ME now has a target on their backs. Cheers, guys.

    Stupid and disproportionate, but that’s what the Swamp likes. Pity Trump never drained it. His inauguration speech was great on foreign policy, but none of it happened.

    Still glad he’s there, not Hillary, but that’s a pretty low bar to clear.

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @Jack D
    , @Buck Ransom
  11. eugyppius says:

    This was an act of incredible foolishness that has every chance of sparking a catastrophic war. With that in mind, look at what some of the stupidest people in America are saying right now:

    Jake Novak thinks killing the man who can take a great deal of credit for destroying ISIS means America has done away with “the world’s no. 1 bad guy”:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/02/trump-just-took-out-the-worlds-biggest-bad-guy-qassim-soleimani.html

    Mark Dubowitz, who holds himself forth as an “Iran expert”, writes that we have blown up “the most effective terrorist on the planet” :

    If it’s true Suleimani is dead, this is bigger than bin-Laden. Bigger than Mugniyeh. Bigger than Baghdadi. For two decades, Suleimani has been the most powerful, savvy & effective terrorist on the planet. He’s enjoyed full backing of powerful terrorist state. Irreplaceable.— Mark Dubowitz (@mdubowitz) January 3, 2020

    He also wants you to believe that “…lots of Iranians will […] wake up in a few hours with smiles on their faces.”

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/bigger-than-bin-laden-iran-expert-hails-qassim-soleimanis-killing-as-massive-blow-to-the-regime

    Obviously he is an expert.

    Pete Hegseth thinks that this is “even bigger” than assassinating Osama bin Laden:

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/about-as-big-as-bin-laden-foxs-pete-hegseth-hails-death-of-iranian-general-qassem-soleimani

    If by that he means vastly more likely to lead to geopolitical disaster and probably instigate a second European migrant crisis that will make the first one look like a small tourism spike, he is perhaps right.

    Renowned scholar-statesman Mike Pompeo has twitter video of several hundred (or just a few dozen?) Iraqis running and shouting, which surely means assassinating this foreign general is a Good Thing. The Iraqis just love it when we kill Iranians, I guess:

    Iraqis — Iraqis — dancing in the street for freedom; thankful that General Soleimani is no more. pic.twitter.com/huFcae3ap4— Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) January 3, 2020

    More freedom for Iraq! And after all the freedom Americans have already given them, millions of freedoms, they are happy for just this little teaspoon more.

    • Replies: @Nodwink
    , @vhrm
  12. LondonBob says:

    Those supposedly incompetent neocons have once again pulled off the seemingly impossible and got the US in to a hugely self destructive shooting war with the far away Iranians. Trump should have tweeted an Israeli flag. Feel sorry for those US troops stationed in Iraq, they are just bait now.

    • Agree: mark green
    • Replies: @GW
  13. JimDandy says:
    @German_reader

    I’m certainly not happy about it. But do you really think “it will probably lead to a terrible war”? That’s a genuine question. I currently don’t think that it will probably lead to a terrible war. I think it could lead to a terrible war, but, if I had to bet, I would bet against that happening because I don’t think Trump or Iran wants it.

    I’ll admit that I can’t really envision an outcome, though. Other than a relatively slow–and lethal–chess match.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  14. Hhsiii says:
    @German_reader

    And if there’s one thing German readers know, it’s terrible wars.

    I kid. All so long ago. At least y’all weren’t responsible for redlining.

  15. Nodwink says:
    @eugyppius

    My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators.

    — Dick Cheney, 16 March 2003

  16. Clyde says:

    Qasem Soleimani, what the hell was this hotshot Iranian general doing in Baghdad. He should have stayed home. I am glad we whacked him with some others.

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @S. Anonyia
  17. FN says:

    Anybody who follows events in the Middle East knows this guy. Your comment suggests you do not read moonofalabama.org regularly. You should, every day. Mr. Sailer, you do not seem to appreciate how serious this is. It will be the end of US presence in Iraq and probably also Syria. This sounds like a good thing, but the way there will be disastrous. This assassination was a massively stupid move, tactically and strategically, and might kill Trump’s reelection bid. Which also might be a good thing, not considering the alternatives.

    Also I am not sure Israelis should be happy about this. Maybe Mr. Netanyahu is, as strife and war might help him with his legal troubles, but the rest should not. With the US perhaps gone in a few months, Iran’s influence in the region will only increase and Israeli warplanes bombing stuff in Iraq and Syria will actually have to start from Israel.

    It will be interesting to watch how alt-righters and paleocons position themselves in the next days. We will see who is actually an Always Trumper and who sticks with their principles.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    , @Anonymous
    , @MB
  18. Anonymous[249] • Disclaimer says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    More exactly, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is Ayatollah-Iran’s Waffen-SS. The Jerusalem (“Quds”) Division is an elite unit within the IRGC that was apparently commanded by Soleimani.

  19. anon[170] • Disclaimer says:
    @German_reader

    Stick a fork in Donald Trump. He’s done. And this time it may be true. Sad. Trump throws an interception that’s returned for a touchdown on the very last play of the game when he was leading. Brilliant. Just when the democrats decided to hand the election to him with this impeachment thing, he then goes and starts a huge war on behalf of Israel and his corrupt Zionist donors and sycophants like Charlie Kirk. Replace “Russia” with “Israel” and everything they said about the guy is true.

    Iran will retaliate. Count on it. That means American blood will be on Trump’s hands, and the public may very well blame him. It’s not beyond reason to think they may even respond with a terrorist attack against civilians in the US; that’s what I’d do as it’d turn the public against Trump and hurt the man much more than attacking soldiers.

    Hope you MAGA guys will be drowned in Mexicans, since you’ve learned nothing at all since 2003

    There is some truth to that. As I’ve said before, Boomer conservatives are worthless and there is an argument that they are getting what they deserve. However, this isn’t what significant portions of Trump’s party voted for, especially younger demographics. They voted for one thing and the deep state and Israel lobby voted for another. Guess which demographic prevailed.

    it will be better for the rest of the world when you’ve become disenfranchised.

    Many of the democrats running, and their supporters in the media, are just as belligerent as Donald Trump is, minus only Iran. They cheered when Trump attacked Syria and demanded he send weapons to Ukraine. Democrats = war with Russia and Syria. Republicans = war with Israel’s enemies. A majority-minority United States controlled by the Democrat party / CIA may end up being much worse than the current arrangement. Imagine the racially-motivated hatred they’ve directed at Russia for the last three years being turned on Europe one day.

  20. JRB says:

    If the Americans don’t want a major war with Iran (backed by China and Russia) this is an act of extreme foolishness. For the parts of the American deep state, that are allied with Israel and Saudi-Arabia, this murder is a great success, since it makes such a war with Iran, that they sincerely hope for, much more likely to happen.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  21. vhrm says:
    @eugyppius

    “catastrophic war” between who and whom?

    Yes this guy did some work against ISIS, but he’s been responsible for sowing strife across the Middle East for 20+ years and caused the death of more Iraqis, more Syrians, and more US soldiers than ISIS ever did…
    and he was proud of it.

    F him.

    Iran might kidnap and execute some Americans and that’s terrible. I hope they don’t get tortured, at least, but we’d already turned the other cheek to this guy (and Iran’s BS in the area ) way too many times.

  22. Anonymous[118] • Disclaimer says:

    Dunno.

    I’ve long cleaved to the view that Iran is just a mini-me version of the old USSR just waiting to implode – the only thing keeping the regime in power being a tight command and control structure…… all it needs is its very own Gorbachev, and… poof! …. the illusion is gone. I mean you’ve got a teeming mass of frustrated porn-fed youngsters, thanks internet, due to ancient high fertility just itching for their slice of the pie, gadgets, gizmos, jobs, bumrushing Europe, trash American negro worship culture etc etc, all it needs is the initial crack in the dam..

    And thus Iranian youth will be exposed to the much cherished and sought after Blacked.com, rap ‘music’ and the other glories of turbocharged American capitalism of the mundane here-and-now world.

  23. Dumbo says:
    @German_reader

    If this leads to a war with Iran we are all f***d. So much for Trump being the “anti-War”, “anti-globalist”, “America first” president. Honestly, he didn’t need to do much to be reelected, just focus on the economy and in limiting immigration and getting the hell out of all foreign wars. But no. I guess it’s too much to ask for any U.S president to just concentrate on the U.S.

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @ben tillman
  24. @Hhsiii

    “All so long ago.”

    Agreed. WW2 finished 75 years ago, yet to the media it’s still just yesterday, as if in the 1970s UK we were still chewing over the moral lessons of the Mad Mahdi.

    Was the American Civil War a frequent US media topic in 1940?

  25. 22pp22 says:

    Trump is Netanyahu’s bitch.

    Trump was on course to win in 2020.

    Now you could get a senile Biden with an AOC clone as his VP, while the rest of us get a blood bath.

    Has Orange Man kept a single one of his promises?

    • Agree: LondonBob
  26. Steve, Soleimani was the Persian Snake Plissken.

    • Replies: @Pegasus
  27. Anonymous[268] • Disclaimer says:

    Most Americans are war mongering scum, I would love to see Iran smash the American military because it has been responsible for inflicting BLACK terror on the world for decades.

    America has done nothing positive for the world, all it has done is inflicted it’s mixed race dystopia on the rest of the white world. Most white Americans support the mixed race dystopia, the average white American when it comes to it identifies far more with the all-American negro than they do with whites in other countries, no doubt about it.

    • Disagree: Alden
  28. @YetAnotherAnon

    There was a movie in 1939 about the Civil War: “Gone With The Wind.”

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    , @HA
  29. Anonymous[268] • Disclaimer says:

    It sickens me how most British people support this, but the British proles are among the dumbest people in the world without a doubt.

    Just look at the rabid comments on the DM demanding that the US obliterate Iran, that is the mindset of the British prole. They will soon be demanding that Boris send British troops as well to get blown to pieces and returned home in multiple bags. The British proles are among the nastiest and worst people in the world.

    • Disagree: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
  30. @vhrm

    “he’s been responsible for sowing strife across the Middle East for 20+ years”

    Wow.

    3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

    4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

    5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

    • LOL: bomag
  31. @anonymous

    No, I’m saying I never heard of him.

  32. Well, that escalated quickly.

  33. Clyde says:

    More on Mr Salami from UK Mail:

    To his fans and enemies alike, Soleimani was the key architect of Iran’s regional influence, leading the fight against jihadist forces and extending Iran’s diplomatic heft in Iraq, Syria and beyond.

    ‘To Middle Eastern Shiites, he is James Bond, Erwin Rommel and Lady Gaga rolled into one,’ wrote former CIA analyst Kenneth Pollack in a profile for Time’s 100 most influential people in 2017.

    ‘To the West, he is… responsible for exporting Iran’s Islamic revolution, supporting terrorists, subverting pro-Western governments and waging Iran’s foreign wars,’ Pollack added.

    With Iran roiled by protests and economic problems at home, and the US once again mounting pressure from the outside, some Iranians had even called for Soleimani to enter domestic politics.

    While he has dismissed rumors he might one day run for president, the general has played a decisive role in the politics of Iran’s neighbor, Iraq.

    As well as talks on forming a government, he was pivotal in pressuring Iraq’s Kurds to abandon their plans for independence after an ill-judged referendum last September.

    His influence has deep roots, since Soleimani was already leading the Quds Force when the US invaded Afghanistan in 2001.

  34. I love you Steve, but this is a poor take. It’s hard to have followed the tragicomedy of the Middle East and our involvement there w/o hearing about the Quds and Soleimeini.

    • Replies: @European-American
  35. obviously the feeling of power you have has POTUS with the finger at the worlds most powerful weapons corrupts everybody, you can only withstand for a certain time.

  36. Dan Smith says:

    The mullah understand force. The dead general was responsible for hundreds of American deaths in Iraq. All unpunished until now. Poke a tiger and you might get bitten. I don’t think we’ll see much response from the pussies in Iran. We aren’t starting another war by the way. This can be filed in the category of taking out the trash.

  37. Uk says:

    A good realist move by Trump. Iran backed forces were constantly attacking American ones. They were trying to show that America could do nothing. Trump had their leader killed. Now Iran will get back in their box.

    I’m as anti-war as anyone but abject weakness is not a way to peace.

    I also don’t like the neo-cons but the third worldist “anti-imperialist” ideology that has infected people here is no better. America is not the cause of all evil in the world and the Iranian government really are a fading bunch of fanatics. The fetishization of any dark-eyed man with a beard is creepy. Killing him was good diplomacy and everyone will see it over the next few months.

  38. Anonymous[115] • Disclaimer says:

    Journalism is announcing Qasem Soleimani is dead when you never knew he was alive

    Didn’t you know he was public enemy number one either?

  39. Anon[274] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.

  40. IHTG says:

    There will be some sort of retaliation. There won’t be a war. Killing one man, no matter how senior, is not a rollback of Iran’s strategic position in the ME, so why should there be a war? They’ll pick up the pieces and move on.

  41. Is this good for the juice?

    • Replies: @MBlanc46
  42. Altai says:

    It’s not so much that he is dead but a question of who airstriked him dead in Baghdad (Nobody is claiming responsibility) and the implications for the new Shia-Sunni proxy war that has ensnared Iran and Saudi Arabia. Was it Saudi? Was it the US-Israel?

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
  43. Anon7 says:

    Does the fact that the President had Soleimani killed necessarily initiate a massive land war? It’s not like they can invade us, and engage us, and I don’t see any reason to believe that the United States is about to initiate a massive conflict with Iran.

    This is a security action, in which a known terrorist agent of a foreign power conspired to kill Americans abroad, and was himself assassinated. From a US political standpoint, both Obama and Biden eventually denounced Soleimani as a terrorist, and had him sanctioned.

    What are Iran’s options for retaliation?

    1) Attack US interests abroad
    2) Activate sleeper agents in the US to perform acts of terrorism.
    3) Tweet angrily.

    As far as I know, they’ve already been doing items 1) through 3).

    Why do you think that this action presages a new land war in the Middle East? President Trump has been President for three years and hasn’t started a new land war as far as I know.

    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
  44. anonymous[245] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Too busy covering black cornerbacks?

    Notice the debate among the commenters — more informative than the usual piling on.

  45. Pegasus says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Of course, as per usual you were too busy shitposting to care about really important issues, such as, perhaps, the Zionist ordered, US delivered geopolitical shitshow in the Middle East.

    Never mind, let us soothe our brains with some more irrelevant “why are Jews so smart” and “why is it forbidden to say Latinos do litter more than rednecks” type posts.

    • Replies: @Ian M.
  46. @El Dato

    What was a top Iranian general doing traipsing around a country where the US spent the better part of a decade marking its territory? I admit, when the US claimed Iran was behind the attack on the US embassy, I thought it was more of the same old tired US propaganda. I admit I was wrong about that now.

    • Replies: @Ozymandias
  47. One flashpoint I could see igniting a major war is Yemen. If the Iran-backed rebels take control of the whole country, which they are not far from doing, they could launch a full-fledged invasion of Saudi Arabia. The rebels launched a trial balloon against the Saudis last year, and it did not go well for the Saudi ground forces. Yemen is not a small county (27 million vs SA’s 33 million), and the soft Saudis would be no match for them on their own. The US would have no choice but to bail them out.

  48. I’m pretty happy about it. The way the swamp fights wars is to let the little people do the dying while the “leaders” are safe in their compounds spouting propaganda and ideology. Killing QS up-ends that. It’s no longer chess where the nobility sits pretty, it’s closer to real life where the war will target the highest value target available. Bonus, it leaves Khomeni or whoever rules Iran at this point in power, so we don’t have to deal with revolution or chaos.

    But what do I know. I’m sitting pretty in the U.S. with zero risk typing on a keyboard. I couldn’t spell QS for $1000. I don’t want any more troops in the ME. But if we can appease Israel through targeted airstrikes and twitter name-calling, that seems like a win.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  49. Steve, I’m with you. I never heard of this guy either.

  50. eugyppius says:
    @vhrm

    “catastrophic war” between who and whom?

    Between Iran and the United States, to start anyway.

    Yes this guy did some work against ISIS,

    That is a profound understatement. But more and more one suspects that the Americans and their, uh, allies wanted ISIS to keep plugging on against Assad and Soleimani’s success was one reason, maybe just a small reason, he had to go.

    he’s been responsible for sowing strife across the Middle East for 20+ years and caused the death of more Iraqis, more Syrians, and more US soldiers than ISIS ever did

    You seem to have mistaken Soleimani for the United States.

    F him.

    Instead of doing that, we assassinated him in a missile attack. Imagine if Iran had assassinated Mike Pompeo and then Iranians cropped up in the comment sections of blogs typing things like “yeah America might kidnap and execute some Iranians and that’s terrible. I hope they don’t get tortured, at least, but we’d already turned the other cheek to this guy (and America’s BS in the area ) way too many times.”

    a) It’s amazing how much more justified the Iranians would be saying something like that. b) it seems unlikely those sentences will age very well and finally c) also those are just plainly ridiculous things to say.

  51. BB753 says:

    We always pick up the wrong enemies: Russia, Iran, Syria, etc, which should be our natural allies. Now, the real bad guys are Saudi Arabia and the United Emirates. I say we remove the thousand princes and sultans, replace them with corrupt military leaders like Saddam Hussein (mustache is mandatory) and keep those oil wells pumping.
    And take away the nukes from Israel.

    • Agree: Ian M.
  52. Realist says:
    @German_reader

    Just shows how parochial you are, no wonder when you spend all your time whining about Latino littering or similarly important issues.

    Yes, like sports issues and other inane things.

  53. Realist says:
    @Ozymandias

    Worldwide sponsor of terror was bad enough…

    Creditable citation.

    • Replies: @Ozymandias
  54. Realist says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Stupid and disproportionate, but that’s what the Swamp likes. Pity Trump never drained it.

    Trump is part of the Swamp/Deep State…that’s why he is President.

  55. @JohnnyWalker123

    Yes oops! Sorry about that.

    My two cents is, this is scary so a lot of people are reacting strongly. It’s also shocking. But it probably won’t dramatically change things. There’s been war and violence in the region for years, and it goes on. It’s just business. May it end soon…

  56. anonymous[245] • Disclaimer says:
    @ScarletNumber

    And are you proud of that?

    High-Q or not, spending too much time smugging it up in an HBD tree fort is one of the many ways to be divided & conquered.

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @Polynikes
    , @Ian M.
  57. Altai says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Not just assassinated, bombed in the capital of another country. Utter madness. I had hoped this was Saudi or Israel but another glorious victory for USAF.

    I think what they’ve settled on, based on their activity over the last few years is to goad Iran into a response from which they can wage a limited war they can win. If you start the war, you’re a bit incumbent to go all the way for meaningful victory, if they start it, you don’t need to occupy them to meaningfully win.

    All the provocative movements that Iran responds to? The media will let them be forgotten like tears in the rain.

  58. Polynikes says:
    @anon

    I’m not advocating this but if you think an Iranian led war against the US is bad for Trump on the eve of re-election, you know less than zero about history or American politics.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  59. vinny says:
    @vhrm

    he’s been responsible for sowing strife across the Middle East for 20+ years

    There’s this other country, whose borders are like 8000 miles from the Middle East, that you’re going to hate when you find out about.

  60. bomag says:
    @anon

    It’s not beyond reason to think they may even respond with a terrorist attack against civilians in the US; that’s what I’d do as it’d turn the public against Trump…

    The opposite will happen, in that any foreign attack will rally things around the prez.

    Hope you MAGA guys will be drowned in Mexicans

    We already are, and now Mexicans have the most incentive to maintain the US as currently structured.

    it will be better for the rest of the world when you’ve become disenfranchised.

    I suspect it will be far better for modal man in the US. The US gives to the world via aid; favorable trade terms; an outlet for “refugees”; world policing; etc. Nice if all that could now accrue to citizens.

  61. It is difficult to see what the strategic benefit of this assassination might be.

    If nothing else, it is likely that the sequelae will include increased oil prices, which, as I pointed out in a post on a different thread just yesterday, will affect almost every American in their wallet and has never been a vote winner.

    History shows us that whenever a US president is in trouble politically at home, he starts a war overseas.

    The difference with Trump is that he was elected specifically on a platform of not doing that and of avoiding military entanglements in the Middle East and bringing home the troops.

    It seems that Trump was elected accidentally, when his only intention in running was to promote his brand and name recognition, and he won by a fluke due to the Democratic Party choosing a candidate whom nobody liked and by, at least on health care and foreign policy, running to the left of his opponent with promises like reining in drug company profiteering and forcing multinational companies to manufacture in the US.

    Since being elected he seems to have done everything in his power to get himself impeached and to avoid being re-elected, so perhaps this is the final throw of the dice.

    It would be nice to think that the Iranians will respond to this killing by throwing in the towel and agreeing to renegotiate their non nuclear proliferation treaty on terms more to the liking of the US, but this seems really unlikely.

    So the question remains. What is the strategic benefit to the US?

  62. @German_reader

    Don’t blame Steve, it’s Qasem Soleimani’s fault he wasn’t better known. He shoulda picked an easy-to-remember nom de guerre like Abu Dickhead.

    • Agree: Redneck farmer
  63. Flip says:
    @anon

    If we have to have a Democrat, I’d want Sanders. He’s viscerally anti-open borders (“a Koch Brothers proposal”), has been ok on gun rights, and seems non-interventionist on foreign policy. I suppose my taxes are going up though.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  64. GW says:
    @LondonBob

    Quit cucking for your Islamic masters you worthless Brit.

  65. @German_reader

    … Hope you MAGA guys will be drowned in Mexicans, since you’ve learned nothing at all since 2003,…

    Dear German Reader: Hitler was right, we are not your natural enemies. Please do not conflate the actions of leadership we do not control with your natural cousins here on the North American continent.

    Stupidity has caused far too much suffering. Read your own history.

    We who might express “MAGA” and other such sympathies are not all what you apparently think we are. Are YOU a Merkel man? LOL. I think not, so I ask YOU to think about the comparison.

    Signed,
    An American who has purchased, owned and driven more expensive German cars, BMW and Benz, than you, probably. You can thank me for my contributions to your economy.

    • Replies: @German_reader
  66. @FN

    If you’re not pulling that trigger you might as well just pack up and come home. Trump didn’t have the authority to do that on this side of the unconditional surrender of the self-declared enemy. Not Iran itself, but those men making the declarations.

    We’ll see how many more are willing to do so.

  67. Thea says:
    @German_reader

    I agree this is a terrible development and not what we voted for. But Israel is far more likely to experience the fallout than Germany. The Iranians won’t refrain from attacking Israel if this means war.

    This reminds me…Does anyone else remember the very organized and swift exit of all Iranian citizens from the US in 1979?most were college students. It was on the news with images of long lines of people forced to leave. They made it look so easy 40 years ago but now it’s somehow impossible?

  68. @German_reader

    Mr Steve’s subtle point about the nature of the American, and, indeed, Western, MSM seems to have passed completely over your head.
    It is unlikely to lead to ” a terrible war.” The September drone attacks on Saudi Oil installations would normally have been a casus belli, except the Americans refused to take the gambit. Even now, they are claiming they have no proof of provenance.
    This was a much more important event than one of Iran’s top generals being killed in Iraq by American forces. Why put your top general in a country where your enemy’s troops are stationed ? Downright stupid.
    Short of either side attacking each other – Americans attacking Iranian territory, Iranians American bases and ships – there will be no war. It is in the interests of neither.
    But expect more incidents of the type previously mentioned, up to and beyond the US Presidential election. It’s in Trump’s interests to continue to throw bones to the Neocons and Zionists. Also, the sanctions seem to be seriously affecting the Iranian economy.

    • Agree: Kevin O'Keeffe
  69. @Steve Sailer

    There was a movie in 1939 about the Civil War: “Gone With The Wind.”

    Interesting that the movie and book (1936) were so popular in the US just at the time that World War II was breaking out in Europe.

    The story is a historical romance (or bodice-ripper) set in the times of the Civil War and contains plot elements reminiscent of Wuthering Heights, and War and Peace in a plantation economy. In other words, chick lit, but whether it was also seen as antiwar propaganda, I do not know.

    • Agree: Realist
  70. vinny says:

    We assassinated Osama and, 10 years later, Americans are still dying to protect Afghanistan’s non-strategic gravel reserves. This is not a hopeful sign.

  71. @JimDandy

    Well yes, it’s far from certain that a war will result. But it’s distressing enough that the USA leadership (and this includes Trump) is engaging in such high-risk actions. They are playing with fire.

    • Agree: JimDandy
  72. Shmendrix says:

    A nice grand gesture, a tidy and hopefully effective disproportionate response to the Baghdad embassy takeover. Convenient that the Jewhaters forget all about that. Let’s just hope the blowback doesn’t spiral out of control.

    • Replies: @Herzog
  73. Anonymous[402] • Disclaimer says:
    @El Dato

    OTOH, you also don’t occupy embassies of countries with which you are not in a live war relationship (and even then), but that no-go zone has been nonchalantly entered last year and nobody seemed to care all that much.

    You seem to be referring to several real incidents. Who has occupied whose embassies?

  74. Realist says:
    @Clyde

    Qasem Soleimani, what the hell was this hotshot Iranian general doing in Baghdad. He should have stayed home.

    What the hell is the US doing in Iraq…or anywhere in the ME? The US should have stayed home.

  75. @Jonathan Mason

    Gone With The Wind – a historical romance (or bodice-ripper) set in the times of the Civil War

    My wife tells me she read it and loved it in 1980s communist Romania.

  76. @Chief Seattle

    Soleimani was a two-star general, who used to be a frontline officer for eight years during the Iraq-Iran War. He also was not unfamiliar with personal danger in more recent years either. He also was certainly not a policy-maker.

    So other than his relatively high rank, his killing didn’t much change the dynamic of civilian leaders deciding belligerent policy and soldiers fighting it out.

  77. Jack D says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Really, the whole ME? Arabs hate Iran and are as glad as Israel that Soleimani is dead. Any European who visits Iran is an idiot – they are always looking for Westerners that they can take hostage on trumped up charges.

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
  78. Anon[119] • Disclaimer says:

    Editor: “*Who* was killed? Find some professor who’s heard of the guy and can make a case that Trump has destroyed the world by having … what was his name? … killed. And mention that Trump has the nuclear codes in the article. Actually, put that in the headline.”

    • LOL: Redneck farmer
  79. Journalism is announcing Qasem Soleimani is dead when you never knew he was alive.

    LOL. You are right.

    • Agree: Kylie
  80. @vhrm

    Apparently, after having fought several wars against tribal militias and one 1960s equipped military, many Americans cannot even imagine that some enemies might even shoot back, or do anything but either surrender or at worst fight some guerrilla war for two decades, resulting in at most a few thousand American casualties.

    • Replies: @vhrm
  81. Realist says:
    @Dumbo

    So much for Trump being the “anti-War”, “anti-globalist”, “America first” president.

    He never was. He has always been with the Deep State. I voted for him, but not again. I commented here on Unz Review in mid April 2017 that Trump was a charade…a phony…a part of the Deep State.
    I have never wavered from that sentiment.

  82. George says:

    President Obama assassinated the Supreme leader of the Taliban in 2016 because peace.

    Mullah Akhtar Mohammad Mansour (/ˈɑːktɑːr ˈmɑːnsʊər, ˈæktɑːr ˈmænsʊər/; Pashto: اختر محمد منصور‎; c. 1968 – 21 May 2016) was the leader of the Taliban, an Islamic fundamentalist political movement in Afghanistan,[8] from 29 July 2015 to 21 May 2016.[9]

    On 21 May 2016, the United States conducted a drone strike on a vehicle which had crossed into Pakistan from Iran. The vehicle was carrying Mullah Akhtar Mansour and he was killed.[10][11][12]

    U.S. President Barack Obama confirmed on Monday, 23 May 2016, that Mansour had been killed in the American airstrike which he had sanctioned.[67] President Obama stated afterwards that he had hoped Mansour’s death would lead to the Taliban joining a peace process.[69][70]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akhtar_Mansour#Islamic_Emirate_of_Afghanistan

  83. @German_reader

    Just shows how parochial you are, no wonder when you spend all your time whining about Latino littering or similarly important issues. Anybody who followed Mideast affairs was at least vaguely aware of the man.
    Anyway, this is very bad, it will probably lead to a terrible war and also inundate Europe with millions more refugees (genuine ones actually!).

    What a ridiculous take!

    Not knowing who this guy was means that Steve (and many of te rest of us) didn’t do something that is “very bad” and didn’t cause a “terrible war”.

    What would you expectus to pay attention to a guy you don’t want us to do anything about?

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @Anonymous
  84. Iran, Iraq and the rest of us are safer because Trump is in the White House.
    Permanent Washington hates and fears his ignorance and dilettantism and is therefore far less likely to anoint Trump as its legitimate wartime POTUS. Trump is a human monkey wrench currently stuck in their war machine. This is the best we could hope for under the circumstances.

  85. Realist says:
    @ScarletNumber

    Steve, I’m with you. I never heard of this guy either.

    Birds of a feather…

  86. WJ says:
    @GW

    Quit cucking for Israel and Saudi Arabia.

  87. @Dumbo

    If this leads to a war with Iran we are all f***d.

    How so? Do they have ICBM’s now?

  88. @Anonymous

    The Soviet Union had countless weaknesses when the German Reich attacked it in 1941. Germany’s elite forces were no match for the people, the topography and the climate in the USSR.

    It’s a statistical fact that Germany would have beaten the Soviets if not for Anglo-American Lend Lease. Even in 1945, Soviet transportation was heavily reliant on American production. Something like 75%+ of their trucks were made in America, as was a huge proportion of their railroad rolling stock. A large amount of this material arrived in 1941 just in time to help blunt the initial German advance.

    Unfortunately, Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill chose against letting the Nazis and commies bleed each other out.

    • Replies: @Vendetta
  89. @Hhsiii

    Franklin Delano Roosevelt was more responsible for starting WW2 than any American is apparently prepared to admit.

    • Replies: @hhsiii
  90. Omigawd … Trump iced a revered Iranian leader while he was having coffee with his wife on their backyard terrace in Tehran?

    Wait, what … this was actually a powerful general of the Iranian Revolutionary Army and his support team in an enemy country actively waging a hot proxy war, as part of their destabilizing effort across the entire Middle East..?!?

    من فکر می کنم که ژنرال خوب فکر می کند …
    بازی زیبایی بود.

  91. So does this mean we can stop hearing all about trannies now?

  92. @El Dato

    You also don’t storm embassies.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  93. @Desiderius

    I don’t want to hear any boomer / neocon hot takes that stem from the infamous hostage crisis.

    Robert Parry told us all we really need to know about the hostage crisis.

    It was a Republican President whose campaign people (Bill Casey) secretly negotiated with Iran in Madrid to keep those hostages longer than necessary. (The real origin of Iran-Contra)

    That’s the level of mendacious immorality in American politicians.

    Trump, like Reagan, is a fake and a stain on the right. Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul were the last two Republican candidates with any integrity.

  94. @YetAnotherAnon

    Every European in the ME now has a target on their backs.

    Mike Pompeo’s posterior would make an ample target for an Iranian drone whenever he sets foot in MENA.

    That would be a tragedy, I mean, but I’m just sayin’.

  95. @Jonathan Mason

    1939 was a pretty interesting year for movie fans. Consider that the nominations for the best actor Oscar were:

    Robert Donat – Goodbye, Mr. Chips
    Clark Gable – Gone With the Wind
    Laurence Olivier – Wuthering Heights
    Mickey Rooney – Babes in Arms
    James Stewart – Mr. Smith Goes to Washington

    Other prominent movies that year included The Wizard of Oz, Stagecoach, and The Hunchback of Notre Dame.

    • Replies: @hhsiii
  96. Anonymous[129] • Disclaimer says:

    I agree, Steve. Iran has not been much of a threat to America. In that sense, Soleimani was never much alive, as you imply.

    I also think that this is not meant to be the start of a war, On the contrary, it is a parting shot.

    Iran will leave it at that. Americans will leave, and that is that.

  97. utu says:
    @German_reader

    Should one know who Soleimani was? If you follow what’s going on and try to figure out why you will know about Soleimani.

    How Iranian general plotted out Syrian assault in Moscow
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-soleimani-insigh/how-iranian-general-plotted-out-syrian-assault-in-moscow-idUSKCN0S02BV20151006

    At a meeting in Moscow in July [2015], a top Iranian general unfurled a map of Syria to explain to his Russian hosts how a series of defeats for President Bashar al-Assad could be turned into victory – with Russia’s help.

    Major General Qassem Soleimani’s visit to Moscow was the first step in planning for a Russian military intervention that has reshaped the Syrian war and forged a new Iranian-Russian alliance in support of Assad.

    Iranian commander Soleimani meets Putin in Moscow
    https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-mideast-crisis-iran-russia/iranian-commander-soleimani-meets-putin-in-moscow-idUKKBN0TZ1NY20151216

    “General Soleimani held a meeting with President Putin and high-ranking Russian military and security officials during a three-day visit last week… They discussed the latest developments in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Lebanon,” Fars said, quoting unnamed sources.

    Soleimani has helped lead Iran’s efforts to fight armed insurgents in Syria and neighbouring Iraq and reports directly to the Islamic Republic’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

    Last month, Putin met Khamenei in Tehran. Iranian officials described the two-hour meeting as “unprecedented in the history of both countries.”

    Soleimani just like Netanyahu was a frequent visitor to Moscow in 2015 and 2016 and just as Netanyahu was responsible for serious reengagement of Russia in the ME. Putin would not move to Syria if he did not have a green light form both Netanyahu and Soleimani.

  98. Jack D says:
    @Desiderius

    Now that’s what this all about. Soleimani was the barely hidden puppet master pulling the strings on the Embassy attack (and planning more). His “Iraqi” militia buddy (whose real loyalty was to Iran) was photographed outside the Embassy directing the attack. The current Iranian regime was born from success in ignoring diplomatic norms and it has always been their go t0 strategy. No one ever called them on their bullshit. They always sent proxies to do their dirty work and as long as they were never caught holding the smoking gun they thought that they could keep doing this forever – the Americans and the West were allowing them to let them get away with it. Soleimani was the man most responsible for leading this strategy. He was so confident that he flew in to Baghdad in order to plan more.

    Now will his death turn Iran into a country that operates in accordance with international norms? No, nothing short of the overthrow of the regime of the mullahs will do that. But it’s a step in the right direction and even the mullahs may have to rethink their strategy, with the new understanding that there’s a personal price to be paid for such f*ckery and that merely maintaining a shred of plausible deniability is no longer going to be enough. Will they try to take revenge to the best of their ability? Sure but there’s a new calculus involved – go too far (and the definition of “too far” has just changed and the burden of proof for assigning obvious Iranian sponsored actions to Iran has lessened) and there’s going to be an even high price to be paid and the mullahs are going to pay it personally. These guys love their own asses – 72 virgins is for suckers, not for them and they will think twice about doing stuff that they understand will endanger it.

    Why hasn’t Iran been attacking the US openly every day up until now? They hate us always (Death to America is their version of In God We Trust) but they were afraid of the consequences. Has what happened to QS made them more or less afraid? Sure they will sputter about revenge but what can they actually do given the new rules of the game? This is what “restoring deterrence” means.

    • Agree: Ozymandias
    • Replies: @res
    , @eugyppius
    , @Anon
  99. That’s it! It’s over! Trump is done! Hysterics! Complete hysterics!

    So this is like, what, the 267th time Trump is completely done for? It’s like watching the McClintock effect in real time with you gals.

  100. istevefan says:

    I get the positive vibe this brings. Iran is not sympathetic, and I don’t think it can do much to retaliate. They aren’t the USSR.

    However, in this moment let’s not forget some basic things

    1) We are STILL taking in over 1 Million LEGAL immigrants per year. That is close to 3000 per day. Though they cannot vote, they are in the pipeline to become citizens for future elections. So whatever positives you get from publicly spanking Iran should be tempered by the reality that the enemy’s reinforcements continue to arrive on our shores unabated. Like the Germans in France in 1944, no matter how good your troops and equipment are, you cannot continue to hold out when the Allies are landing an average of 30K new troops per day. Eventually they will overwhelm you.

    2) Don’t forget that in the Arab/Persian and Sunni/Shia spat going on, the Sunni Arabs are not really on our side. They are the ones with the history of long term occupation of significant parts of Europe. They are the ones who are currently leading the migration waves into Europe and increasingly into the USA. They are the ones with dreams of colonizing and eventually taking over Europe and her New World offshoots.

    So while it’s nice to see that we have the ability to pull off operations like this, it’s not addressing the above problems or many others that could be listed. And unlike climate change alarmists who tell us we only have 12 years every 12 years to fix their issue, we probably don’t even have if we want to address the above.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @Jack D
  101. Jack D says:
    @Anonymous

    The comparison to the Waffen SS is very apt. Now why would a dictator (and only a dictator) need a force that is personally loyal to him and his party and not operate thru the regular military of his nation? Because if the leader calls up the head of the army and asks him to send his troops on suicide missions or to attack civilians or protected targets or to otherwise commit war crimes, the generals might balk. You need a force like this specifically to commit war crimes because you are a criminal regime that operates outside of international norms.

    The people here who are expressing love and admiration for the regime of the mullahs are nuts. Iranians themselves (some of them at least) are great but they had a civil war and the winning side of that war is an outlaw regime with a fanatical ideology that entrenched itself by a brutal willingness to kill their own people. (The same thing happened in the USSR). That regime is not synonymous with the Iranian people.

  102. Anonymous[182] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    The Soviet Union had countless weaknesses when the German Reich attacked it in 1941. Germany’s elite forces were no match for the people, the topography and the climate in the USSR.

    What is the relevance of this?

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  103. Jack D says:
    @istevefan

    Islam’s conquest phase ended a long time ago. Sure they have movements of religious fanatics that pop up now and then but most mainstream Muslim leaders are perfectly content just to rule their own personal hell holes and are not interested in missions of conquest that they know will end badly due to the mediocrity of their people. Now that most of them have reconciled themselves to the presence of Israel, they have no real beef with the West.

    Arabs are never really “on your side”. You can buy them temporarily but they won’t stay bought. But it’s possible to keep buying them (and punishing them for breaking their deal, which ever is cheaper) and the idea that there is some inevitable civilizational clash is overblown.

  104. @Jack D

    Still not a reason for good American boys to be there.

    Looks like Iraq is still a cobbled-together mess with three countries trying to be born. The whole region, from Beirut to Cairo to Tehran, is a dysfunctional hall of mirrors. Hopefully James Kunstler is right and the place can revert to its historical norm of banditry and nomads and drawing down to a sustainable tenth of the population (that will be something to watch).

    Keep them there and us here.

  105. jill says:

    Drone strikes conducted by Obama:

    “…the United States conducted a drone strike over central Yemen, killing one al-Qaeda operative. The strike was the last under Obama (that we know of). The 542 drone strikes that Obama authorized killed an estimated 3,797 people, including 324 civilians. As he reportedly told senior aides in 2011: “Turns out I’m really good at killing people. Didn’t know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine.”

    https://www.cfr.org/blog/obamas-final-drone-strike-data

    Obama killed American citizens via drone strikes:
    “16-year-old Abdulrahman Al-Aulaqi was one of three U.S. citizens killed by U.S. drone strikes in Yemen last year. Abdulrahman was eating at a restaurant with his teenage cousin when they and 5 others were torn to shreds. Abdulrahman was not accused of any crime.”

    On Tuesday, the ACLU and the Center for Constitutional Rights filed a lawsuit in U.S court against CIA and military officials over the deaths of Abdulrahman and the two other American citizens killed with drones–including his father, the controversial Anwar Al-Aulaqi–because:

    “These killings, undertaken without due process, in circumstances where lethal force was not a last resort to address a specific, concrete and imminent threat, and where the government failed to take required measures to protect bystanders, rises to a violation of the most elementary constitutional right afforded to all U.S. citizens – deprivation of life without due process of law.”

    https://www.amnestyusa.org/is-it-legal-for-the-u-s-to-kill-a-16-year-old-u-s-citizen-with-a-drone/

  106. @Jonathan Mason

    It seems that Trump was elected accidentally, when his only intention in running was to promote his brand and name recognition

    This was a popular opinion circa 2015. But Trump started losing business almost immediately after he announced his candidacy. If he were only in it for the money and brand, he’d have dropped out on some pretext before the first primary.

    • Replies: @Jasper Been
  107. MLK says:
    @El Dato

    Might as well have chosen Hillary at this point.

    That’s childish. Trump inherited a mess. No more so than in the Middle East. The Democrats abandoned our allies, and funded Iran’s regional dominance.

    Worse, since Trump took the oath, the Democrats have made it clear to Iran that it would be well rewarded for doing its Resistance part in removal of the duly elected President by any means necessary.

    Few of the commenters display any knowledge of Iran’s recent provocations, let alone those that preceded them. Soleimani wasn’t sightseeing in Bagdad. He no doubt heard the Democrats calls for another “Benghazi,” that the Democrat wished to exploit for domestic political purposes.

    As has been evident for more than a year now to anyone half intelligent paying attention, Trump turned the tables on Iran with the USG’s Maximum Pressure campaign. By this I mean that, as he has done elsewhere geopolitically and on trade, he relocated time on our side and the side of our allies. All you had to do was listen to him — “I’ve got all the time in the world . . .”

    Apply some common sense. Iran’s regional expansion was Soleimani’s baby. But for Trump’s election, Iran would have consolidated a position of regional hegemony. It shouldn’t surprise that he defended those gains gifted by the Obama administration, as it became increasingly obvious the Democrats were failing in their removal by any means coup efforts.

  108. Thea says:
    @Anonymous

    Indeed.

    The Iranian public had been polarized. The map of Amendinjad’s election looks just like Bush’s: the small towns and rural areas all voted for him while cosmopolitan cities did not. Urban Iranians have been adopting liberal views.

    This might be the sort of thing that unites them as a force to be reckoned with. Or it could tear apart the Islamic Republic. It could really go either way but one thing is clear: Americans won’t get to determine which way it goes.

  109. Thea says:
    @Jack D

    Yeah

    When Saudi Wahabists seized the mosque at Mecca the Saudi regime was happy to let rumors spread that Americans had actually done it. This lead to the destruction of our embassies in Pakistan and Libya. American lives were lost and our so-called allies enabled this result.

  110. @anon

    Iran will retaliate. Count on it. That means American blood will be on Trump’s hands, and the public may very well blame him.

    Nope. If shooting starts, Americans will rally ’round the flag and Trump’s popularity will only increase. The only people who will be blamed will be the Iranians.

    It may not be logical, but that’s how American public opinion works.

  111. BenKenobi says:
    @Jack D

    I guess that’s why mosques are popping up all over the West, eh?

  112. Thea says:
    @Desiderius

    His feed is Fascinating, thanks.

  113. @vhrm

    “This guy” couldn’t have had us soldiers killed if the us gov hadn’t needlessly and aggressively sent them far abroad.

    As for Syrians and others who are neither our citizens nor our treaty allies, the us government has no right or duty to protect them.

    As for ISIS, while this guy’s forces (and Russia’s) apparently fought against Isis, it appears that the USA, Saudi, and Israel have assisted ISIS:

    https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/isis-was-state-sponsored-by-us-allies-says-former-government-intelligence-analyst-exclusive-51a9e999c437

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/how-the-us-supports-the-islamic-state-isis-one-accidental-airdrop-vs-billions-in-covert-military-aid/5409449

    In any event, I hope that the government I used to call “our” government, the US, had nothing to do with this. Hopefully the Israelis and Saudis did their own dirty work this time. Yeah, probably not.

  114. Kylie says:
    @German_reader

    “Just shows how parochial you are, no wonder when you spend all your time whining about Latino littering or similarly important issues. Anybody who followed Mideast affairs was at least vaguely aware of the man.”

    Just goes to show how humorless you are. If you don’t recognize Steve’s (admittedly very dry) wit by now, you need to sit down and stfu. Either English is not your first (or second or third) language or you have a serious humor deficit.

    • Replies: @Mr Mox
  115. Whiskey says: • Website

    Most commenters here are nuts. Or symptomatic of the weakness of understanding that is the Dissident Right.

    Trump decreased the possibility of War with Iran. Not increased it. He whacked a top guy creating personal risk to the Iranian leadership. He did not bomb Tehran. And he retaliated against the storming of our Embassy.

    He created a clear demonstration of American capability and also that he’s unpredictable — he can and will order strikes to take out top leadership. Apparently this guy was planning more attacks against Americans. And was personally responsible for overseeing attacks that left something like 700 Americans in total dead.

    Democrats and never Trumpers were calling Trump Jimmy Carter yesterday, now he’s Cheetoh Hitler again.

    Trump is President because the old rules don’t work. Go along get along did not work in domestic policy, immigration, trade, and it has not worked in foreign policy. Invasions have not worked. Neither has rolling over and handing over pallets of cash like Obama.

    There are already demonstrations in Iran, calling for the restoration of the Monarchy and banning Islam, restoring Zoroastrianism. Nothing will come of it but Iran is fraught with fissures.

    This was probably the best move — tit for tat for the Embassy storming, a reminder that people in the area can wind up dead if they piss off Trump by doing stuff like that. Just like over-aggression is self-defeating, weakness invites attack. Trump showed he’s not weak.

    • Agree: vhrm, Abe, JMcG, Clyde, TWS
  116. res says:
    @Jack D

    That’s the pro assassination case as I see it. Seems to me like a gamble which we will only really be able to assess in hindsight.

    The con assassination case has been laid out in a number of other comments.

    Here is a timeline for the embassy attack:
    https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/01/03/world/heres-timeline-recent-turmoil-iraq/

    I think anyone who expected Trump to back down was being foolish given his personality and the example of Jimmy Carter in 1979 staring him in the face. By the way, notice that both incidents occurred less than a year before a US presidential election.

  117. eugyppius says:
    @Jack D

    They always sent proxies to do their dirty work and as long as they were never caught holding the smoking gun they thought that they could keep doing this forever – the Americans and the West were allowing them to let them get away with it. Soleimani was the man most responsible for leading this strategy.

    The US retaliated against a rocket attack on their K1 base by striking PMU positions that were like 400km away near the Syrian border. Purportedly because the rocket attack was down to Kataeb Hezbollah. But harvest from this attack was only 9 dead PMU officers; the majority killed were Iraqi police or army. The result was a quite sudden healing of internal Iraqi Shiite political divides as they united in protest and a mob attack against the US embassy.

    But now Americans have made everything so much worse. They have assassinated not only Soleimani but also the deputy PMU chief Abu Mahdi. It is beyond crazy, this desire to take an initial mistake and blindly double down, all while tweeting spurious videos of Iraqis dancing in the streets because freedom.

    The truth is that Soleimani and Iranians don’t need proxies or even devious strategies to hurt the US. The total foolishness of American actions are quite enough to create political disaster all by themselves. Now the US has done everything within its power to bring its enemies in the Middle East into perfect alignment with each other, which will mean the end of US presence in Iraq, but perhaps only after squandering much blood and treasure.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  118. I wouldn’t expect the Iranians to willingly enter a hot kinetic war, but a few false flags might open the door to one being delivered to them anyway.

    The bigger issue is that assassination of one side’s top leadership opens the door to repayment in kind. As much as we whine about Iranian sponsorship of terrorism, we actually haven’t had much of it until now. Interesting times indeed.

  119. @ben tillman

    Better question might be, could Iran have the ability to seriously obstruct the shipment of oil and gas through the straits near them (or other shipping chokepoints)?

    Do Iran and its allies have the ability to generate an electromagnetic pulse over the USA that disables much of our technology and thus severely harms our economy, healthcare, transportation, communication, public safety, and standard of living?

    How would we fare if much of the American police forces, firemen, ambulance corps, and hospitals lost much of their electronic equipment all at once? What would the already-violent and uncivilized elements in our cities do in that situation? How many tens of millions of people living in our cities don’t have firearms to protect their families and whatever food and water they have stored?

    How many people have enough nonperishable food and water stored to survive even one week with the stores closed and the roads unsafe? What do people naturally do to each other when there isn’t enough food or water to go around? I know what I would do to get food and water for our children, without hesitation.

    Here is former CIA director James Wolsey about an EMP attack:
    https://www.newsmax.com/platinum/iran-emp-attack-united-states/2019/05/20/id/916723/

    Here is a Forbes article about EMP attacks, which I won’t discount — at least in technical terms — merely because it is written by an Ariel Cohen:
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielcohen/2019/04/05/whitehouse-prepares-to-face-emp-threat/

    Woolsey and the powers that be in the us gov may want to exaggerate the threat posed by Iran and provoke a war as well. But the question is merely whether Iran technically has the ability to carry out an EMP attack on us if we attack them. Seems to be good evidence that they could do so without being stopped.

    A country like Iran, with the technology and allies it has, needn’t have intercontinental missiles to be able to harm the American people badly. It’s unfounded arrogance to think otherwise.

  120. @Jack D

    So you don’t think there will be a drastic civilizational clash when Muslims constitute, say, 25% of Europe’s population?

    Is there not a physical and cultural life-and-death civilizational clash already developing between Muslims and nonMuslims in Sweden, England, France, the Benelux countries, and Italy?

    • Replies: @Ian M.
    , @dfordoom
  121. @German_reader

    I hope you are inundated with more refugees. I hope your country collapses and becomes a colony of Turkey (which some say it already is).

    • LOL: Clyde
  122. Anon[930] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    They always sent proxies to do their dirty work and as long as they were never caught holding the smoking gun they thought that they could keep doing this forever – the Americans and the West were allowing them to let them get away with it. Soleimani was the man most responsible for leading this strategy. He was so confident that he flew in to Baghdad in order to plan more.

    WTF? Soleimani has been on the front lines in Syria for ages. If Pompeo is assassinated the next time he visits some other country this would be more in line with your description.

    They hate us always (Death to America is their version of In God We Trust) but they were afraid of the consequences.

    OK, I think I’ll just leave this up and let you think about it a bit.

  123. Lurker says:
    @German_reader

    I think perhaps Steve was mocking the more typical MSM journalist.

    • Agree: Bardon Kaldian
  124. Ian Smith says:

    The death of Baghdadi and the effective end of ISIS was a perfect opening to wash our hands of the Fertile Crescent and then Trump pulls this. This was the last straw for me; I’m doing a write-in for Tulsi this year.

  125. Mr. Anon says:
    @GW

    @LondonBob

    Quit cucking for your Islamic masters you worthless Brit.

    You would prefer that he cuck for the same people you’re cucking for then?

  126. anon[353] • Disclaimer says:

    Trump has had it out for Iran since day 1. He withdrew from the treaty.

    Massive unilateral sanctions are economic warfare and highly provocative. So what has changed?

    Other than that this highlights George Bush more or less reduced Iraq to an Iranian vassal state. Which we knew.

    Iran needs the sanctions on its oil sales lifted. Any retaliation by them that doesn’t address that is meaningless.

    Frankly, Trump’s Iran fixation was always suspect, and I was concerned about what his post reelections would have been. The only reason we aren’t already in a shooting war with Iran is that some element of the Swamp doesn’t want it. Time to get it all out there is as good as ever. And that doesn’t mean war but whatever was the script.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
  127. Lurker says:
    @GW

    A US attack on an Iranian (Shia) would appear, at least superficially, to be in the interests of Saudi Arabia (Sunni) and ISIS/Al Qaeda (Sunni).

    Whereas most of our unwelcome Muslims in the UK are also Sunnis from Pakistan (presumably those Islamic masters) but you’re saying they’re secretly supporters of Shia Iran?

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
  128. istevefan says:
    @Jack D

    Now that most of them have reconciled themselves to the presence of Israel, they have no real beef with the West.

    Now that most of them have reconciled themselves to the presence of Israel and have moved on instead to the mass immivasion of Europe, you have no real beef with them.

    • LOL: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @Anonymous
  129. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jack D

    The people here who are expressing love and admiration for the regime of the mullahs are nuts.

    Nobody is doing that. Saying so is your deceitful ploy to conflate a desire by us to simply mind our own goddamned business with supporting a foreign regime.

    Iranians themselves (some of them at least) are great but they had a civil war and the winning side of that war is an outlaw regime with a fanatical ideology that entrenched itself by a brutal willingness to kill their own people.

    A civil war? Sure that’s one way to describe a largely popular rebellion against a monarchy that was viewed as a foreign puppet-regime.

    (The same thing happened in the USSR).

    And was there any particular group of people who were vastly over-represented in that?

    If you want a war with Iran, make Aliyah, and fight it with your own damned country, not ours.

  130. Anonymous[421] • Disclaimer says:

    Of course, Donald Trump made his fortune from NYC construction and real estate.
    It has been said that no one can be a serious player in these businesses without Mob connections.
    Basically the Donald in full made-up ‘Don’ mode has just called in a hit – in order to ‘encourage the others’, as the saying goes.

  131. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jack D

    Arabs are never really “on your side”.

    I’m beginning to think maybe there’s another group that fits that description too.

  132. Anonymous[421] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    The *real* problem is their propensity to export their surplus population to Europe – and the contemptible gullibility and foolishness of the Eurotrash (Economist) elite in accepting and encouraging it.

  133. There’s one possible further motivation for Trump’s action I haven’t yet seen mentioned in the media coverage.

    Kim is, apparently, about to take a major step in escalating his military capabilities.

    Could Trump be demonstrating just how vulnerable Kim and his military leaders might be, and how willing he, Trump, is to decapitate a rogue regime?

    Kim and Trump are, of course, the best of friends. But sometimes even great friends need a little assassination to work out their differences.

    • Agree: Thea
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    , @Jesse
  134. fnn says:
    @Desiderius

    “…deterrence was never restored…”

    I guess it was a shame that deterrence was never restored after the 1967 attack on the USS Liberty.

  135. @Steve Sailer

    From what I can tell from reading the MSM, he was mild-mannered Military expert renowned for his humanity and love of children, puppies, and long walks on the beach. I”m not sure why Trump killed him, but because Trump did it, it must be bad.

    I’m also puzzled why Iranian military leaders are in Iraq. And what’s up with Iraq? We never hear about them. Are they a democracy? An ally? Are we still giving them Billions? We never get any info.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  136. S says:

    There’s a lot of unfortunate historic parallels lining up with these events, some ‘bad mojo’.

    In ancient Rome some two thousand plus years ago there was the First Triumvirate which informally in political alliance ruled over the Republic.

    As depicted in the three sculptures below, it consisted of the Roman billionaire and real estate speculator Crassus (center), the General Pompey (right), and Crassus’ protege, the up and coming Julius Caesar (left).

    Things started to go badly for the Triumvirate when Crassus made the disastrous decision to launch a military campaign against Parthia, ie present day Iran.

    The result was the complete annihilation of Crassus’s legions.

    What followed was civil war, political assassination, the fall of the Roman Republic resulting in a centuries long dictatorship, and the ultimate personal destruction of all three individuals who had constituted the First Triumvirate.

    It was a catastrophe for Rome.

    Some two thousand years later a paralleling triumvirate rules over a hypothetical New Rome, the United States, which at present is poised to attack Iran.

    As pictured below, this modern day political alliance consist of the US billionaire and real estate speculator Donald Trump (front), the military veteran and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo (far right), and Trump’s protege, the up and coming Jared Kushner (standing immediately behind Trump).

    Learning from the past, the best thing each of these three could do is quietly resign and go home and enjoy their families.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Triumvirate

  137. @Buzz Mohawk

    Please do not conflate the actions of leadership

    Sorry, it’s not just your leadership. I spent much of last night reading Twitter, the amount of chauvinistic Americans celebrating this was nauseating. And lots of commenters even here are defending it as well, with total disregard for the consequences.
    If the Trump phenomenon has proved anything, it’s that American nationalism as it actually is, not like a few commenters here might like it to be, is inherently tied up with external aggression. An awful lot of Americans think nothing about casually dishing out lethal violence abroad, are indeed celebrating it, because in their warped world view noble America is somehow always aggrieved, wronged, exploited. Nothing learned at all from Vietnam, nothing learned at all from Iraq, America is still inherently good, always in the right. Just pathetic.

  138. @Jack D

    ” the winning side of that war is an outlaw regime with a fanatical ideology that entrenched itself by a brutal willingness to kill their own people. (The same thing happened in the USSR). ”

    No, you are completely wrong.

    The Russian Empire was taken over by NON-RUSSIAN revolutionaries. Yes, WW1 was a destabilizing event, but the Bolsheviks who eventually won the civil war were as “Russian” as chow mein.

    The USSR in its early decades was ruled by a hostile Jewish elite, not by Russians. Even Stalin was not Russian, but rather a Georgian with a Jewish father.

    In no sense can Trotsky (etc) said to have ‘killed their own people’ by marching Russians, Belorussians, Chechens, Dagestanis and the rest into the gulags.

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
    , @Ian M.
  139. @El Dato

    “Might as well have chosen Hillary at this point.”

    On immigration and trade I support President Blumpf!. The Blood Queen would’ve brought back her rituals to the White House and conjured Belial for spiritual guidance. HRC would’ve been much worse, especially for straight white male whitey.

    • Replies: @Ozymandias
  140. @Anonymous

    “the British proles are among the nastiest and worst people in the world”

    While I disagree, there’s an iota of truth there in that the Brits, incapable (without risking imprisonment) of doing anything about the increasing Muslim presence (and all that means) in their cities and towns, have an unheroic tendency to cheer Americans or Israelis who take robust or even murderous action against Middle Eastern Muslims.

  141. nebulafox says:
    @German_reader

    They were going to build nukes anyway. The last couple of decades of US foreign policy deepened the desire. It did not create it: the Shah wanted a bomb, too.

  142. A123 says:
    @res

    I think anyone who expected Trump to back down was being foolish given his personality and the example of Jimmy Carter in 1979 staring him in the face. By the way, notice that both incidents occurred less than a year before a US presidential election.

    This appears to be a miscalculation by Khameni. It certainly looks like the embassy attack was arranged for domestic consumption to bolster his popularity back home.

    If Barack Hussein was still President, it would have worked. The establishment State Department would have had Obama on a teleprompter apologizing to Khameni. However, with Trump as President, the whole thing has backfired. Khameni failed to keep the embassy, and he also lost a senior terrorist. The net result is that the weak Ayatollah is now even weaker. The real risk is what additional crazy things might Khameni do before the Iranian people can get rid of him.

    The troops and officers of the IRGC cannot want to die for an insane Ayatollah. The most likely outcome is that they will get rid of the religious hierarchy and take over themselves. Once the religious extremism and revolutionary dogma is pushed out, the reformed result will be an Iranian “Capitalistic” Guard Corps. Not necessarily a friend of the U.S., but a huge leap forward for rational diplomatic relations.

    PEACE 😇

  143. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:

    Trump should have just killed the Iraqi guy (Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, deputy-commander of the Iraqi-based pro-Iran People’s Mobilization Forces) who was going to meet Sean Connery at the airport as a warning shot.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  144. Cynics might wonder why a president, who has generally – even if not always rhetorically or in his selection of cabinet members – sought to decelerate America’s military stance all around the globe, would suddenly, in a presidential election year, escalate with a military action that Iran will certainly respond to in bloody fashion.

    If Iran does respond to this action, and it almost certainly will, Trump will benefit politically – at least in the short term. And perhaps that is all he cares about.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
  145. As an American who wants to see the end of Jew control of my country I hope this leads to total war. I don’t see any other way to end this traitorous 911 false-flag orchestrating regime than by the US getting into a war that causes the mindless fucks that are Americans to sit up and take notice.

    There is no way the US can prevail in a war against Iran with out invading the country. To do that would require massive conscription. The Jews who run the US know that forcing Americans to fight on the other side of the world to institute Jew supremacy will be the end of their control of the US.

    I realize that real war could result in misery and even possible death for me, but at this stage in the game I think it’s worth it.

    • Replies: @Anon
  146. @Ozymandias

    “I draw the line at poorly drawn graffiti. Dude had to go.”

    Drawing blood over aesthetic principles. I agree.

  147. Jack D says:
    @eugyppius

    united in protest and a mob attack against the US embassy.

    The “protest” was a coordinated military strike. There is no “perfect” alignment in the ME – there are only temporary alliances. Iraq is physically stuck between Iran and American influence emanating from Kuwait and the carriers in the Gulf. They are not going to be able to get rid of us even if they want to, and (some of them) don’t really want to become an Iranian vassal state.

    Maybe they will redouble their efforts to take the embassy but Trump has shown that he is not going to let it be taken and the US has the military power to prevent that. The “embassy” is no ordinary embassy but more like a fortress.

    • Replies: @eugyppius
    , @ThreeCranes
  148. Jack D says:
    @istevefan

    This is false. As we have seen with Labour in the UK and Omar in the US, Muslims, while perhaps somewhat reconciled that the destruction of Israel is not possible in the short run, do not favor it either and to the extent that they have influence in the West that influence tends to push the nations that they live in away from support of Israel.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  149. @nebulafox

    They were going to build nukes anyway.

    There’s zero proof for that, it’s just a lame talking point to explain away Trump’s disastrous policies. There was a nuclear agreement and everybody but the Americans adhered to it and thought it was working. And note: Trump and his gang never brought up any specific points in the agreement which in their opinion should have been re-negotiated. Instead they opted for a policy which brought in many elements completely unrelated to the nuke issue (Iran’s ballistic missiles – regarded by the Iranians as crucial for deterrence -, Iran’s proxies) and whose goal was obviously to force regime change or total surrender by Iran.
    What’s now going to happen, is entirely due to American choices for continual escalation, and most of the world won’t be buying your propaganda. You’ll be way more isolated than even in 2003.

    • Agree: Jonathan Mason
    • Replies: @nebulafox
    , @Reg Cæsar
  150. @Pincher Martin

    My initial thought was-because of the elections….

  151. @res

    “I think anyone who expected Trump to back down was being foolish”

    Is it too harsh to say Trump is a Zionist tool? I support the Orange One in his battle against his vile domestic enemies. But in terms of Middle East policy he is a captive of the demonic neoconservative cult.

  152. @Jack D

    most mainstream Muslim leaders are perfectly content just to rule their own personal hell holes and are not interested in missions of conquest that they know will end badly due to the mediocrity of their people.

    That’s like the Elephant Man being content about not being the most eligible bachelor around town. That’s not contentment – it’s resignation re their relative military capabilities today. Saddam moved because he thought Iraq was powerful enough to attempt to unify Arabia under his rule, while the US would be leery of stumbling into another Vietnam.

    It’s not even unique to Arabs or Muslims. Outside of the politically-correct West, everyone recognizes that a national leader’s path to lasting fame comes through territorial conquest. A peaceful surrender offered by the country whose territory is being targeted is fine, given that what these leaders seek isn’t war itself, but the fruits of war.

  153. eugyppius says:
    @Jack D

    The “protest” was a coordinated military strike.

    There is no point getting into semantic debates but in this universe “coordinated military strikes” generally are not understood to take shape from disaffected crowds of people who have just attended funerals. Coordinated military strikes do not involve sit-ins, graffiti, burning tires, hurled rocks, the chanting of slogans, countless iphone videos of seized trophies; they are most often not repelled with weapons such as tear gas. The only thing military about these protestors was the uniforms most of them were wearing, but then again this was a protest with a large PMU contingent.

    But it is interesting that they got as far as they did only because Iraqi security forces at the perimeter seem to have let them through. The Iraqi army has just condemned the assassination: what happens if American soldiers can no longer serve in any proximity to Iraqi security forces or depend on them even in the limited way they do now? At the bare minimum they are going to be opening a lot more gates, I would say.

    They are not going to be able to get rid of us even if they want to, and (some of them) don’t really want to become an Iranian vassal state.

    Well right now they must be thinking, it can hardly be worse than being an American vassal state, with the Americans still carrying out air strikes against their soldiers and officials.

    • Agree: Colin Wright
    • Replies: @Jack D
  154. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @El Dato

    You just don’t assassinate top generals of countries with which you are not in a live war relationship.

    If the drone strike happened in Iran, you might have a point, this guy was killed in Iraq, where he had just fomented an attack on the U.S. embassy. The embassy attack was the escalation, and a particularly provocative one by Iran, given history.

    That said, at this point, if I were Trump, I would declare victory and pull American troops out of the region.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    , @Corvinus
  155. @Jack D

    You and I don’t often see eye to eye but your take is right on this one. And not just because of Israel. People forget, OIL.

    I lived through the world-wide upheaval in financial markets caused by the first oil embargo imposed by OPEC. Leaders in the West vowed, “Never again”.

    Even China, heavily dependent on imports to fuel her industrial revolution, benefits from a stable oil market. There will be no response from that quarter. And Russia? She exports oil. We will hear nothing but obligatory words of protest.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  156. Sean says:

    Qasem Soleimani may have been the second most important man in Iran. That means he had rivals in the Iranian power structure, enemies who must be really unhappy with his expedient demise.

    • Replies: @Neoconned
  157. Anonymous[292] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    So Jews work to bring in Muzzies that want them gone and hate WNs like me that leave them alone and would prefer Israel prosper (the better to attract them there and out of our hair).

    They are not happy unless they are unhappy. That’s for sure.

  158. @Jack D

    “Arabs hate Iran”

    Don’t you mean Sunnis hate Shia? Plenty of Shia scattered about the ME, including Saudi and Iraq.

    I’m impressed at how you can wag the US dog, though. We’ve gone full circle since 1979. Remember how Saddam used gas against the Iranians without a peep from “the West”, then a few years later Saddam was the enemy, not an Iran bled dry by the war?

    There seems to be a pattern, that any ME country with a functioning government/military and poor relations with Israel sooner or later gets attacked by the US, be it Shia, Sunni or secular.

    The two glaring exceptions are Egypt and Saudi Arabia. I tend to assume that since the Aswan dam was built, Egypt is uniquely vulnerable, as breaking the dam would more or less drown all the Egyptians and demolish Cairo. In the case of Saudi I suppose all that lovely US hardware has backdoors/kill switches/GPS tweaks built in, to prevent it being used “inappropriately”.

    • Replies: @Ian M.
    , @Ian M.
  159. If the intelligence was accurate, I can understand why Trump did it.

    I don’t think I would’ve done it, however.

    I really hope there isn’t a major war. The fact such a war would serve neither side’s interests would seem to make it less likely. But humans are pretty dumb, and both sides are being provocative.

    Kinda worrying.

    The (aircraft carrier) USS Harry S Truman was apparently last listed as being in “the North Arabian Sea”, as of December 30th. That could have some relevance.

  160. Looks like Uncle Sam has been spying on the Israelis:

    https://pjmedia.com/trending/obama-administration-stopped-israel-from-assassinating-soleimani-in-2015-report-says/

    Not that there’s anything wrong with that, of course.

  161. Mr Mox says:
    @Kylie

    Just goes to show how humorless you are. If you don’t recognize Steve’s (admittedly very dry) wit by now, you need to sit down and stfu. Either English is not your first (or second or third) language or you have a serious humor deficit.

    It has been said that a German will laugh three times of a joke: when hearing the joke, when the joke is explained to him, and finally when he gets it. (ok- make that two times)

  162. anon[236] • Disclaimer says:
    @El Dato

    OTOH, you also don’t occupy embassies of countries with which you are not in a live war relationship (and even then),

    Didn’t the Iranians do that very thing back in the 1970’s?

  163. @German_reader

    “Anyway, this is very bad, it will probably lead to a terrible war and also inundate Europe with millions more refugees (genuine ones actually!). ”

    Simple countermeasures as invented by your nation can EASILY cope with that:

    Show some backbone and sing it!

    • LOL: TWS
  164. Dumbo says:
    @ben tillman

    China and Russia have. Anyway, just the economic crisis, tons of refugees and cost in dollars and human lives that such a demented war would cause, is reason enough to be worried. And all that for what? So that Israel is the only nuclear power in the region and have only countries in rubbles around it?

  165. @El Dato

    ‘… You just don’t assassinate top generals of countries with which you are not in a live war relationship. Before yesterday the live war relationship was still a bit deniable. No longer…’

    You do if you want to start a war but don’t even have the moral courage to just say so.

    We need Iran to start the war. That way, we can be ‘defending ourselves.’

  166. @Dave Pinsen

    ‘If the drone strike happened in Iran, you might have a point, this guy was killed in Iraq, where he had just fomented an attack on the U.S. embassy. The embassy attack was the escalation, and a particularly provocative one by Iran, given history.’

    …and all we’d done is mount airstrikes across Iraq, killing twenty five people.

    Who would get upset about that?

    From another commentator, here’s our sequence:

    ‘… events appear to have escalated from the 25 December killing of five PMF guys on the Syria-Iraq border by an unattributed drone or missile strike. Our media is doing its best to obscure this event as the probable starting point. Two days later on 27 December, the rocket fire near Kirkuk killed the US contractor. Then came the strike on KH troops back out in the West and now the assassination of Soleimani et al.

    Israel probably launched the strike on Christmas Day while the US was doing Christmas. But that strike must have been permitted/facilitated in some way by the US. This has been going on for at least six months. Israel has been killing Iraqi PMU guys in Syria and Iraq trying to generate a response that could be escalated into a US-Iran war. In this case, it may finally have worked with KH, knowing that the US was allowing Israeli strikes, responding against T1. Whether Trump is complicit with this concerted drive to war or whether he is simply being played by the Israel-Firsters is hard to say…’

  167. Journalism is announcing Qasem Soleimani is dead when you never knew he was alive.

    Didn’t he do that Top Forty countdown on the radio years ago?

    Qasem Soleimani = Slam IQ, i.e., so mean!

  168. @Lurker

    “most of our unwelcome Muslims in the UK are also Sunnis from Pakistan “

    Quite a few Shia, too, admittedly outnumbered .

  169. @candid_observer

    But it could also demonstrate to Kim what might happen to him if he didn’t have nukes.

  170. vhrm says:
    @reiner Tor

    Well, Iran is not THAT much different, is it?

    It can launch a bunch of missiles at targets in the gulf region. They can mess with shipping in the Gulf. They can cyber attack.

    They can continue covert “terrorist” style bombings.

    All the while their infrastructure is highly vulnerable to air assault.

    So their offensive capability is still just “kill a couple of thousand people”. Not that i want to see that happen, but it’s not exactly tanks rolling through Europe.

    a concise statement on their capabilities: https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Releases/Release/Article/2021009/iran-military-power-report-statement/

  171. @Anonymous

    ‘Trump should have just killed the Iraqi guy (Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, deputy-commander of the Iraqi-based pro-Iran People’s Mobilization Forces) who was going to meet Sean Connery at the airport as a warning shot.’

    You need to understand that we’re trying to start a war — not avoid one.

  172. Anonymous[375] • Disclaimer says:

    Was he a character in the latest Star Wars movie? His name sounds like a Star Wars character.

    • LOL: Ian M.
  173. Anon[210] • Disclaimer says:

    We have a policy rule. You attack our embassies or our soil, you get whacked. That’s it.

    We’re also following the bully rule. If you cringe before a bully, he just hits you again and again. You have to retaliate to make him stop. You have to make him pay a cost and make him realize the cost is too great for him to try anything further. Trump just reminded the Iranian regime that they’re nothing but a two-bit peckerwood bunch of crooks, and he can drone them again. Yes, their leaders are frightened by this. We just let them know our intelligence is good enough to figure out who’s guilty of ordering the attacks on the embassy, finding that person, and wiping him out despite his protective entourage.

    We also did this to send a warning to North Korea’s rocket boy to shut up and behave.

    This is the world of Realpolitik, people. Man up and toughen up. You’ve been brainwashed by the Democrats into no longer thinking like a responsible person. The Democrats have made you into cowards.

    • Agree: Jack D
  174. Jesse says:

    A few years back, I went through a brief obsession with the – remarkably catty – world of Iranian domestic politics, so I knew. I was surprised, FWIW.

    I just don’t get the obsession with Iran from the warmongers. They’re awful, but it’s their country and their region.

    I do, however, wonder if the current movement against this war has been captured. During college, I tried to get into the anti war meetings. I soon got drummed out by some deeply unpleasant people who weren’t against war per se; they just really wanted to kill all Israelis/Jews instead.

    That does make me wonder how many neurotic neocons aren’t panicking about Iran itself so much as the most vocal members of their “anti war” movement. It’s definitely something to consider when you see all these deeply unpopular wars being crammed through.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
  175. Neoconned says:
    @German_reader

    As strongly as I hate war and want the neocon functionaries in Washington to be put on trial I knew things were over the line when Trump recognized Israel’s ownership of Jerusalem and was saber rattling with Iran.

    Its a matter of time….but I dont think Iran is suicidal. They wont take the bait.

    Note the embassy occupation and this are both proxies.

    Ive never heard of this dude & I know a lot about the Middle East. It’ll probably be a bunch of fist shaking & the Iranians will probably target Israelis rather than America in retaliation…

    In summary: as much as I dont want war I figure its like the build up of the 1930s….with japana
    And Germany…..war will come 1 way or the other.

    • Replies: @eugyppius
  176. Jesse says:
    @candid_observer

    Can someone explain why China’s not taking the lead on this one? It’s their area, their border, and they are – at least – the regional power. So why does the US need to be talking about this at all?

  177. Neoconned says:
    @Sean

    Good point…..

    Which may mean if we’re lucky this will jist all peter out into fist shaking and nothing else.

  178. Didn’t he host American TopForty

    • Replies: @danand
  179. Anon[210] • Disclaimer says:
    @2stateshmustate

    “There is no way the US can prevail in a war against Iran with out invading the country. To do that would require massive conscription.”

    You haven’t been paying attention. We fought and won against regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq without massive conscription. We sent in just enough professional military to do the job, and did the rest by making promises to the enemies of the regime that the country will be their afterwards, and by bribing the regime’s allies to sit out the fight. We took advantage of their internal divisions and innate greed, and it worked like a charm. We can do so again in Iran. A lot of people in Iran hate the regime.

  180. @German_reader

    when you never knew he was alive.

    As the USA has become increasingly multicultural, and in my line work of business development (sales), more and more of the people I deal with, English is a second language. There English can be excellent but one area that tends to lack comprehension is a satirical comment. Maybe Steve needs to put some wink wink emoticons to better portray the sentiment for our ESL readers and the smart-alecky deficient. 😉 😉

    • Agree: LondonBob
    • Replies: @Jack D
  181. @SunBakedSuburb

    “The Blood Queen would’ve brought back her rituals to the White House and conjured Belial for spiritual guidance.”

    From the Philistine “balal.” First L silent and usually omitted, ba’al. Often shortened to Baal. Means owner or “lord.” Zebub is an Ethiopian word for a biting cattle fly. “Baal Zebub” (Beelzebub) is literal for “lord of the flies.”

  182. It will be interesting to see who the Iranians knock off in retaliation.

    My guess is, initially, some obscure general who is visiting Latin America or Asia.

    They’ll wait till Trump leaves office to go after Kushner, or one of his kids.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    , @Anonymous
  183. @ScarletNumber

    most people in Iran haven’t heard of Pence and Biden either most likely. But its not a great idea or wack Pence in Mexico city.

  184. S says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    ..whether it [Gone With the Wind] was also seen as antiwar propaganda, I do not know.

    It might of been a bit of foreshadowing (or predictive programming as some call it) as there are a great many close parallels between the US Civil War as depicted in GWTW and WWII, specifically between the quasi nationalism of the Southern Confederacy and Germany, and the monolithic United States and Soviet Union.

    Some of the parallels:

    1) War starts in 1861 and 1941 respectively for the United States and Soviet Union and goes badly for both for about the first two years.

    2) Mid-war, 1863 and 1943 approximately, with the invasion of the Capitalist US and Communist USSR by the armies of the Confederacy and Germany respectively, and their deepest penetration being achieved, the point of apparent existential threat is reached for the two continental super-states.

    The titanic battles of Gettysburg and Stalingrad turn the tide, each accompanied by important near simultaneous parallel victories at Vicksburg, and (very roughly) Kursk.

    I say ‘apparent’ existential threat as in reality neither the Southern Confederacy or Germany had any real chance to win for the reason Clark Gable had mentioned in GWTW, ie not enough industrialisation.

    Besides that, if either the US or USSR had started to collapse, the British Empire and US/UK would have directly intervened with troops sent to the respective failing front, in the US Civil War on the side of the Union, and in WWII on the side of the USSR.

    3) Near the end both the Confederacy and Germany have a rumored ‘redoubt’ where a last stand is to take place. For the Confederacy this was the ‘Trans-Mississippi Redoubt’ and for Germany this was the ‘Alpine Redoubt’. As is known, it doesn’t happen.

    4) Following the defeats of the Southern Confederacy and Germany in the Spring of 1865 and 1945 respectively, the intention is to try the defeated foes political and military leadership for ‘crimes against humanity’ involving ‘the camps’.

    These plans largely fall through for the Confederacy, not so for Germany.

    And that’s just some of the parallels.

  185. nebulafox says:
    @German_reader

    The CIA was quite aware that the Shah wanted a bomb back in the 1970s, because his pro-American sentiments aside, he wasn’t stupid and could read a map. To suggest the mullahs wouldn’t want a bomb project too, especially after Iraq and even moreso what we did to Gaddafi a decade after he gave up his nuclear ambitions, deeply insults their intelligence. I would want one if I was Iranian, too. It’s a deeply logical thing to want to have considering their strategic situation, even before the rise of the neocons or the Islamic Republic.

    And when, in my entire history as an Unz commentator, did I ever say that Operation IRANIAN FREEDOM was anything but an unambiguously terrible idea???

    • Replies: @German_reader
    , @utu
  186. Jack D says:
    @eugyppius

    You sound like the Washington Post – the guys bashing down the gates of the Embassy and setting fires were “mourners” according to them. I guess Muslims have different mourning customs.

    Two weeks ago the Iraqis were demonstrating against undue Iranian influence in their country. This week they hate America. Next week they’ll hate Iran again. I guess they just hate everyone. They really don’t need to like us, they just need to treat us with proper respect and understand that actions have consequences so that if you get a little too excited when you are “mourning” and start setting things on fire or if your troops guarding the perimeter of the Embassy are “on their lunch break”, then you might have to pay the consequences later. It’s like the British who were informed that it was an old Indian custom to throw widows onto their husband’s funeral pyre. The British said that was fine, but it was an old English custom to hang anyone who participated in this, so the Indians could keep their customs as long as they let the British keep theirs. It’s an old American custom to kill anyone who tries to kill Americans.

    • LOL: black sea
    • Replies: @eugyppius
  187. eugyppius says:
    @Neoconned

    Note the embassy occupation

    There was no embassy occupation. Protestors including many PMU officers gathered after a funeral for some of their brothers-in-arms who had been killed in a US military attack on their positions on the Syrian border. They penetrated an outer perimeter and then left.

    Ive never heard of this dude & I know a lot about the Middle East.

    He is a national war-hero in Iran who was even mooted a few times as a presidential candidate. He headed the Iranian Quds forces: the intelligence and special operations wing of the Revolutionary Guards. The rough equivalent would be an unprovoked Iranian assassination of Mike Pompeo. Imagine what that would lead to.

  188. nebulafox says:
    @jimmyriddle

    And you know what? That’s a deal I’m more than happy to take. Soleimani was a deeply skilled, charismatic figure who the Iranians are going to have a hard time replacing. Anyone they likely bump off from the Swamp in response is someone we’d probably be better off without.

    The only risk here is that they go too far, retaliate on US soil openly, and give the neocons swarming around Trump an excuse to launch IRANIAN FREEDOM. But the Iranian regime is many things: suicidal isn’t one of them.

  189. @Steve Sailer

    You’re in fat company.

    • Replies: @indocon
  190. @nebulafox

    There’s zero evidence that Iran still has an active nuke programme, everything known indicates it was ended more than a decade ago (iirc around 2003/04). Now of course one can’t exclude completely that the Iranians are hiding something or have retained some capabilities for re-starting it…but that’s what the inspections regime of the JCPOA was supposed to check, the agreement which Trump has ripped up, without having any alternative except embarking on another deranged regime change project (because that’s what his policies amount to, no matter how deep in denial people like you are about it).

    did I ever say that Operation IRANIAN FREEDOM was anything but an unambiguously terrible idea???

    No, you just wrote that it was ballsy of Trump to have Soleimani assassinated, which indicates you don’t care about the possible consequences of this reckless action or haven’t thought about them.

  191. Clyde says:

    “Invade the world, invite the world” was properly credited to Steve Sailor today. At 206PM by Mark Steyn subbing on Rush Limbaugh show. He called Steve Sailor a commentator.

  192. eugyppius says:
    @Jack D

    Two weeks ago the Iraqis were demonstrating against undue Iranian influence in their country.

    Were we to be inundated with a different flavor of warmongering propaganda, we would be reading that the Iraqis who attacked the Najaf consulate were American proxies taking part in a coordinated military strike. Anyway this is ridiculous because Soleimani-as-protest-organizer is an even weaker pretense than Soleimani-as-Treasury-certified-terrorist for this assassination.

    It’s an old American custom to kill anyone who tries to kill Americans.

    Presumably the Iranians will feel entitled to a similar custom and we’ll be very lucky if the consequence, after several stages of escalation, isn’t something that makes the 2003 Iraq war look like a mild police action.

    • Agree: Charon
    • Replies: @Jack D
  193. Jack D says:
    @George Taylor

    Writing doesn’t convey the same amount of information as speech, especially in person speech where you have facial expressions, gestures and body language to help get your meaning across. And humor, especially irony and sarcasm often doesn’t translate well across cultures. Even some stuff the British find funny falls completely flat with Americans and vice versa.

    Other cultures use either more or less sarcasm or use it in different situations. If an Israeli sees you standing too close to the curb on a busy street, he won’t say, “Excuse me sir, you’re standing a bit close there and may want to step back for your own safety.” He’ll say, ” Hey, maybe you want to get killed?” He means this as a gesture of concern for you, but it’s hard for Americans to understand it that way.

  194. Anonymous[206] • Disclaimer says:
    @El Dato

    you also don’t occupy embassies of countries with which you are not in a live war relationship

    Yeah, there’s that.

    I’m interested in the domestic media’s decision paralysis between playing it as Wag The Dog or Lawless Assassination Murder Warcrime Warfare (Euro media always flocks to the latter even if Obama is prez). It’s not really possible to do both at once because the former implies the target did not have significant military value; so you are basically accusing POTUS of droning a nobody.

    btw Steve just got quoted by name by Mark Steyn on radio re: Invade/Invite, characterizing it as the sentiment of Trump’s more-or-less foundation bloc in the base (but, pretty obvious he himself is quite jolly about this Iranian guy getting smoked)

    I predict Iran does nothing, even though desperate for oil sanction bucks… The young protesters in south Iraq surely are causing them headaches and headed east next, but bargaining that a Washington impeachment proceeding was real was a foreign-wacko type of cognitive error.

  195. Jack D says:
    @eugyppius

    We are not going to fight a WWI style trench war with the Iranians. If the Iranians were so stupid as to actually try it they wouldn’t last a week before they were pounded to ribbons and they know it better than you do.

    • Agree: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @eugyppius
  196. @YetAnotherAnon

    The Civil War was a big thing when I moved to the South in 1968. I mean, in the north nobody ever talked about it. When I moved to the south in 1968, not long after the Civil War Centennial celebrations, other kids in my elementary school asked me if I were a yankee or a rebel. Having moved from the north, I gave the wrong answer.

    • Replies: @anon
  197. nebulafox says:
    @Jesse

    >A few years back, I went through a brief obsession with the – remarkably catty – world of Iranian domestic politics, so I knew. I was surprised, FWIW.

    People who think of Iran as this totalitarian monolith of Twelver Shi’a fanatics fantasizing about nuking the Little Satan couldn’t be more wrong: it’s really a classic case of (often corrupt) competing power interests that are more often than not at odds with each other. The nuclear program is part and parcel of that, and using it as a political chip is arguably even more important than direct military usage. The Iranians don’t exactly have a Seoul to hold hostage, after all.

    Quds is an important power block in that game. That’s why Soleimani’s death is so important. He was both really, really good both at his line of work, and at keeping Quds at the forefront of domestic politics, going back to the 1990s when he pressed Khatami. Any replacement is bound to be a downgrade.

    >I just don’t get the obsession with Iran from the warmongers. They’re awful, but it’s their country and their region.

    Israel and Saudi Arabia both have a very strong influence in the Beltway, and both of them have deeply rational reasons to contain Iran: and if possible, to get the US to go do a regime change for them. At our expense and human resources, of course.

    >That does make me wonder how many neurotic neocons aren’t panicking about Iran itself so much as the most vocal members of their “anti war” movement. It’s definitely something to consider when you see all these deeply unpopular wars being crammed through.

    I expect little from the neocons, but if Trump can’t perceive just how unpopular a war with Iran would be unless the Iranians openly attack US soil (and they won’t), he deserves to lose in 2020. The rounding around the flag dynamic the American public displays, while still real, has changed significantly in the past decade. It’s going to take an *actual* attack against the US to get it going. Quoting “human rights” as a reason to enact a regime change, or paranoia about what a country MIGHT do, or even their own limited military activities doesn’t fly anymore, whether it is Russia or China or Iran or North Korea. That’s why we didn’t end up with Operation SYRIAN FREEDOM, despite both parties heavily favoring it in 2013. That’s part of why we ended up with Candidate Trump. DC absolutely hates this and does everything they can to subvert it and get around it, but they can’t pull another 2003. Their credit is too shot for that.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  198. @jbwilson24

    Even Stalin was not Russian, but rather a Georgian with a Jewish father.

    Stalin didn’t have a Jewish father.

  199. AndrewR says:
    @German_reader

    Yeah this is a major self-own for Sailer. Dude ran Quds Force for over 20 years. Not an insignificant character.

  200. Anonymous[330] • Disclaimer says:
    @ThreeCranes

    Actually, my suspicion is that industry and commerce, in the advanced nations at least, have turned a corner, and the centrality of oil to fuel economies will wane, in both relative and absolute terms, in an accelerating fashion, from hereon in.
    It’s only a matter of time before eVs replace ICEs. The rest will surely follow. Basically oil will be a declining asset in the future.

    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
  201. @Faraday's Bobcat

    No doubt he’s power hungry too, and had an inclination he could win and that it would be all worth it.

  202. utu says:
    @nebulafox

    Who was behind Iranian Revolution?

    At the same time the secular government of Afghanistan was being destabilized by the support Islamists were getting form CIA to make trouble for USSR and ultimately to draw them in.

    Somebody helped to destabilize Iran. Could it be USSR? I doubt because they ddid not deal with the Isalmists and they had relatively good relations with Shah. However Shah himself believed that Brits were behind Iranian Revolution. And indeed Brits continued to collaborate with Khomeini’s regime:

    Islamic Revolution in Iran: Cultivating, then Arming the Ayatollah
    http://markcurtis.info/2017/02/01/islamic-revolution-in-iran-cultivating-then-arming-the-ayatollah/

    In short term Israel was making the best of the fact that Iran was the US ally by wheeling and dealing and squeezing as much a possible in terms of profits from Iran and possibly even helping in nuclear program (this might be a disinformation though for alibi purpose) but most importantly Israel in the process was able to thoroughly penetrate Iran:

    Did Israel, under Shah, help start Iran’s nuclear program?
    https://www.timesofisrael.com/a-generation-ago-israelis-found-paradise-in-iran/

    IRAN WAS THE ALLY ISRAEL WANTED. IT GOT SAUDI ARABIA
    https://www.timesofisrael.com/a-generation-ago-israelis-found-paradise-in-iran/

    The Yinon plan was not officially formulated then as far as we know, but perhaps it was already being worked on. All secular ME states were considered a threat. Why not Iran? Would Israel wanted to have a strong Iran in a long term that also was friendly with West at the same time? No, Israel is much more comfortable with the nincompoops from Saudi Arabia that can be rolled up in 24h.

    Iran had to be pried off the US. Which the Iranian Revolution succeed in doing so. Iran became official enemy of the West. Sanctions set back all developments. The next step was Iraq-Iran war in which the US was siding with Iraq while the Yinon plan was envisioning the destruction of Iraq in this war.

    Anyway, my hypothesis is that Iran had to go because it was getting too strong and paradoxically because it was on too good terms with the West. Iranian Revolution accomplished it

  203. Anonymous[206] • Disclaimer says:
    @FN

    How’s the prediction track record of po-faced fo-po commentators on Unz/Lew Rockwell/CounterPunch/StarsFellOnAlabama dot org? If they’re predicting nuclear war with Iran, it must be a weekday. Also, that Vladimir Grozny, who’s a great fella & does a lot for His People don’t ya know, is also completely dangerous and not to be underestimated, so there is some doublethink required.

  204. S says:

    Whilst alive, Qasem Soleimani bore a striking resemblance to Sean Connery’s fictional Captain 1st Rank Marko Aleksandrovich Ramius.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
  205. eugyppius says:
    @Jack D

    The US has wasted truly unprecedented resources on wars of unclear purpose against tired, spent, disorganized, poor, and very distant nations since I have been alive. In that time they have never pounded anyone to ribbons. With the exception of Gulf War 1.0, which they sensibly ended before the enemy had been destroyed, they just pulled exhausting farcical guerilla-war stalemates from what they thought were the jaws of quick victory time and again, somehow in the process always stacking the board for more adventures a few moves down the line. And it is far from clear to me that Iran is the immiserated anemic opponent that the American army is built to fight, and that the American electorate has grown used to threatening with impunity.

  206. hhsiii says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    Thomas Mitchell was in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (as Diz the reporter), Stagecoach (as the drunk Doc) and Gone With the Wind (as Pa O’Hara), as well as Only Angels Have Wings (also with Jean Arthur) and Hunchback of Notre Dame. Not bad playing 2nd fiddle to Stewart, Wayne, Gable, Grant and Laughton, all in one year.

  207. @Anonymous

    The usual quagmire business.

    Let them do the nation-building after the surrender. Whatever they come up with is fine as long as it isn’t blowing our shit up and attacking our embassies.

  208. @nebulafox

    They already did. The embassy is U.S. soil. And they got their just desserts. Ball’s now in their court. As you say no boots on the ground unless they try something stupid again.

    If anybody tries any nation-building they’ll get thrown out at the next election and deserve it.

    • Replies: @Anon
  209. @Whiskey

    Wow…for once, I actually find myself in total agreement with Whiskey. Good summary of the situation, sir.

  210. Corvinus says:
    @Dave Pinsen

    “That said, at this point, if I were Trump, I would declare victory and pull American troops out of the region.”

    You mean like “Mission Accomplished”? Regardless, Trump’s Jewish masters wouldn’t put up with it. You know, with the Grand Bargain and all.

  211. Anonymous[236] • Disclaimer says:
    @German_reader

    If you knew anything about politics in the US you would know that the “immigration restrictionists” who are the typical audience for this blog are also the group that is most opposed to the US foreign policy in the Middle East of the last several decades, ie “invade the world, invite the world”. This is basic and I assumed that everyone knew this by now.

    Trump has outsourced his presidency to neocons, but they were bitterly opposed to his candidacy at the time, and Trump largely ran in opposition to W. Bush’s foreign policy.

    The typical American reader here is more opposed to a war with Iran than you are, as it would directly involve us and we’ve already wasted so many trillions in the region.

    • Replies: @German_reader
  212. When I worked in a prison, it was fairly common for inmates to fight other inmates, and then miraculously have no injuries. These were known as “hug a thug” fights.

    This USA vs Iran conflict is a bit similar. Neither wants to invade the other, but both are happy to threaten to kill the other while being held back by their friends.

    It is not clear what the strategic objective of the US is. They already have economic sanctions on Iran, with no visible way forward out of the impasse. Regime change, perhaps, then the US could do a trade deal with a client government, but it doesn’t seem to be worth a war.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
  213. hhsiii says:
    @German_reader

    Twitter?

    I’m not defending it, although I don’t lose sleep over this guy whom you seem to admire so much. I worry about a dirty bomb on the subway and don’t look forward to any more blow back that we have been courting since Mossadegh. BTW, did you grow up in East Germany or West Germany?

  214. Anon[211] • Disclaimer says:
    @German_reader

    I completely get where you’re coming from, but please have mercy on your American cousins here. These people have good instincts that have been redirected in the interest of Israel and they don’t even have a clue. I know this because, as a rather young person, I was in favor of all the neocon wars and, through massive levels of Jewish programming, somehow thought this was in the interest of actual Americans. My friends served in these wars. Painfully embarrassing, but true.

    The division this causes between Europeans and real Americans of European ancestry is another regrettable side effect—please let’s not give them the additional pleasure of discord among cousins and natural allies.

  215. LondonBob says:
    @GW

    If the Iranians are really smart they will retaliate by attacking the Israelis.

  216. Anonymous[182] • Disclaimer says:
    @istevefan

    Now that most of them have reconciled themselves to the presence of Israel and have moved on instead to the mass immivasion of Europe, you have no real beef with them.

    Opening up Europe (and America) to them was a way of pacifying them for the loss of Palestine to the Jews. Think of it as a kind of land swap.

  217. hhsiii says:
    @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

    Thanks for the hot tip. I read that a million times before Unz review was even a thing. They even close Godfather II with it.

    Not like the Gemans get a free pass, though. And I am ethnically german, although not since the late 1600s or so. One of my relatives apparently (and luckily for me; most of my other relatives died during the unpleasantries) deserted during the 30s years war and his son made it over.

    In any event, only a joke, and a damn funny one I might add. I’m not too happy about this assassination but whaddyagonnado? You’d think the last place that needed lecturing about US overreach would be this comment section.

  218. JohnnyD says:

    Qasem Soleimani sounds like the name of a good sandwich…

  219. Anonymous[278] • Disclaimer says:
    @German_reader

    I’m offering to put $1,000 in escrow if you can match it. To be paid out on this date in 2021, to you if either Iran or the United States declares formal war on the other, to me if otherwise.

  220. Anon[930] • Disclaimer says:
    @Desiderius

    Still waiting for the assassination of George Tenet. Do you really think that would be a good thing? I don’t.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    , @Desiderius
  221. Anonymous[278] • Disclaimer says:

    The media is making a point to say the strike was personally ordered by Trump. The plan was developed in the NatSec apparatus and approved by Trump. He didn’t go to the generals and say “hey let’s get this guy.”

    It’s a bit worrisome that Trump decided to go with them on this. But the mullahs don’t really have a move to make, right?

    Generally pessimistic people are saying this means a war. Generally optimistic people are either exultant or saying wait and see.

  222. @German_reader

    They were going to build nukes anyway.

    There’s zero proof for that…

    Swarthy men with caps reading “Imperial Iranian Navy” were strolling around our Navy base in Orlando in 1977. That’s where our nuke school was based.

    Whether or not they were dreaming of nuclear weapons, they were already on board nuclear subs. (Atomkraftunterseeboote to you.)

    Weapons are a step or two up from that.

  223. danand says:
    @Skyler_the_Weird

    “Didn’t he host American TopForty”

    Skyler, his favorite tune, one I readily recall from my youth:

  224. @Anonymous

    The typical American reader here is more opposed to a war with Iran than you are

    Then why are so many commenters here writing that killing Soleimani was a fantastic idea, because “Iran shouldn’t have attacked our embassy” (not even sure this is what happened btw, and in any case the “reaction” was grotesquely disproportionate) or for some other idiotic reason, completely ignoring that the escalating tensions with Iran since mid-2018 are a direct result of Trump’s choices, both in policies and the horrible warmongers he’s brought into his administration?
    Sorry, I may well believe that you’re opposed to all of this, but lots of commenters here obviously aren’t.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @mobi
  225. @Anonymous

    Hey, I own solar panels myself but when you crunch the numbers, calculate the BTU’s etc, it’s an uphill battle. So I’m with you, but…..

    How will semi trucks run on solar? Freight trains? Ocean-going freighters? In other words, all of the means and modes of locomotion that make the modern open borders, free trade economy possible? I’ve read that the cost of shipping a TV to the USA from China is $3. Back in the day of the Tea Clippers, circa 1840, shipping from China to the West was so expensive that only the costliest of commodities i.e. tea and spice, were worth doing so. Consequently, economies were local then. All Paul Krugman’s elaborate theories about comparative advantage etc. are premised upon cheap freight. Without bulk carriers and container shipping none of the modern ideas about open borders would be viable. It’s basic Marx; the material level of production determines consciousness.

    Anyway, back to the subject at hand, until batteries improve, it will be hard to replace the concentrated energy stored in fossil fuels. Some day we may get there but it won’t happen in my life time. There are some good sites that explore this topic from a strict physicist, energy-accounting-including-loses standlpoint.

    • Replies: @ziggurat
  226. @German_reader

    As I’ve already pointed out to you in past comments, a massive influx of immigrants into America will not make the US government less warlike.

    Within the Republican Party, the immigrants disproportionately vote for the warmonger neoconservative candidates such as Marco Rubio, while old stock Americans disproportionately vote for antiwar nationalists like Pat Buchanan or antiwar libertarians like Rand Paul.

    Within the Democratic Party, the immigrants vote disproportionately for the warmonger establishment candidates such as Hillary Clinton, not for the antiwar socialists such as Bernie Sanders.

    • Agree: Chrisnonymous
  227. @German_reader

    If the Trump phenomenon has proved anything, it’s that American nationalism as it actually is, not like a few commenters here might like it to be, is inherently tied up with external aggression.

    Coming from a German, this is quite rich.

    An awful lot of Americans think nothing about casually dishing out lethal violence abroad…

    You can blame Wilson and Roosevelt for that. Funny, though… boulevards in Paris are named for those monsters. Talk to the Frogs about that.

    I want to restore Liberty to the dime– and the land.

    Nothing learned at all from Vietnam, nothing learned at all from Iraq…

    Nothing learned at all from France… twice. The antics of some king sporting a Pickelhaube or some faggot with a toothbrush mustache, whose people were foolish enough to elect, never had anything to do with us, as the Lindbergh family fruitlessly explained in detail.

    Our modern jingoism is the spawn of earlier progressives, their propaganda for overseas wars that have been our bane for over a century now.

    They had to keep it up after we “won” those wars, to prevent our noticing that the Lindberghs had a solid point.

    • Agree: Old Prude
  228. @Realist

    “Creditable citation.”

    Just say “Link please.” Creditable citation gives away your No True Scotsman scheme. Doesn’t matter how much citation I might provide, you will deem it non credible unless I can get the Ayatollah to swear to it on a stack of Bibles. You’ll have to do better than a biased frame if you want me to bother with you.

    • Replies: @Realist
  229. Precious says:

    If Trump gets dragged into a war with Iran that would be a big mistake.

    I won’t believe it until I see it though. We already saw with both Syria and North Korea that Trump isn’t a Bush Junior, or even a Bush Senior. And that is a good thing.

  230. @S

    Depends on a photo. Here, he looks like Clooney:

  231. @Anon

    Still waiting for the assassination of George Tenet. Do you really think that would be a good thing? I don’t.

    I first read that as “George Takei”. No comment on the utility of a Suluectomy.

    • Replies: @Anon
  232. @Altai

    We did it probably with a Hellfire fired from a Global Hawk. I’d bet we’d had him under surveillance for a long time. May he rot in Hell.

  233. Anon[930] • Disclaimer says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    We could blame it on Romulan secret agents.

  234. Anonymous[187] • Disclaimer says:

    He LED the defeat of ISIS.

  235. @anon

    Trump has had it out for Iran since day 1. He withdrew from the treaty.

    Wrong, Tonto.

    BHO never submitted the treaty to the Senate for its approval because he knew it would not pass.

  236. Jack D says:

    In the mind of an anti-Semite, he doesn’t like anyone who is Jewish and anyone he doesn’t like is therefore Jewish – hatred is transitive. If I had a nickel for every anti-hero on Unz who has falsely been accused of being Jewish, I’d have a lot of nickels.

    The great thing about such accusations is that they tend to make the person making them self-discrediting. If this part of their statement is so clearly false and the product of their sick imagination, then the rest is probably equally false.

    Besarion Jughashvili (Stalin’s dad) was a drunk who abandoned his family and died of alcoholism (as did Stalin’s son and Stalin himself was known to drink more than a bit). This alone makes him a poor candidate for being a Jew.

  237. eugyppius says:
    @Whiskey

    What a ridiculous comment.

    The embassy wasn’t stormed, its outer perimeter was penetrated by a group of angry PMU militants after the US hit five PMU locations on the Syrian border in retaliation for a nebulous rocket attack because Hezbollah. Iranian complicity in the rocket attack remains questionable and you don’t call drone attacks on protest organizers, if Soleimani even had anything to do with that. But that hardly matters, because the sequence is: 1) rockets from someplace hit K1, 2) US blames Iran/Kataeb Hezbollah and retaliates over Iraqi objections by attacking PMU sites in Iraq hundreds of km away, 3) Iraqis and PMU soldiers protest and do some damage, the 4) US assassinates the deputy chief of the PMU, Soleimani and their entourage in a strike in Baghdad.

    Now the Iraqis are united, for once, in wanting the Americans out, which means the Americans out of Syria too. But Americans will try to stay, and Iran will now have myriad opportunities to extract a pound of flesh, provoking retaliation again from the US, with the upshot being war.

    Trump decreased the possibility of War with Iran.

    Trump put the Iranians in a position of having no choice but to retaliate, however much they may not want to: The leadership will need to maintain credibility domestically, at the very least. Also too, there is no reason to expect that docility will get you anything from “unpredictable” adversaries who “can and will order strikes to take out top leadership” in the case that “they piss off Trump by doing stuff.” If anything there is reason to fear that the dog who, once kicked, doesn’t bite, will get kicked again, especially by a leader eager to “show” that “he’s not weak.”

    Otherwise it’s just slogans. Soleimani was not planning attacks on Americans, and you don’t get to assassinate foreign heads of state because they may have been involved in the legitimate armed resistance that your invading forces faced a decade ago. A “demonstration of American capability” how exactly? Apparently Soleimani’s Baghdad visits were an open secret so there is no intelligence victory and anyone who thought America had somehow lost its capability to rain death from the sky must have slept through the attacks on PMU emplacements just a few weeks ago.

    Trump decreased the possibility of War with Iran.

    Generally assassinating foreign heads of state reduces the risk of war. If Iran had hit the equivalent, Mike Pompeo, our belligerence in the region would be about nil now. Because they would have demonstrated their capability to kill at will and so forth.

    Democrats and never Trumpers were calling Trump Jimmy Carter yesterday, now he’s Cheetoh Hitler again.

    That”s a great reason to kill foreign political and military leaders.

    There are already demonstrations in Iran, calling for the restoration of the Monarchy and banning Islam, restoring Zoroastrianism. Nothing will come of it but Iran is fraught with fissures.

    Internal political weakness has never led countries to behave in disastrous unpredictable ways at all. For example, there is no possible connection between Trump’s impeachment and associated cries of “Jimmy Carter” and his willingness to give in to longstanding neoconservative plans and risk open war with Iran so that he could be “Cheetoh Hitler” once again.

    • Replies: @eugyppius
    , @Jack D
    , @Ozymandias
  238. @Hapalong Cassidy

    ” I admit, when the US claimed Iran was behind the attack on the US embassy, I thought it was more of the same old tired US propaganda.”

    You never really know what to believe. When all sides are liars, I try to reserve judgement. But the Orangeman caught them with their hand in the cookie jar and chopped it off. Now he’s holding that jar up, hand still in it, asking “How’s your plausible deniability doing, Ayatollah Kornhollah?”

    Soleimani got lazy. He thought he could play with the same old strategy that had gotten him this far. He was wrong. Orangeman called his bluff. If he hadn’t been in Baghdad, he wouldn’t be dead. It was stupid of him. Stupid, sloppy, and lazy.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @Clyde
    , @eugyppius
  239. eugyppius says:
    @eugyppius

    And just once more on the premise that this is about the embassy. It has been reported that the attack was in the works before 31 Dec. and that the timing was a matter of opportunity. And even Lindsay Graham this was “not an act of revenge” but a “preemptive, defensive [sic!] strike planned to take out the organizer of attacks yet to come.”

  240. S says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Qasem Soleimani was a man of a thousand faces.

    Well, at least two. 😉

  241. Herzog says:
    @Shmendrix

    My thoughts pretty much (being another “German reader”). It’s showing with whom the escalation competence really lies, and that the US under trump is not afraid to use it, after the test run with the Baghdad embassy. Rather, that it goes for the jugular, with precision.

    Sure, Iran will retaliate at some time, and it will be sly and bloody (a Lockerbie-like incident?). Then, it’s going to be interesting to see what the next US step will be — maybe just weeks before the election? So far, I find it difficult to imagine a Carteresque approach at any stage by Trump.

    The Russians and the Chinese — they may talk a nice talk re Iranian friendship, and all that. But ultimately, they will hardly want to lose their equivalent of any “Pomeranian grenadier” for imams, ayatollahs, and their hairy followers.

  242. The more I hear about this Soleimani character the less I care for him.

  243. Jack D says:
    @eugyppius

    Soleimani was not planning attacks on Americans,

    You seem very confident of this. How would you know? Pompeo says otherwise. It’s possible that US intelligence was wrong but I think he has access to more of it than you do. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of his communications get released in the coming weeks as Democrats try to push the same lie as you are pushing. If Soleimani WASN’T planning attacks on Americans then he wasn’t doing his job.

  244. Anon[930] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    How do I know you aren’t planning attacks on American forces, tovarisch?

  245. anon[914] • Disclaimer says:

    Middle Eastern culture does not respect forbearance . That signals weakness
    They will hate the Americans even more for the air strike, but being hated is better than despised for weakness

    The air strike lessened considerably the chance of more embassy-like attacks

    • Replies: @JohnnyWalker123
  246. Realist says:
    @Ozymandias

    Doesn’t matter how much citation I might provide, you will deem it non credible unless I can get the Ayatollah to swear to it on a stack of Bibles.

    So bottom line…you got nothing.

  247. @German_reader

    If the Trump phenomenon has proved anything, it’s that American nationalism as it actually is, not like a few commenters here might like it to be, is inherently tied up with external aggression.

    Trump used American nationalists to get elected, then promptly started betraying them.

    • Replies: @German_reader
    , @Bumpkin
  248. @eugyppius

    “Soleimani was not planning attacks on Americans,”

    He was a good boy who had turned his life around and was getting ready to go back to school.

    • Agree: Desiderius
  249. @nebulafox

    They were going to build nukes anyway.

    So you’re saying that the Iranian government isn’t bound by its religious leaders’ fatāwā?

    That’s odd; I thought that one of the problems with Iran was that it is a ‘hard line’ theocracy. You know, glowering men with long beards and robes and all that. (Nothing whatsoever to do with the scowling-beardyfaces overthrowing a Western satrap and re-nationalising the oilfields… how dare anyone ever suggest such a thing)

    [MORE]

    Everyone in the West was all aflutter when there was a fake-fatwah[1] issued against Salman Rushdie, but a much-more-binding, actual fatwah declaring nukular weapons as utterly haram (“Hormah of weapons of mass destruction”) is not to be taken seriously.

    Got it.

    .

    If you get your opinions from the TV, it’s no surprise that they wind up being internally inconsistent.

    .

    It has been obvious for two decades that Iran’s best-response is to acquire nuclear weapons: this is obvious to anyone who has observed the difference in the behaviour of the US Death Machine towards countries who do, versus countries that don’t.

    And yet the Iranians still steadfastly refuse to even attempt to do so. It’s laughable to Westerners (including me) because we know full well that our political vermin have literally no principles, and that they will abandon any that they pretend to have the nanosecond after it becomes expedient to do so.

    however the Iranian government understands that if they ignore such an important fatwah, they will lose power. End of story.

    To put into perspective how important religious doctrine is to the Iranian political class: they could not use ‘suicide’ tactics in the war against Iraq until a fatwah amended the Islamic injunction against suicide.

    After that fatwah was issued, they had thousands of young men prepared to walk unarmed into minefields to clear the way… similar to the Soviet shtrafbat in WWII, who were basically ammunition-absorbers (although the shtrafniki were not there voluntarily).

    Sending gullible fuckwits to step on mines is a deplorable strategy, but the Iranians would never have deployed the strategy if it was contrary to Islamic law.

    .

    Currently, Iran’s best-response is to get someone with enough clout to issue a counter-fatwah rescinding the anti-nukular one – and thereafter to ramp up nukular weapons production as fast as possible.

    They have no hope of getting that fatwah until Khamenei dies. After that it seems that opinion id divided.

    .

    Why Iran Needs Nukes

    It is a hallmark of all who earn their keep by sociopathic parasitoidism, that they are fundamentally dishonest counterparties; nobody should assume good faith when negotiating with any member of any political institution. This is especially true if you’re dealing with a declining superpower.

    The best thing that can be said of such vermin is that they respond to incentives, so in the presence of a credible balance of terror they can be forced to simulate honesty.

    When it comes to diplomacy towards the Middle East, the West have been that way since before the start of WWI.

    The not-nearly-famous-enough Crewe-Hardinge letter/telegram of 1914 is a salient case in point.

    The money quote:

    What we want is not a united Arabia, but a weak and disunited Arabia, split into little principalities as far as possible under our suzerainty — but incapable of coordinated action against us, forming a buffer against the Powers in the West[2].” Crewe to Hardinge, 12 November 1914, Archives of India (quoted in Busch, Britain, India and the Arabs p62

    This is well before Sykes-Picot (1916), and well before the Balfour Declaration (1917). It was pretty much at the very dawn of the importance of hydrocarbons (although the very first military action in WWI was over an oilfield).

    It also shows that Western behaviour towards that part of the world has nothing to do with interest in the well-being of da Joooze.

    The Iranians aren’t Arabs; the point is that Western geopolitical strategy in the entire region have always been based on keeping the natives there at each others’ throats.

    It’s all about keeping the the region in disarray: there’s ~250 million Arabs, and a total of ~400m people, in the Middle East. If they even set aside their internecine bickering, they could be a significant economic counterweight.

    NOTES.

    [1] Khomeini’s statement that Rushdie should be put to death for ‘The Satanic Verses‘ was misrepresented in the Western media as being a ‘fatwah‘. It was no such thing: Khomeini never claimed it was a fatwah, for a start. Also, in Shi’a Islam a cleric cannot find an individual guilty and impose a death sentence: only a court can do that.

    [2] ‘Powers in the West’ meant the Ottomans (and to a lesser extent the Persians) – who were to the west of India. Hardinge – the recipient of the note – was Viceroy of India; Crewe – the author – was Secretary of State for the Colonies.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    , @Anonymous
  250. J.Ross says:

    To be charitable (as a math-stupid person with plenty of educational blind spots) I will assume that Steve’s meaning is that Journalism (in the sense of mainstream establishmentarian programmatic lying) was so busy breathlessly condemning Trump for misspelling words and eating improper food that they neglected the reporting of relevant information (known to such people as visitors to 4chan’s Syria General), and now find themselves in the position of wishing they had reported more.
    That said, Steve likes being called “boomer” …
    Tonight NPR was full of gibberish about the incident: markets look shakey, the future is uncertain (as opposed to yesterday, when time machines guaranteed it), experts warn, and we are promised from anonymous shadows that whereas Obama was precise, procedural, and cautious in extrajudicially droning more people and Americans than Arbusto, Trump is a dangerous loose cannon who plays by his own rules and has exceeded his bubblegum supply.
    But just to be safe, Steve, there’s this Winnie the Pooh cosplayer you should check into …

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  251. @Flip

    If we have to have a Democrat, I’d want Sanders. He’s viscerally anti-open borders (“a Koch Brothers proposal”)

    “When we talk about making public colleges and universities tuition-free, the American people support that. They support immigration reform. They support criminal justice reform. In Philadelphia, Larry Krasner has done a great job in that area.” –https://jacobinmag.com/2018/07/bernie-sanders-interview-alexandria-ocasio-cortez

    So Bernie’s for paths to citizenship, and against instruction in college, and for let-’em-loose-Bruce judges. Most post-secondary education is literally tuition-free now,– i.e., students are getting little value for their tuition fees— which is why he was able to scoop up so many naive supporters on campuses.

    I can’t find the Jacobin interview where he said America is a “nation of immigrants”, but if you think he’s on our side, for solid borders, I’ve got a deed to half a library in Vermont to sell you…


    Jacobin knows the score– which is why they like him:

    https://www.jacobinmag.com/2019/04/bernie-sanders-immigrant-rights-border-policy

    • Replies: @Flip
  252. White people are already a minority in the USA of A(public schools and soon the general population) and starting a confrontation is good for us! Soon the Negro and Hispanic will control us . World War one and World War Two were a disaster for White people and this will only add to our down fall.

  253. Uhh... says:
    @S

    That’s a very weird comparison you’re trying to make here.

    Both Triumvirates and the transformation of the Republic into the Empire were the results of a long process dictated by the Roman State’s political trajectory. As the Romans expanded and standing armies became a necessity, the centralization of power was inevitable; otherwise, centrifugal forces would have broken the Republic up.

    And neither Triumvirate was a catastrophe for Rome: the Empire kept expanding for at least 200 years after Caesar’s death, and its Eastern part survived as a major player in the region for another 1000. Rome itself wouldn’t be sacked until 410 AD.

    That said, the unlikely dissolution of the US would free the (western) world from many of its most virulent ideologies du jour.

    • Replies: @S
  254. Ian M. says:
    @Pegasus

    Chillax, dude. People have different interests. You can go elsewhere for foreign affairs, you’re not limited to Sailer.

    • Agree: bomag, Bubba
  255. Clyde says:
    @Ozymandias

    Soleimani got lazy. He thought he could play with the same old strategy that had gotten him this far. He was wrong. Orangeman called his bluff. If he hadn’t been in Baghdad, he wouldn’t be dead. It was stupid of him. Stupid, sloppy, and lazy.

    Exactly! Sloppy and lazy and believing his magical reputation too much. I mean, I have been reading he was practically a god or a war god in Iran. It all went to his head, and Orange Man made him dead. And Orange Man was eating ice cream at Mar A Lago when it all went down. Eating dinner with friends and Kevin McCarthy, House Minority Leader.

  256. @S

    As depicted in the three sculptures below, it consisted of the Roman billionaire and real estate speculator Crassus (center), the General Pompey (right), and Crassus’ protege, the up and coming Julius Caesar (left)…What followed was civil war, political assassination, the fall of the Roman Republic resulting in a centuries long dictatorship, and the ultimate personal destruction of all three individuals who had constituted the First Triumvirate.

    It seem like Julius Caesar still wound up making out pretty well, despite not having lived as long as he would’ve undoubtedly preferred.

  257. Polynikes says:
    @anonymous

    Yes. I know of a thousand other people who control policy here and have an affect on my life. A few I’ve met or know rather personally.

    Let me guess, you’re proud of playing internet ME expert and spewing bullcrap about things you have no real world experience with? Congrats.

    • Thanks: Futurethirdworlder
  258. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Polynikes

    I’m not advocating this but if you think an Iranian led war against the US is bad for Trump on the eve of re-election, you know less than zero about history or American politics.

    I agree. This is a shrewd political move on Trump’s part. Americans just love war. Especially when it’s the US against a Third World country that can’t fight back. Trump’s base will eat this up. Starting a war is usually a surefire way to get re-elected.

    It also demonstrates very clearly that Trump is as cynical and as evil as any Swamp-dweller.

    Quite a few Americans will die but none of them will be rich people so it doesn’t matter. Countless Iranians will die but they’re not even Americans so they don’t count at all. The end result is likely to be millions of Iranian refugees heading for Europe.

    But it will be great for defence contractors. Think of the profits.

    • Replies: @Kevin O'Keeffe
  259. Ian M. says:
    @anonymous

    On the other hand, why should one be expected to keep up with what’s in the news? For one thing, most people have more important things to worry about (and if they don’t, they should), and for two, consumption of the news corrupts us and enables our rulers to control us and mold our opinions.

  260. Mr. Anon says:
    @GW

    @LondonBob

    Quit cucking for your Islamic masters you worthless Brit.

    He isn’t cucking. And LondonBob rates far higher in worth to me than you do, idiot.

  261. Mr. Anon says:
    @Desiderius

    And I’m sure Yoram Hazony is just looking out for America’s best interests, isn’t he?

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  262. @Anon7

    a known terrorist agent of a foreign power

    A bit like how Iran might have viewed McChrystal, Mattis, or any of the hundreds of nutjobs that currently infest Fox News. My guess is that the Secret Service is going to be spending a shitload more money safeguarding those fuckers when they holiday in Paris and similar places (the French internal security apparatus has no hope whatsoever of protecting them).

    .

    Soleimani was a uniformed member of the armed forces of a sovereign nation with which the US is not at war.

    It would be interesting to view your histrionics if the current head of JSOC was killed while in Syria (without the permission of the sovereign government of Syria).

    After all, the current US cheap shot was justified by a claimed Iranian involvement in the death of a US-paid mercenary.

    When it’s the US making the claim, the strong prior is that it’s going to turn out to be a lie: if you haven’t internalised that properly yet, you should leave the conversation to the grown-ups.

    • Replies: @bomag
  263. @German_reader

    Just shows how parochial you are, no wonder when you spend all your time whining about Latino littering or similarly important issues. Anybody who followed Mideast affairs was at least vaguely aware of the man.

    I’m late to the party here, but you–German_reader–not Steve, are the one who is not grasping what’s important.

    What Steve is pointing out with the Latino littering is both that
    a) Latinos lack some of the pro-social attributes that allow “rule of law” and allow high functioning society.
    and
    b) The under our minoritarian raj we can’t even talk about anything that puts a minority in a negative light, ergo can’t try to fix it.

    That through the nasty silliness of minoritarianism/immigrationism the US is being turning into a somewhat whiter, higher performing version of Brazil is a world historical disaster. (I guess unless you’re Chinese.)

    In contrast the assasination of some general/thug/player … yawn. Today’s noise … soon yesterday’s news.

    ~~

    In the long run demographics–the survival and improvement of your nation–is what matters. Everything else is noise.

    Take the German case. The imperialist Hitler was a disaster. Millions dead, maimed. And if you’re one of those killed, or your children killed–that’s pretty damn bad! Yet in 1945–millions dead, borders rearranged–Germany was still Germany full of Germans. Even devasted Poland was still Poland. Russia still Russia. China still China. Japan still Japan. Even the Ashkenazi Jews survived and got nation.

    But in one year Frau Merkel gave Germany a demographic disaster the magnitude of America’s “legacy of slavery” that has created no end of pain, tears and terrible politics. Where Hitler just killed people, Merkel has permanently maimed, if not killed the German nation.

    Demographics–not the strum and drang of politics or military squabbling–is what actually matters.

    • Agree: Old Prude
    • Replies: @Anon
  264. Sailer strategy part 2 (let the Ds be the Black Party) not looking so hot:

  265. @Jack D

    Pompeo says otherwise. It’s possible that US intelligence was wrong

    Anyone who believes anything that emanates from the US Death Machine is a rube.

    There is an unbroken line of deliberate misinformation that goes all the way back to “Remember the Maine“.

    Anybody who says they believe Death Machine press releases is either the cognitive equivalent of a retarded child, or is making the statement out of venal, cynical self-interest (i.e., is bullshitting).

    Perhaps both… but certainly not neither.

    • Replies: @Hhsiii
    , @nebulafox
  266. @Anon

    Your analogy is far afield on both counts.

    • Replies: @Anon
  267. Anon[930] • Disclaimer says:
    @Desiderius

    Given that you “agreed” to Sailer’s not having heard of one of the guys in question until yesterday, I’m not sure how much weight to place on your opinions.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    , @Mr. Anon
  268. Mr. Anon says:
    @AndrewR

    Yeah this is a major self-own for Sailer. Dude ran Quds Force for over 20 years. Not an insignificant character.

    Do you off hand know the name of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff? The commander of JSOC or Central Command? Without looking it up?

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    , @AndrewR
  269. Anonymous[270] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Steve, this is very surprising! How dare you? 🙂

    No analogy is perfect but this killing is like as if USA killed Beria at the start of the Cold War, just before the Soviets got nukes. Obviously, a big deal. Soleimani was just as influential. Probably even #2 guy in the whole Iran.

    • Replies: @Hhsiii
  270. J.Ross says:

    Michael Moore has managed to forget years of Obama-era domestic propaganda about Iran, Syria and Russia, and has decided that Trump invented the current situation ex nihilo.
    These are the people who call Trump and his supporters dumb.
    https://postimg.cc/Z0whZxNZ
    And speaking as an anti-Neocon and opponent of this action (and all shabbyism), the Iranian sonofabitch was on our side of the border. He wasn’t in Iran. He wasn’t on some neutral ground. He wasn’t visiting civilian relatives or Shia holy sites in Southern Iraq. He was doing special operations work near American residences. That’s a huge detail.

    • Replies: @German_reader
  271. The persians are coming right at you goyim, you gotta kill ’em all!!!! It’s the only way to be sure you’ll be safe!!!!!! Greatest allies for ever, right?????!?!?1??!

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  272. @J.Ross

    My point was that I’m a journalist and I didn’t know who this guy was, which is embarrassing. But my lack of knowledge on the subject is why I’m not offering an Insta-Opinion.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    , @JimB
  273. Vendetta says:
    @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

    Statistically false, the Soviet rail network was sustained almost entirely on an enormous pre-war stock (in the region of 25,000-30,000 locomotives). They neither built many new ones of their own nor imported that many from the US because the Germans never made much of a dent in that figure.

    Figure for trucks is vastly inflated, about 312,600 arrived via Lend-Lease while the Soviets drew on pre-war stocks from the military and from the civilian sector of a combined 491,500, in addition to about 150,000 newly built over the course of the war. Lend-Lease thus supplied only about one third of Soviet truck capacity. Still a significant contribution, but it should also be borne in mind that rail traffic carried a far heavier proportion of the Soviet supply lines than road traffic, and that the Soviets were also still heavily dependent on horse transport (as were the Germans).

    It is also false that any significant quantities of American lend-lease reached the Soviet Union in 1941. 95% of Lend-Lease materiel arrived after the Battle of Stalingrad was over, in 1943 through 1945.

  274. I don’t know if Mr. Sailer’s implicit point was the following, but it would be consistent with his previously expressed stance.

    Being insistent that it is important for an American to know who Qasem Soleimani was is part of the “Invade the World, Invite the World” mindset so common among our highly educated elites-that he writes about so often.

    We live on the other side of the world from Iran, safe behind two vast oceans, an almost as vast friendly and frozen northern neighbor, and a problematic but largely tame southern neighbor.

    It should be normal for an intelligent and well-informed American citizen to not know who Soleimani was.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  275. J.Ross says:

    Trump attempted to communicate with Iran through the Swiss, calling for de-escalation. The Iranians told him to kick rocks. Then he droned them.

  276. @AndrewR

    Like many of us Sailer probably doesn’t care. Let’s say you knew everything about the guy before he was killed. So what? This information gained you nothing.

    • Agree: Bubba
  277. J.Ross says:
    @Mr. Anon

    Do any of those people matter? QS is a major reason why the CIA’s Arab Legion was defeated, and he did it in person, showing up at the front lines and exposing himself to danger. Can any of that be said about those pension-protecting lobbyist wannabes?

  278. @German_reader

    Steve seems to be one of the few to give a shit about what you call “parochial” concerns. For the US, it’s funny that you feel that a military figure in a country halfway around the world is more important that the people that are invading our country. It’s only important because our concerns are too international and not parochial.

  279. @J.Ross

    the Iranian sonofabitch was on our side of the border.

    Ahem, you seem to have missed that the US is also going after the heads of Iraqi Shiite militias (apparently several killed just a few hours ago in a new attack), whose groups are entwined with the Iraqi state and military. You may think these people are “bad guys”, but seems a bit strange to claim they’re on “your” side of the border, when they’re actually in their own country.
    There’s even talk now btw that the Iraqi parliament might demand a withdrawal of US troops from Iraq which would render any argument about “your” side of the border totally absurd.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  280. @Mr. Anon

    If you want to be a nationalist, why not learn from the best?

    As for your question, yes, to a first approximation, just as I would be offering advice to our ally Israel, England, et. al. Your brain-dead, callow cynicism accomplishes the opposite of what you intend.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  281. @Just Saying

    I disagree. We love Steve also because he says what others won’t. Middle East politics is famously complex, Americans are famously not foreign policy experts, and the Middle East is very far away.

    So Steve’s admitted ignorance is at the same time true, endearing, embarrassing, representative, and very pertinent.

    You’d think we’d all be Middle East experts by now. But we remain very, very ignorant. And we’ll never really learn. How could we?

    It’s a frequent occurrence that people we don’t know are killed in our name.

    Real people we know nothing about. By US forces. In the name of US citizens.

    Let’s at least do what we can to keep the killing as infrequent as possible…

  282. @Steve Sailer

    At least you manfully saved face in the best possible way – frank candor.

    In a nutshell:

  283. • Replies: @European-American
  284. @John Gruskos

    Trump used American nationalists to get elected, then promptly started betraying them.

    Sure, one can interpret it like that. It’s just unfortunate that a substantial part of Trump’s base seems to be too gullible, jingoistic and stupid to notice.
    There was a unique chance in 2016 to create a sane national conservatism in the US which could have been a positive inspiration for the rest of the Western world. Instead we got this bizarre replay of the Bush II administrations, with Trump and his crew of maniacs apparently intent on starting a potentially catastrophic war of choice for no good reason at all. Meanwhile the great replacement continues relentlessly. Total waste of political capital.

    • Agree: Old Prude
    • Replies: @John Gruskos
  285. Anon[119] • Disclaimer says:
    @German_reader

    I’m not sure it’s worth explaining at this late hour, but German friend (and most respondents [Update: and Steve himself]) seem to have misinterpreted the post. Here it is in its entirety:

    Journalism is announcing Qasem Soleimani is dead when you never knew he was alive.

    What it doesn’t say: “Journalists are announcing QS is dead, and I don’t know who he was.”

    Rather, this is simply another of Steve’s definitional quips about the state of journalism.

    — In his First Law of Female Journalism, he “noticed” that women think a lot about how hot they are.

    — In his hair series he noticed that black women journalists and op-ed writers think a lot about their “nappy” hair.

    In the present post he is noticing that journalists like to go after Trump. My translation of the post:

    Trump era journalism’s Prime Directive is to relexively interpret every event through a filter and in a frame that turns it into something horrible or existentially dangerous (or racist or misogynistic or transphobic or Nazi-like) that ultimately is the fault of Donald Trump (even things that are actually attributable to Barrack Obama), including, for instance, taking a killing of a foreign official whom the mostly twenty something journalists have never heard of and, after twenty minutes of Google research, building a case that the official was the glue holding the whole Middle East together and thus the sky is going to fall after this guy’s death, and who even cares anymore about climate change because we won’t last that long after what this horrible assassination unleashes.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  286. @dfordoom

    This is a shrewd political move on Trump’s part. Americans just love war.

    There aren’t a lot of countries Americans tend to unambiguously hate. But Iran is most definitely at the top of that list. Especially among people born before 1970 or so (as we recall the Hostage Crisis).

  287. @German_reader

    inundate Europe with millions more refugees

    I work with some Germans. I don’t know what it is with you people, but you seem to approach politics as though you are all just spectators. If Germany is inundated with refugees, it’s because you failed to deal with Merkel. It’s the German people’s fault, not Trump’s.

    Anyhow, I don’t think Iran actually wants war with the US because that would be suicidal for them. My question for you: at what point would consider admitting reacting hysterically? 1 week without conflict? 1 month? 2 months?

    • Replies: @German_reader
  288. @Anon

    “Journalists are announcing QS is dead, and I don’t know who he was.”

    Well, actually I didn’t.

    • Replies: @anon
  289. JimB says:
    @Steve Sailer

    My point was that I’m a journalist and I didn’t know who this guy was, which is embarrassing. But my lack of knowledge on the subject is why I’m not offering an Insta-Opinion.

    I suspect it is for realpolitik reasons that the public is kept in the dark about Qasem. He played a useful role in defeating ISIS, so he was the enemy of our enemy. On the other hand he was also an ally of Russia, but Adam Schiff won’t remind you of that because the Resistance narrative says Trump owes his primary allegiance to Putin and protects Russian foreign policy interests. Therefore, killing Qasem makes no sense. Since Qasem is below the radar of most voters, the Democrats feel free to fictionalize him to their political advantage. Besides, everyone will have forgotten him by next Wednesday.

    I have a new found respect for the Roman Empire’s foreign policy. They seemed to be better at managing the Middle East than the US.

  290. anon[318] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Well Steve, at least you know all of the characters from the Harry Potter books.

  291. Hhsiii says:
    @Anonymous

    Iran’s sole claim to fame is being a burr up the US’s ass. Everyone knows this. Side deals: they are relatively aryan compared to other sand dudes (Iran, duh), and like to turns their gay men into fake chicks. I’m trying to be the ugliest American I can for German reader. We are only involved over there because our ancestors the Brits were bled white by your stupid wars. Nice try against the commie asiatic russkies, but their sock puppets dominate Unz so no credit.

  292. @Desiderius

    • LOL: Redneck farmer
  293. More air attacks tonight, alledgedly on an Iraqi medical convoy. It looks like the US has declared war on Iran and Iraq. There may be no going back now.

    There was no crisis with Iran when Trump took office. The US unilaterally reneged on the Iran nuclear proliferation treaty with the idea that application of trade sanctions would make Iran settle for a deal more to the liking of the US. How is that working out now? What is the strategic goal?

    Hopefully the Republican Senators will stop playing games and come to the realization that Trump needs to be removed from office ASAP before he does something even crazier.

    What if Russia and China come to the defense of Iran? Could the EU also join in against the US to try to force regime change in Washington?

    Isn’t this (see link) a warning?

    https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/27/asia/china-russia-iran-military-drills-intl-hnk/index.html

  294. @Chrisnonymous

    It’s the German people’s fault, not Trump’s.

    Sure, most Germans are morons, the core problem is of course within Germany herself. Still, I resent American foreign policy in the Mideast, it’s needlessly making the situation worse for Europe. If there’s general turmoil and state collapse throughout the region (which Trump’s administration doesn’t seem to care about) repatriation of unwanted migrants will be even harder, even if right-wing governments should ever achieve power in Western Europe (which unfortunately looks unlikely right now). When there’s an actual war going on in the region, how can you make a persuasive case that people should be sent back there?

    Anyhow, I don’t think Iran actually wants war with the US because that would be suicidal for them.

    Americans should read more about 1914, to learn how easily miscalculations can lead to disaster (and I’m far from convinced that Trump and his administration don’t want war btw).

    • Replies: @Bill P
  295. Anonymous[270] • Disclaimer says:
    @Vendetta

    Agree. The myth about Lend-Lease is only slightly less ridiculous that the “we Americans saved Europe from Nazis” one. The war would have lasted about a year, maximum two, longer without Lend-Lease help but the outcome was pretty much determined by the end of 1942. Germany was ill prepared for a protracted war on vast territory – that’s really all there is.

  296. Hhsiii says:
    @Kratoklastes

    What about every other country? Are YOU that retarded, venal, and most of all, cynical. And when was Hearst elected? Not defending the US here. We just happen to be king of the universal dipshits.

    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
  297. @Anon

    Don’t place any weight on my opinions. My statements were fact. It was not an assassination. Tenet is the wrong parallel, more like Cheney.

    I agreed that Sailer’s claim was straightforward and had no esoteric meaning. You can tell when he does. Not that I’m an expert on the late, lamented Mr. Soleimani. But like everyone else who chooses an evil path he discovered that there’s always a bigger asshole.

    Sucker.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @Anon
    , @anon
  298. Mr. Anon says:
    @Desiderius

    As for your question, yes, to a first approximation, just as I would be offering advice to our ally Israel, England, et. al. Your brain-dead, callow cynicism accomplishes the opposite of what you intend.

    Brain-dead? It is you who advocates the same zombie foreign policy we’ve had for seventy years. And – no – Yoram Hazony is not looking out for American interests. If you think he is, you are a naive fool. But I gather you are more than just that.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  299. MB says: • Website
    @Buzz Mohawk

    ‘From the halls of Montezuma

    To the shores of Tripoli

    We got Qasem Soleimani’s number

    And will get thanked by the Israelis

    More jingoism and warmongering is needed

    So the neocons get their money’s worth

    Of the constitution and common sense in the American Empire

    There is a distinct dearth.’

    cheers

  300. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    Hopefully the Republican Senators will stop playing games and come to the realization that Trump needs to be removed from office ASAP before he does something even crazier.

    The Republican Senators are the ones pushing for him to something even crazier.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  301. @German_reader

    … or, we could leave Iraq, and the whole thing resolves itself. Iranians take it over, Sunnis take it over, either way whoever rules Iraq would have to put unrest down and deal the oil. the nukes won’t be needed, Cuba still went on after Che Guevara died.

    yeah, better to have pulled out before anything like this happened, but maybe better to go out with a baptism scene… assuming we are going out, Israel and the Sunnis get enough billions to hold the fort. plus… Trump may ask Vlad to hold the Ayatollah back a bit, not waste all of the Russian equipment just yet…

  302. indocon says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    I am voting Bernie, the hell with out all.

  303. MB says: • Website
    @FN

    “This assassination was a massively stupid move, tactically and strategically, and might kill Trump’s reelection bid. ”

    Nah, it was red meat to the MAGA maggots infesting the body politic in competition with their Lib Prog version.
    America First really means it’s more big government all the time.
    The Swamp has got him when it comes to foreign policy.

    Make America Free.
    Build a Wall around Washington DC.

  304. @Jonathan Mason

    would Russia and China really defend Iran that bad?
    MAD is still a thing.

    yeah, it was better not to quit the deal if nothing better could be obtained, same issue as Obamacare. but it’s done, and the tough line worked in North Korea. granted, smaller proxy state, but still a proxy state. i just hope there is a goal, in NK it was to tamper down Kim’s usual saber rattling for aid money. in Iran and Iraq, i hope there is a similar attempt to keep order, and not simply to wipe those nations out for Netanyahu and the Saudis and Gulf emirs… then your fears will realize, and worse. the Persians have been defeating Westerners since Roman times…

  305. @PiltdownMan

    Agreed. It seems the group most critical here of the average American’s obliviousness to Soulman are the composed significantly of the commenters who already loathe the US and its people. German_reader, the presumed Eurotrash but confirmed coward utu, and the Polynesian mongrel Krackhead just to name a few.

    Amusing that they, consumed by delusions of intellectual and moral superiority, must come to an American website to spew their anti US bile. They could go anywhere to do that and feel at home – Huff post, Daily Kos, National Review… but narcissistic lowlifes like the above must always be ready to remind others of their immense intellectual acumen, while simultaneously shouting insults at their hosts and those Americans that see the world differently than they do. They behave as spoiled children.

    The only value they have here, that they don’t realize, is to provide perspective of the effects of globohomo on their homelands. Their views on the US are trite and shallow, and I expect they garner much of their perceived insight on US culture from viewing syndicated reruns of Modern Family or Friends.

    The US citizenry is, and has been overwhelmingly anti-war and anti-interventionist. As I have tried to explain to other alien invaders of the US, themselves opportunists and thieves, that the US government has not represented or acted upon the wishes of the citizenry in over 100 years. We see proof here that it makes little difference. These people insist that anything the US government says is a lie, but they admittedly spend significant time reading twitter. The irony is apparently lost.

    • Thanks: William Badwhite
    • Replies: @Hhsiii
    , @Bubba
  306. @El Dato

    You just don’t assassinate top generals of countries with which you are not in a live war relationship.

    There’s a lot of finger “oh how terrible” finger wagging in these comment threads.

    I don’t think this is terrible at all. Sure it could lead to more conflict. (I’m going to on a family trip to the middle east pretty soon … hope i don’t–or worse, any of the kids don’t–end up dead.)

    But if you’re having a political/military conflict this is how i *want* it resolved:
    Let’s have the people who want to fight fight by killing each other.

    I hate seeing a bunch of 18 year old kids getting killed by politicians. Sure there’s some sociopathic loons, but most young guys just want to do cool stuff, have fun, find a girl … get their pecker wet. Not saints, but not the world’s a*holes either. Guys who can–with proper incentives–be productive citizens and husbands and fathers. Why is it ok for them to die?

    If we’re having some intractable dispute with some folks …. let’s try and kill the bastards actually responsible. Like this Soleimani punk.

    And if the Iranians want to retaliate against American elites–so be it. Better them trying to kill their actual antagonists than kill me or some innocent American soldiers. Frankly there are a whole lot of America’s parasitic elites–Congress, the deep state, the bloated bureaucratic swamp, business cheap labor shills, most of Wall Street, most academics, the NYT editorial board–i wouldn’t mind drone striking myself.

  307. @Hhsiii

    What about every other country?

    I’ve gotten sick of typing that all people who make their living through politics are vermin who should be eradicated.

    Also, the best target for calumny is the government that’s currently doing the most damage outside their own borders: since (roughly) the 1950s that has been the US.

    when was Hearst elected?

    When was Pompeo elected?

    When was John Boltonelected?

    When was Gina Haspel elected?

    When was Mark Esper elected?

    When was Kissinger elected?

    When was Rumsfeld elected?

    When was Colin Powell elected?

    When was Condoleeeezzzzza Rice elected?

    When was Samantha Power elected?

    When were Perle, Feith, Abrans, Libby, Wolfowitz, Bremer (etc) elected?

    (Note I’ve left out some folks who were elected, but to the positions other than those that entitled them to make decisions to kill brown foreigners: Darth Cheney, Hanoi Songbird, Nikki Haley etc)

    You see where I’m going with this, right? US foreign policy is not run by people who are elected.

    • Replies: @Clyde
  308. @Mr. Anon

    The same?

    Seventy years was invade/invite. I want Hazony’s nationalism instead.

    You’re an idiot.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @Mr. Anon
  309. @AnotherDad

    Why is it ok for them to die

    It’s a Darwinian Filter. HBD, bitchez.

    If someone’s stupid enough to sign up to go kill people they don’t know for a reason that they cannot possible comprehend (and which is almost certainly a lie)… well, there’s a very good chance that the national median IQ goes up (very slightly) each time a poor-man’s-landmine (IED) detonates.

    Nobody said evolution wasn’t messy sometimes.

    As a method though, it’s still inefficient (like all government programs): all that collateral damage just to get rid of a few dumb young males.

    It would be way cheaper (and better targeted) if they were subsidised to stay in their native trailer park habitat and off themselves (eventually) with opioids or meth.

    Don’t despair though: foreign-baby-killing targets could still be met by people smart enough to get a job dropping bombs from aircraft, or firing missiles at children from an airconditioned cabin at Creech AFB.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  310. @Flip

    He’s a politician. He talks out of both sides of his mouth. Which side do you expect us to believe?

    When he nationalizes Ben & Jerry’s — which is what “socialism” means– then I’ll lend some credence to his words.

    Bernie agrees with the Kochs on all sorts of issues– no deportation, not suing gunmakers, buggery as marital consummation, Flynt and Mapplethorpe don’t belong in prison…

  311. J.Ross says:
    @German_reader

    >”their own country”
    >German_reader
    Forty keks. Does “your” government know where you’re commenting?

  312. anonymous[245] • Disclaimer says:
    @Desiderius

    Why do so many comments here cut/paste ungrammatical things from Twitter, etc., by random people as though they were evidence? It’s even more annoying than the MTV clips of bands popular during ninth grade.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    , @Alden
  313. ziggurat says:
    @ThreeCranes

    Anyway, back to the subject at hand, until batteries improve, it will be hard to replace the concentrated energy stored in fossil fuels. Some day we may get there but it won’t happen in my life time.

    It could happen in the next 20 years, with the help of 4th general nuclear power and electrofuels.

    Engine makers on the hunt for less-polluting fuels are eyeing synthetics, called electrofuels. They require vast amounts of electricity to produce required hydrogen, and that’s where small nuclear reactors, also known as SMRs or small modular reactors, can be used, East said. Attaching the reactor to a synthetic fuel plant would be a “competitive solution,” he said, according to Bloomberg News.

    Electrofuels are made by combining hydrogen with carbon from carbon dioxide.

    https://karmaimpact.com/jet-engine-makers-cast-an-eye-on-nuclear-power-for-help-making-cleaner-fuel/

    The bonus is that this would make air travel carbon-neutral.

    The Trump administration has green-lighted some testing for advanced nuclear technology. It could be the surprise, breakthrough technology of the upcoming decade.

    NuScale Power has clearly entered the second half of its quest to get federal approval for its small modular nuclear reactor (SMR) expected to be in service sometime in the next decade.
    https://www.power-eng.com/2019/12/13/nrc-moves-review-of-nuscales-smaller-nuclear-reactor-to-final-phases/

    Bill Gates has a company called “TerraPower” which was set to test a new nuclear power plant in China before the trade war started. But maybe he’ll get to test it here. The major problem is the regulatory hurdles in the U.S. But while Trump is president, these hurdles may get resolved.

    Bill started TerraPower to craft a sustainable, clean energy future. He sees nuclear energy, and in particular advanced nuclear, as a key part of the solution.
    https://terrapower.com/updates/netflix-documentary-on-terrapower-co-founder-and-chairman-released-inside-bills-brain-decoding-bill-gates/

    TerraPower LLC, a nuclear energy venture chaired by Microsoft Corp co-founder Bill Gates, is seeking a new partner for early-stage trials of its technology after new U.S. rules forced it to abandon an agreement with China, company officials told the Wall Street Journal.

    Gates, who co-founded TerraPower, said in his essay that regulations in the United States are currently too restrictive to allow the reactor prototype to be built domestically.
    https://terrapower.com/updates/netflix-documentary-on-terrapower-co-founder-and-chairman-released-inside-bills-brain-decoding-bill-gates/

  314. J.Ross says:
    @Mr. Anon

    Screencapped, any time Mason’s not talking about reggae or business law he’s unforgivably uninformed.

  315. anonymous[245] • Disclaimer says:
    @Desiderius

    “You’re an idiot.”

    Said someone who had just written “our ally Israel.”

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  316. Anon[930] • Disclaimer says:
    @Desiderius

    Don’t place any weight on my opinions.

    Thanks for the candid admission. “X is the wrong parallel” is an opinion, and I’ll follow your advice.

    You seem steamed up (that’s an opinion too); it doesn’t do wonders for the judgment.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  317. Ian M. says:
    @RadicalCenter

    So you don’t think there will be a drastic civilizational clash when Muslims constitute, say, 25% of Europe’s population?

    Hard to say. Depends on whether the Muslims are able to maintain their religion or whether instead they succumb to the seductive melody of androgynous secular liberalism as Christians have.

    I wouldn’t necessarily bet against the latter.

  318. dfordoom says: • Website
    @RadicalCenter

    Is there not a physical and cultural life-and-death civilizational clash already developing between Muslims and nonMuslims in Sweden, England, France, the Benelux countries, and Italy?

    I’m inclined to agree with Jack that the cultural civilisational clash thing is wildly exaggerated.

    Most people, whether they’re Muslims, Jews, Christians or atheists, are focused on stuff like doing the shopping, putting gas in the car, making sure there’s food in the refrigerator, not getting fired from their jobs, watching the kids to make sure they’re not creating more mayhem than usual, thinking about where to go on their next vacation.

    You’d be surprised how little most people care about cultural life-and-death civilisational clashes.

  319. @Anon

    It is a statement of fact. It may be a wrong statement, but that doesn’t change what it is. Tenet is the wrong parallel. Sailer would be an even more wrong parallel. This keyboard wronger still.

    I like vanilla ice cream is an opinion. Killing Soleimani was a good idea is an opinion.

    Don’t try to read emotions online, you’ll be talking more about your own than anyone else’s. Too many physical cues missing.

  320. @anonymous

    The is/ought distinction, how does it work?

    Dork Right out tonight.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  321. MBlanc46 says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    Always there with the pertinent point, Mike.

    • Thanks: MikeatMikedotMike
  322. @GW

    Iranians are actually at odds with most of the Islamic world. Their only allies are Syrians and Shiite minorities. The Sunnis (all the large Islamic countries like Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan) either don’t care for them or actively dislike them. Qatar is probably the friendliest Sunni majority country to Iran.

    I believe most Muslims in Britain are Pakistani, therefore this comment makes no sense.

  323. The droning continues with six more PMU officers getting liquidated tonight. I am very disappointed in the Trump administration right now. Soleimani was a nationalist, a patriot, a fighter, and, whether you care for Iran or not, a sympathetic figure. I disavow his sad and unnecessary murder.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  324. @Clyde

    Why are we still in Iraq? Would be cheaper for us to make Iraq the 51st state at this point.

  325. @Jonathan Mason

    I’m thinking the Republicans in Congress are responsible. They’ve wanted this for awhile and have the upper hand since he needs their support to fight impeachment.

    It’s pretty clear that’s why this ridiculous move is happening now.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  326. Ian M. says:
    @jbwilson24

    Stalin was not Russian, but rather a Georgian with a Jewish father. I’m an idiot.

    There, fixed that for ya.

  327. Ian M. says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    “Arabs hate Iran”

    Don’t you mean Sunnis hate Shia?

    No, he meant Arabs hate Iran. There is a long-standing (indeed, many centuries old) enmity between Arabs and Persians that still simmers today. Persians regard Arabs as their ancient foe.

  328. @anonymous

    Ungrammatical?

    It’s a thread of several comments. It’s not evidence of anything. I don’t necessarily agree with it, but it’s a reasonably argued perspective that many influential people hold and of which it is good to be aware. Here’s another:

    and another:

    and another:

  329. anon[377] • Disclaimer says:
    @Paleo Liberal

    I grew up in Arkansas in the 60’s. My uncles were in WW II and ancestors in the Confederate army. As boys we talked about war a lot. WW II loomed much large in our lives. That was the war we identifed with. Of course it was a given that Yankees were the bad guys.

  330. HA says:
    @Steve Sailer

    “There was a movie in 1939 about the Civil War…”

    I can think of another one a few years earlier, which was remade about two decades later. I’m pretty sure you’ve heard of it — you actually reviewed the latest remake just a few days ago.

  331. Ian M. says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    There seems to be a pattern, that any ME country with a functioning government/military and poor relations with Israel sooner or later gets attacked by the US, be it Shia, Sunni or secular.

    The two glaring exceptions are Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

    So you have what, one, maybe two ME countries with functioning governments & militaries and poor relations with Israel that have been attacked by the U.S.? (Iraq & Syria, but not sure if Syria really meets the first criterion). A third if we end up attacking Iran. Who else?

    That hardly seems to be a pattern when the ledger is 3-2.

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
  332. @Bardon Kaldian

    Depends on a photo. Here, he looks like Clooney:

    I don’t see the resemblance. Maybe in the facial expression…

  333. Jack D says:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Soleimani was a nationalist, a patriot, a fighter,

    So was Himmler. So was Beria.

    whether you care for Iran or not, a sympathetic figure.

    I understand that if you are an Iranian supporter of the Mullahs and their theocracy then you might find him sympathetic to your side but for anyone else, especially an American given that he was responsible for the deaths and mutilations of thousands of Americans, he is about as sympathetic as Himmler or Beria. He was a henchman. There is nothing sympathetic about henchmen, especially not enemy henchmen. They are as sympathetic as pit vipers.

    • Agree: Johann Ricke
  334. nebulafox says:
    @AnotherDad

    The big difference between this and what was going on last year is that this was an precise strike against a single individual who’d been killing and assassinating Americans for decades. We can debate whether the odds of this paying off is worth it or not (depends on Trump, which means we should limit our optimism), but to act as though he wasn’t a legitimate target for getting whacked reeks of the purest hypocrisy. What exactly was Soleimani doing for decades if not assassination?

    But last year, the Iranians shot down a spy camera: which, in my eyes, was also a perfectly legitimate act. You spy on people, you might get caught and face the consequences. That’s life. Instead of taking the embarrassment and moving on, Trump nearly launched an attack that would have killed hundreds of people and might have triggered a hot conflict.

    (Yes, we shouldn’t have gone into Iraq in the first place. And yes, Soleimani was a worthy professional adversary who was simply doing his job as an Iranian commander. But that’s not the point. The Iranians just proved they couldn’t protect their top man in a place that is their protectorate in all but name. If that’s not a little humbling, I don’t know what is.)

    >And if the Iranians want to retaliate against American elites–so be it. Better them trying to kill their actual antagonists than kill me or some innocent American soldiers. Frankly there are a whole lot of America’s parasitic elites–Congress, the deep state, the bloated bureaucratic swamp, business cheap labor shills, most of Wall Street, most academics, the NYT editorial board–i wouldn’t mind drone striking myself.

    The Iranians are not suicidal: they are deeply unlikely to respond to this by launching an attack against the US, assuming they have that capability in the first place. They are going to escalate their activity in Iraq against us and might go and whack a US intelligence official somewhere off the beaten path like Latin America.

    I’m more interested in seeing how Trump responds. Will he use the subsequent temporary beheading of Quds, who has to protect their position in the messy game of Iranian politics, as a golden opportunity to GTFO out of Iraq, and maybe with this stick out of the way, extend the carrot of uninterrupted control across Mesopotamia and Syria to Tehran? Could Trump be capable of that kind of long-term thinking?

    Hahahahaha! Just kidding: we’re getting more escalation while The Donald decides to openly engage in macho posturing. Just tee-damned-rrific.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  335. nebulafox says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    >It is not clear what the strategic objective of the US is.

    There is none. Since the overall ME strategy that landed us in Iraq in the first place was a rotten failure, all tactical options are kind of tainted. It doesn’t really matter what we do or not as a result: it’ll be a bad decision. There are only varying shades of black and grey.

    That’s why I advocate cutting our losses as quickly as we can without doing something too awful like setting off a nuclear arms race.

  336. MEH 0910 says:

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
  337. indocon says:
    @Desiderius

    Come think about it, the only 2 accomplishments Trump has had are tax cuts for billionaires, and further strengthening of Israel, not a damn other thing.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Desiderius
  338. nebulafox says:
    @Kratoklastes

    I normally would agree on not trusting anything The Usual Suspects in DC have to say about the world (my commenting record should speak for itself here), including when it comes to the perennial Beltway game of overblowing Iranian ambitions and capabilities… to say nothing of the dirty little fact that the Iranians and Russians were in the right in Syria.

    But it was Soleimani’s *job* in Iraq to coordinate attacks on Americans. Just ask anyone who was there. So, no, upon reflection, I don’t find it terribly hard to believe he was planning to take a lot of American lives. Maybe it is all a ruse: if that is indeed the case, we’ll find out soon, and I’ll happily eat crow. But sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

    Until we know more…

  339. anon[343] • Disclaimer says:
    @Desiderius

    Why? The US refuses to allow it to sell it’s oil.

  340. Anonymous[236] • Disclaimer says:
    @German_reader

    After I read a little more about the event I can see more where your righteous indignation is coming from. I’m a little sensitive to the typical mindless anti-Americanism that we often see from Europeans, mostly because it tends to be focused on attacking completely powerless “average” Americans who have no influence whatsoever on our government’s policies. This killing though really was indefensible and idiotic; a shameful display from Pres. Kushner. I hope that cooler heads will prevail.

    I do stand by what I said though; Steve Sailer/UNZ.com readers are hardly the group that you should be insulting. There was a very well known “purge” on the American right during the 90’s where the “neocons” removed the “paleocons” from National Review, etc. The group that is speaking out most forcefully against this idiotic killing, the bombings in Syria etc. is the so-called “Alt-Right”.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  341. Mr. Anon says:
    @Desiderius

    I want Hazony’s nationalism instead.

    He only wants it for his own people. Assuming you are not of his people: you want nationalism? Then you’ll have to have your own.

    Anyway, whatever you want, or say you want, is irrelevant. You are a supercillious clown.

  342. Mr. Anon says:
    @Anon

    Evidently, no weight should be placed on anything said by Desiderius. He’s a prating nitwit.

  343. Mr. Anon says:
    @Honesthughgrant

    I’m also puzzled why Iranian military leaders are in Iraq.

    I’m puzzled why American military leaders are in Iraq.

  344. Escher says:
    @German_reader

    Classic Pavlovian response. Kill a manufactured enemy, beat the drums about it, and watch the proles go “USA, USA!!”

  345. bomag says:
    @Kratoklastes

    Soleimani was a uniformed member of the armed forces of a sovereign nation with which the US is not at war… It would be interesting to view your histrionics if the current head of JSOC was killed while in Syria

    Well, we had this guy, who was killed in a rather grisly manner; it still rankles; I imagine it was a factor precipitating this event.

    Yes, Iran can hide behind its proxy Hezbollah. Changes nothing.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @Jack D
    , @Anonymous
  346. Pericles says:
    @German_reader

    also inundate Europe with millions more refugees (genuine ones actually!).

    There are no genuine refugees. Let’s just drop this self-destructive, obsolete concept.

  347. @Kratoklastes

    Your comment fully encapsulates the effectiveness of Hollywood propaganda, especially on primitive people like yours who have only relatively recently been lifted out of primal savagery by Western advances. You saw Raising Arizona or Jarhead once or some other farcical representation of the US and think you’re an expert on rural America. Have you ever been the the US, Krackhead?

    Not too long ago your people were into practicing cannibalism and engaging in intercourse with dead things. You scream at wedding receptions and try to convince the rest of the world that it’s a really cool culture tradition.

    How the resentment must burn.

  348. S says:
    @Uhh...

    That’s a very weird comparison you’re trying to make here.

    Nothing weird about the comparison at all. The United States since the time of its founding has had numerous parallels with ancient Rome. [See links below]

    For instance, land carefully chosen for which the capital Washington DC was built upon was called ‘Rome’ complete with it’s own Tiber running through it.

    As for the First Triumvirate and the present US government the parallel is plain.

    A search of ‘Trump Crassus’ will find numerous hits. The Secretary of State’s surname Pompeo is literally the same name as ‘Pompey’, just spelled slightly differently. The case for Jared Kushner paralleling Julius Caeser isn’t quite as strong as the other triumvirate parallels, but they are certainly there.

    Both Triumvirates and the transformation of the Republic into the Empire were the results of a long process dictated by the Roman State’s political
    trajectory.

    The ‘Empire’ was a dictatorship. Conquests of other peoples over centuries had (in part) made the Republic unwieldy to govern.

    Republics and empires don’t mix.

    As the Romans expanded and standing armies became a necessity, the centralization of power was inevitable; otherwise, centrifugal forces would have broken the Republic up.

    Or, foregoing empire, if they had not conquered so many other peoples and their territories, they may not have needed the standing armies and been able to better retain their Republic and Latin identity, physically and culturally.

    And neither Triumvirate was a catastrophe for Rome: the Empire kept expanding for at least 200 years after Caesar’s death, and its Eastern part survived as a major player in the region for another 1000. Rome itself wouldn’t be sacked until 410 AD.

    Julius Caesar being proclaimed ‘dictator’ for life set the template for the future emperors. The Senate became a rubber stamp for whatever the emperor wanted, rather than an actual deliberative body.

    For every ‘good’ emperor there seemed to be at least one (or more) psychopath emperors. Costly and destructive civil wars became a routine for transitions of power forever weakening the body politic.

    Empire’s have it seems, with rare exception, sought world domination.

    Regarding peoplehood and empire, there’s a lot of truth in the biblical admonition about ‘gaining the world and losing one’s soul.’

    That said, the unlikely dissolution of the US would free the (western) world from many of its most virulent ideologies du jour.

    Regarding ‘the unlikely dissolution of the US’ I wish I had your confidence.

    My guess is they may be planning a top down economic collapse of the US, ie a ‘fall of Capitalism’ paralleling the Soviet Union’s ‘fall of Communism’ circa 1990.

    This might be combined with a Russian style ‘Civil War’, which as Solzhenitsyn alluded in his writings, was in reality a war by the Bolsheviks upon most any identity (particularly Russian) that had existed there.

    In other words, if some of the Hispanic population of the US attempts to create an ‘Aztlan’ empire in the Southwest, the radicalized left will make war upon them as well, in addition to their war against Anglos and other Euros who simply wish to preserve themselves as a group.

    And a world war (WWIII) may well figure in these events.

    The ultimate objective as this manufactured centuries old Hegelian Dialectic moves forward being (apparently) the convergance of the Capitalist thesis and Communist anti-thesis to form a final synthesis of the two in global multi-culturalism. This will manifest as a world state/empire, no doubt to be called (in theory) a ‘republic’.

    I hope I’m very mistaken. We’ll see what transpires.

    https://alison-morton.com/2015/06/21/rome-and-washington-dc/

    https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/the_new_rome_or_the_united_states_of_the_world_1853/

    • Replies: @S
  349. Could it be that this is all a great lie,that Soleimani was not the target? The real target was Sean Connery?

    • LOL: kaganovitch
  350. eugyppius says:
    @Ozymandias

    Soleimani visited Baghdad regularly and nobody ever made a secret about it. The PMU militias formed to oppose ISIS from 2014 received substantial training and support from Quds officers. They did so with the approval of the Iraqi state, as organized militias under the umbrella of the Iraqi army. Soleimani’s latest visit was obviously in connection to the PMU militias because he met the deputy PMU chief, whom we also killed in this strike. The Iraqi state is supposed to enjoy nominal sovereignty which means that they are allowed to approve arrangements like this. The embassy fracas is a total red herring: reporting from the beginning has been that the hit was in the works well before 31 Dec.

  351. Dube says:
    @Jack D

    You’re a busy man, Jack.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    , @Moshe
    , @S. Anonyia
  352. eugyppius says:
    @Jack D

    You seem very confident of this. How would you know? Pompeo says otherwise

    Pompeo told CNN that Soleimani was planning to “take actions” or perhaps even take “a big action” that would “put dozens if not hundreds of American lives at risk” and then he went on to characterize these actions as “threats located in the region.” What does all of that even mean? This is what it means: operations in Iraq or Syria which would be coordinated with the PMU, i.e. legitimate elements of the Iraqi army. If this is “planning attacks on Americans” that justify drone assassination, then Americans will have a hard time complaining about the injustice of assassinations of US military officials who were “planning attacks on Iraqis”.

    This vague drivel is such weak sauce that it has to be supplemented with this totally incoherent propaganda storm of lies and half-truths and impossibilities we are now experiencing. Soleimani helped “10 of the 12” (!) 9/11 hijackers 18 years ago! Soleimani planted IEDs ten years ago which may have killed 600 US soldiers or maybe 700 US soldiers or who knows! Every few hours one finds a New Reason.

    Meanwhile, the US has hit five PMU positions placed to limit ISIS movement along the Syrian/Iraq border, they killed a deputy PMU chief and ISIS’s greatest foe, Soleimani; and just last night they hit another PMU convoy. This quite plainly isn’t about American lives. But it is starting to look a lot like it is about ISIS and the PMU militia founded to oppose them.

    • Agree: German_reader
    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @Jonathan Mason
  353. Anonymous[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Reminds me of an old joke by that celebrated Scots comedian Jimmy Boyle,

    Commenting on the then change of Labour Party leadership from Tony Blair to Gordon Brown, Boyle quipped, that foreigners unfamiliar with the minutiae of British politics would conclude that ‘Tony Blair has put on weight – and suffered a minor stroke”.

  354. Anonymous[421] • Disclaimer says:
    @indocon

    No different to any other Republican President, then.

  355. J.Ross says:

    Just in time for Israel’s satraps’ latest gift to the Minotaur!
    Marine Boot Integration — Get Clap Now Rather Than At MOS School
    https://www.businessinsider.com/marine-corps-platoon-level-gender-integration-required-at-boot-camp-2020-1

  356. Anonymous[158] • Disclaimer says:
    @ben tillman

    Not knowing who this guy was means that Steve (and many of te rest of us) didn’t do something that is “very bad” and didn’t cause a “terrible war”.

    Wrong. The more one knows about the Middle East and its recent history, the less likely is one to support Zionist-fomented intervention in the region.

    What would you expectus to pay attention to a guy you don’t want us to do anything about?

    The only people we should pay attention to are those whom we should “do something about” (as in, get aggressive with)?

    Your comment is really one of your dumbest ever.

  357. J.Ross says:

    Remember John Kerry going behind the government’s back and separately negotiating with Iran, even after Trump Delusionals pushed prosecutions for the Logan Act: remember Kerry telling Iran to just wait because Trump didn’t know what he was doing and anyway he would be gone soon? Anyone else remember that?
    Anyone think Iran is interested in private citizen Kerry’s brilliant opinions now?

    • Agree: Jesse
  358. anonymous[245] • Disclaimer says:
    @Desiderius

    It may be dorky, but using words precisely helps in discussions like these.

    “ally: a country that has agreed officially to give help and support to another one, especially during a war”

    Are “we” there yet?

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    , @Mr. Anon
  359. Bill P says:
    @German_reader

    Hi German Reader, I would like to point out that Steve’s post was quite literal — he was criticizing the headlines. Most of us have no idea who this guy is, and it’s up to the media here to know that and report accordingly instead of acting as though the Iranian general is a household name in the US.

    So I think you overreacted to the post, assuming there was some intent to gloat or belittle there that did not actually exist.

    If anything, the post was a crack at American journalists.

    It’s ok, I understand how frustrating all this is to Europeans — I’m married to one and hear about it all the time. But please for a moment give us Americans the benefit of the doubt. Not everything we say and do has a double meaning.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  360. anonymous[245] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    But Mr. Sailer (and some of his biggest fans here) are NOT “speaking out most forcefully against this idiotic killing, the bombings in Syria etc.” His candid profession of ignorance and longstanding indication that he doesn’t much care is what set this off, isn’t it?

    • Replies: @Pegasus
  361. @Ian M.

    Well back in the old days Israel used to fight its own wars. Egypt (pre-filled Aswan), Jordan, Syria.

    Now the US does it for them. Simples!

    (German Reader, one other reason for ignorance, certainly mine, is that for the last few years I’ve simply stopped listening/reading/watching mainstream news, which is all about spinning a narrative rather than telling us what’s happening. For example, those good Europeans at the BBC and Guardian have almost completely ignored what’s been happening in France over the last year)

    • Replies: @German_reader
    , @Anonymous
  362. anonymous[245] • Disclaimer says:
    @bomag

    Even your Wikipedia source says that “this guy” was CIA, whose cover was the US embassy in Beirut. Thirty-five years ago.

    Only someone who identifies (“we had this guy”) with his Uncle Sam and snaps to attention once the missiles start flying could rationalize any such justification.

    Did you also believe Mr. Powell when he shook that vial of WMD at the UN?

    • Replies: @bomag
  363. Jack D says:
    @nebulafox

    Hahahahaha! Just kidding:

    Not really. There’s nothing that Trump likes better than doing a deal. The problem is that the deals that he offers are no usually acceptable unless you are in deep distress. He’ll offer you 10 cents on the dollar and you’ll take it because otherwise you get nothing. So in order to do a deal with the Donald, he has to beat you up first so that you are in an adequate amount of distress that you’re willing to take a Trump deal.

  364. Jack D says:
    @bomag

    Soleimani was responsible for many more American deaths and more recent ones and was planning even more – it was his job to do so, his raison d’etre. The arguments here come down to “we tolerated him doing this for so many years, even decades. What has changed? Why is Trump drumming up a war now when we allowed Iran to piss on us for decades as long as they could maintain some thin curtain of deniabiity?” Even Soleimani didn’t expect this shift and he paid for it with his life. He was as confident as Heydrich visiting the Reich Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia.

  365. Jack D says:
    @eugyppius

    What you are reciting is the exact opposite of what you think it means. Soleimani has been killing Americans for 20+ years. His death was justified a thousand times over. The question is not why we put the hit on him now but why we let him live for so long. The answer is mostly cowardice ( and an understanding that the rest of his gang of criminals is going to seek revenge). These are not good excuses and I am glad that Trump has finally dispensed with them.

  366. @indocon

    So you’re saying you’re not much for thinking. No shame in that, most people these days aren’t, what with the specific being declasse, but you’ve always got a better option.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  367. @Jack D

  368. SFG says:
    @Jack D

    I have no respect whatsoever for the mullahs and their regime.

    I still don’t see the need to go to war with them. Do we go to war with every tin-pot dictator in Africa? Sorry. I don’t hate Israel but there’s no reason we have to send American boys to do their dirty work for them.

  369. @Bardon Kaldian

    Connery’s a good pick but I was already thinking Clooney, as TV and movie heroes often turn to villainous character roles as their careers decline. (And according to our traitorous media Mr. Quds was such a suave, sensitive, poetry-loving soul, perfect for Clooney)

    • Replies: @LondonBob
  370. @anonymous

    We, kimosabe?

    You go on ahead and pick a fight with Mossad. My country has other fish to fry.

  371. Anon[842] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnotherDad

    Well the empire creates these streams of refugees for a (((people))) who hate your guts

    It’s only poetic justice that the belly of the empire gets drowned in them

    Im looking forward to the eventual destruction of the empire. If it takes boatloads of brown immigrants so be it

  372. AndrewR says:
    @Mr. Anon

    I’m obviously not criticizing Sailer for not knowing the name before this week, but I think you knew that.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  373. S says:
    @S

    This has been corrected with the emboldened portion to read:

    In other words, if some of the Hispanic population of the US attempts to create an ‘Aztlan’ ethnic state in the Southwest, the radicalized left will make war upon them as well, in addition to their war against Anglos and other Euros who simply wish to preserve themselves as a group.

  374. @YetAnotherAnon

    German Reader, one other reason for ignorance, certainly mine, is that for the last few years I’ve simply stopped listening/reading/watching mainstream news,

    I haven’t watched or read mainstream news either for years (don’t even have a working tv, don’t read newspapers anymore). I do make some modest effort though to follow Mideast affairs and American foreign policy in the region (mostly through American sites btw, it’s not like you need to read some weird anti-American propaganda with its own agenda like Russia today to get a picture of how utterly crazy and reckless the policies of Trump’s administration are). So I knew immediately that assassinating Soleimani was a major escalation which is bound to have terrible consequences (which a lot of commenters here are still underestimating imo).
    It’s been clear for years that Trump’s maximum pressure policy was going to lead to a collision with Iran, and it’s also clear that many figures around him have regime change in Iran as their goal and are willing to go to war for that. Trump voters who think that this course is likely to lead to disastrous consequences should have made an effort to make it clear that they won’t stand for this. But unfortunately most can’t even muster the necessary attention to understand what’s going on, and remain indifferent or fall into spouting jingoistic platitudes.

  375. @eugyppius

    Pompeo told CNN that Soleimani was planning to “take actions” or perhaps even take “a big action” that would “put dozens if not hundreds of American lives at risk” and then he went on to characterize these actions as “threats located in the region.”

    So according to Pompeo/Trump, Soleimani was in the process of starting a war by killing Americans in the Middle East, and this war was prevented by killing Soleimani since his organization would be unable to kill the Americans without him at the helm. Okay. By killing Soleimani that war has been prevented, but possible another war will take its place.

    In this interview the Iranian ambassador to the US was saying “show us the proof”.

    https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2020/01/04/615309/Iran-United-States-assassination-Soleimani-act-of-war

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  376. Mr. Anon says:
    @Desiderius

    It’s a good question deserving of an in depth answer, so here’s a thread listing some of what he’s done in 3 years. Read it all!

    And then you don’t link to the list. There are lots of accomplishments………..trust me.

    I guess a blowhard like Trump appeals to blowhards like you.

    Idiot.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  377. Mr. Anon says:
    @anonymous

    Desiderius has really outed himself as a clown on this thread. He blows out a big cloud of squid-ink in order to not just say what he thinks. I still don’t know what he really thinks. I do know however that I don’t care, as he’s a rank idiot.

  378. Mr. Anon says:
    @Dube

    @Jack D

    You’re a busy man, Jack.

    He’s the James Brown of Keyboard-Sayanim.

  379. @Jack D

    The trouble with your argument is that it justifies any other nation putting a hit on Trump or any of his top officials so as to prevent future deaths. The weird thing is that the White House “lawyers” would probably agree, but they they also support torture for the same reason.

  380. Moshe says:
    @Dube

    Indeed,.

    I apologize on behalf of Jack and all other reasonable sounding people tainted by jewishness.

    The truth is this:

    We killed him. And by we I mean Zionists, and by him I mean Soolemeenee. Also Christ.

    The reasons we did it are obvious. Money, wealth, power, sex, posterity, and the Devil.

    Jack is running haspara as are his orders but having recently come into F-U money when Zaidy Rothschild died I feel free to say the truth.

    We killed him.

    Just to draw America into a war with the Mahdi.

    Just to watch the world burn.

    For our entertainment.

    P.S. The whole point of Trump is to get Ivanka into The Bloodline. I assume you already knew that but it’s an exact quote from the Minutes of our meeting circa 2005.

    P.P.S. As a Good Jew I’m sorry about the 5 to 6 billion Goyim who are going to have to die in the coming war (finished in under 20 years) but, hey, you read the Bible [including the “Christian” one I mean] so we hope you understand.

    • LOL: Clyde
  381. HA says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    “The trouble with your argument is that it justifies any other nation putting a hit on Trump or any of his top officials so as to prevent future deaths.”

    Remember, for Jack D, those who are at the top of the heap are allowed to operate under a different set of rules and prerogatives, which do not apply to those who are below them.

    Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  382. Anonymous[166] • Disclaimer says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Well back in the old days Israel used to fight its own wars. Egypt (pre-filled Aswan), Jordan, Syria.

    It’s probably as much about geography and country potency as anything else. Those countries are on Israel’s border and have relatively week militaries.

    It makes sense for Israel to use the US military to strike at more distant or potent targets such as Iraq, Iran, Libya, and Serbia.

  383. ChrisZ says:
    @S

    Creative comment, S.

    God forbid that the future should regard Jared Kushner in the same way we do Julius Caesar. But they do have the same initials (mutatis mutandis).

    The similarity between Pompey and Pompeo is even more striking—I’m surprised I’ve never noticed it.

    Crassus-Trump presents more of a problem. But close your eyes and say “Crass U.S.”—and I’d be surprised if an image of the President doesn’t quickly come to mind (whether you love him or hate him).

    • Replies: @S
    , @S
  384. nebulafox says:
    @Kratoklastes

    >That’s odd; I thought that one of the problems with Iran was that it is a ‘hard line’ theocracy.

    Not in the conventional sense, no: Iran is not Saudi Arabia, on multiple levels. Iranian politics can be deeply messy, with different interest groups pursuing different and sometimes contradictory agendas in foreign and domestic policy. Once you start looking at Iran as an authoritarian hive of different interest groups as opposed to a totalitarian monolith, things like the herky-jerky nature of Iran’s dabbling with a nuclear program start to make a lot more sense. Khomeni’s dream of a Platonic republic ruled by religious scholars is long dead: corruption is commonplace, cynicism far moreso. That’s why Soleimani’s death is such a big deal domestically for Iran: he was the head one of the most important competing power blocks.

    Iran’s coherent agenda these days, to the extent there is one, is traditional Persian power politics than Khomeini’s dreams of religious revolution all over the Muslim World. This is something the US steadfastly refuses to acknowledge.

    Good luck getting the American media to acknowledge this, though.

    >And yet the Iranians still steadfastly refuse to even attempt to do so.

    They will likely opt for Israeli style nuclear ambiguity, if they ever get there. And they will. Eventually. They are willing to postpone development, but they are never going to give up that bargaining chip in the forseeable future. They’d be utterly stupid to after the last couple of decades of US foreign policy.

    I think it’s better to just accept that reality and move on rather than start a war over it.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  385. @Jonathan Mason

    The trouble with your argument is that it justifies any other nation putting a hit on Trump or any of his top officials so as to prevent future deaths.

    The West adheres to rules because of its holier-than-thou sense of morality, brought on by an electorate lacking civilizational confidence. The rest adheres to them because they fear getting stomped by Uncle Sam. If it weren’t for Uncle Sam, Russia would have re-occupied all of the former Soviet Union, and perhaps all of the Warsaw Pact. Principles and justifications have nothing to do with it. If it weren’t for the US, China would be collecting tolls for passage across the Pacific. That’s the reality of life outside of Pax Americana – big fish eat little fish.

    • Agree: Jack D
    • Replies: @Futurethirdworlder
  386. Bumpkin says:
    @John Gruskos

    Which was obvious from the very beginning. The nationalists were so happy that for once a candidate was singing their song, with a full throat at that, that they never once stopped to think, “Wait, this guy’s Trump-branded neckties are made in China, is he just using us?” They got what they deserved when they were betrayed.

  387. @German_reader

    I’m placing my hopes in Tucker Carlson 2024.

    Trump wasted 8 precious years, but it might be worth it if the dissident right learns something from this catastrophe.

    A man who promises all the right things (immigration restriction, social conservatism, non-interventionist foreign policy, populist economics, freedom of speech) can’t be trusted if he has a son-in-law named Kushner.

  388. Anonymous[166] • Disclaimer says:
    @Kratoklastes

    It also shows that Western behaviour towards that part of the world has nothing to do with interest in the well-being of da Joooze.

    One little-known individual’s statement in a 1914 telegram proves that Western behavior in the Middle East has nothing to do with Jewish interests. Got it. I thought you were intelligent and unfortunately will have to revise that assessment.

    If Western behavior is not susceptible to Jewish interests, why do Jews spend so much time and energy trying to influence it?

  389. @Dube

    My theory is that Jack is a disinfo agent, probably Hasbara but possibly for the U.S, too. Nothing else explains how often he is able to make these detailed posts.

    Other possibility retired intelligence operative or think tank dude with way too much time on his hands.

  390. @Jonathan Mason

    The trouble with your argument is that it justifies any other nation putting a hit on Trump or any of his top officials so as to prevent future deaths.

    Trump did not order an attack on the Iranian Embassy and taking hostages of the diplomatic personnel. Trump did not order an attack on Iranians in Beirut resulting in 241 Iranian deaths. Trump did not perfect IEDs and did not deploy them to kill or maim Iranian soldiers and marines in Iraq.

    Iran chose war with us in 1979 and have been fighting us ever since. Your argument does not work because your attempt at reversal fails. Iran started the war, and escalates it as far as possible until we respond. Your reversal ignores that fact.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
  391. Jack D says:
    @HA

    That’s absolutely right. There really is no such thing as international law. There is only victor’s justice. The United Nations is a debating society. The only real principle in international affairs is “might makes right.” If we can put a hit on Solemaini and get away with it, then it’s right. If Iran can put a hit on Trump and not get nuked as a result, then they were right. Who is to say otherwise? Is the International Criminal Court going to come and arrest Donald Trump? You want justice on this earth? Find some other planet.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @SFG
    , @HA
    , @Dube
    , @reiner Tor
    , @Anon
  392. Of only mullahs knew how many fans they got here….. they would instantly donate to isteve, just to keep the comments going…

    • Replies: @German_reader
  393. @S. Anonyia

    He’s getting his information from CNN. Don’t believe the hype.

    Think Barbary pirates.

  394. @Mr. Anon

    Twitter, how does it work?

    The link’s there at the bottom right, grandpa. Arrow thing.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  395. Wow! Between the pearl-clutching and the hand-wringing I cannot tell whether I stumbled into a seminar at the Brookings Institution or a United Methodist Ladies Aid meeting.

    Trump is a Jacksonian.

    The Democrats have been talking to the Iranians, because both have a common enemy: Trump. If Democrats win the election we go back to the Obama deal with another round of bribery money in the form of pallets of unmarked bills, a path to both nuclear weapons and intercontinental missiles, and, most importantly for the mullahs, the sanctions will be lifted. Democrats have told the Iranians the same.

    The Iranians assumed they could outmaneuver Trump by putting him in a no-win situation. Either he loses the embassy in Baghdad in a Benghazi-US-Embassy-in-Iran manner, or he takes the political blowback for retaliating. There is some blowback, as exhibited by the posts here, Tucker, Buchanan, Rand. But it won’t be enough to derail Trump’s re-election.

    Trump chose the Jacksonian response, consistent with Game Theory 101. In this case, iterative game theory. We shall see what the Iranians do, but whatever they choose to do, they should expect a Jacksonian response.

    • Agree: Desiderius
  396. Jack D says:
    @nebulafox

    What we really need is a series of homes for retired dictators all over the world. The Saudis could host the Muslim ones, the Chinese could host the Asians, Mexico could do the Latinos, etc. As it stands now, there is no graceful way out for dictators. Assad might have been willing to throw in the towel at some point but he knew that it would end with him on the gallows or with his mutilated corpse being dragged thru the streets so he had nothing to lose by fighting on.

    Now as retired dictators they would no longer wield the power of life and death as in their glory days, but they could still live in nice palaces and they would get to die of old age in bed and not always be listening for the sound of the incoming American missile (apparently the Reaper drone runs real quiet – you never even hear it coming). Some might be willing to take that deal.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    , @res
  397. Now I see why you largely avoid FP, Steve.

    Embarassing show here in the comments.

    We’ll have to see whether this falls under the rubric of invasion or cleaning up prior invasions. I don’t see anyone but fools claiming the former.

  398. Anon[930] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    OK but we’ll remember that next time you complain about anything.

  399. Clyde says:
    @Kratoklastes

    Your post was more retarded than the ones eugyppius the agitated has been dumping here. Get a grip, both of you!

  400. SFG says:
    @Jack D

    Yeah, but we still face consequences. If we wind up with a long and bloody war with Iran, that’s a real problem. I mean, it’ll be worse for the Iranians than it will be for us, but it’s still unnecessary.

  401. @S. Anonyia

    He’s just another dude trying to make sense of this crazy world. He makes detailed posts because he reads and has read alot. Paid Hasbara would be both stupider and more unctuous.

    We’ve all got exactly the same amount of time on our hands. Jack spends a good deal here, as do I. It’s where a decent amount of the action is.

  402. @SFG

    That goes without saying. No one is foreseeing any like that. Fracking takes that off the table.

  403. War With Iran?
    The United States has preferred toothless sanctions over victory. But sometimes the right sanctions are deadlier than atom bombs.

    Angelo Codevilla – January 3rd, 2020

    https://amgreatness.com/2020/01/03/war-with-iran/

    • Replies: @German_reader
  404. @Johann Ricke

    “The West adheres to rules.” Yeah, that they set and reset when it suits them. Take for example the mass aerial bombing of civilians in WW2 and the Nuremberg trials.

    • Replies: @German_reader
  405. @Bardon Kaldian

    Of only mullahs knew how many fans they got here

    That’s a lame strawman. I certainly don’t have much sympathy for Iran’s system of government and would prefer it, if Iranians reformed it into a more secular direction. Doesn’t change the fact that war with Iran is a profoundly bad idea and will cause nothing but misery in the region, either by even more state collapse (and a possible resurgence of Sunni jihadis) or by empowering the most radical elements in the Iranian elite (war will be a great pretext to crush any dissent, those favouring negotiations with Western countries already look pretty foolish given Trump’s actions since mid-2018). Its effects will also be profoundly detrimental to European security which is my main concern.
    And I don’t see how this thread shows “the mullahs have many fans”, imo it shows that even on a supposedly dissident site like Unz review a high percentage of American commenters consist of people who apparently haven’t yet had enough of Mideast wars.

    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  406. @Desiderius

    From the linked article:

    Were the United States to place secondary sanctions on all manner of goods, especially food, the effect would be far greater than an invasion by the entire U.S. army. How the Iranian people would deal with the choice between starving and ending their government’s war on America would be their business.

    Wow, nice, real humanitarian, sort of like the Wehrmacht before Leningrad. At least honest though, none of that bs pretense “We’ve got nothing against the wonderful Iranian people, only want it to be free” that people like Pompeo keep spouting.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  407. @SFG

    If we wind up with a long and bloody war with Iran, that’s a real problem.

    The deputy commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps , Brigadier General Ali Fadavi, said the US “resorted to such means as diplomacy this morning [Friday] and even told us ‘if you want to take revenge, do it in a way that’s proportional to what we did’.” [The Guardian]

    If this is really true, is the US signaling that this was a massive balls-up and it would be OK to take out Pompeo, Esper, or one of the Trump boys to please the Islamic world, but please don’t start a war?

  408. nebulafox says:
    @Jack D

    The Saudis already fulfill that function to some extent for dictators in the Islamic World, including ones they didn’t particularly like. It’s deeply embedded in traditional Bedouin culture that if an individual formally supplicates himself to you and begs for your protection, you have to give it. Think a modern version of Bronze Age Greece.

    This does has its limits: if you try to assassinate members of the royal family, like Gaddafi did, you aren’t welcome. I suspect the mullahs would fall into the same category, given their own track record of assassination attempts against Saudi officials. But within reason, they are very accommodating.

    >Assad might have been willing to throw in the towel at some point but he knew that it would end with him on the gallows or with his mutilated corpse being dragged thru the streets so he had nothing to lose by fighting on.

    If he ever figured he’d lose, so it’d have to be prior to 2013. I’d go further and would say it’d have to be during the initial, political stages of the revolution before it erupted into civil war. Contra to the image on Unz, there were many people in the IC and in the military who baldly stated that short of Operation SYRIAN FREEDOM, Assad was going to win any civil conflict. I actually have a very close-and remarkable-personal anecdote on this that I’d share if we weren’t on the Internet.

    (The Obama White House-as well as the top brass-really didn’t like that answer in the height of the whole Arab Spring fervor, so they simply ignored it. Some things never change.)

    This makes it tricky because of the Assad regime’s nature: not impossible, but tricky. Going back to the 1970s, it has always been an extremely tightly-run, paranoia infused ship: Mitrokhin does an excellent job of documenting that in his section on Syria, and just how much that has its roots in the government being dominated by a minority considered heretical by the Muslim mainstream. The sectarian tensions were escalated, like in Iraq, by decades of Ba’athist policies. That’s not usually a situation conducive to getting either rebels or government to back down.

    This raises an interesting question: why didn’t he just pull another Hama, though, and nip things in the bud? Was he thinking the world was watching too much in 2011 and didn’t want to provoke a response like Libya was getting, and wanted to hedge his bets? Or did he just not have the ability to do what his old man did?

  409. J.Ross says:

    Is Iraq a sovereign country? Find out the astonishing answer in SOFA II: Particle Beam Boogaloo. “I want more deployments than ever before, but legal deployments!”
    https://postimg.cc/sMC5h3rq

  410. @anon

    Iran is a case study in forebearance. Only in the fevered minds of the Neocons is Iran the “next Nazi Germany!”

    By the way, it’s interesting that the people who are cheerleading (but not actually fighting) this coming Iran War are largely the same people who cheerleaded (but didn’t actually fight) the 2003 Iraq War.

    What a (((Cohencidence)))!

  411. nebulafox says:
    @SFG

    I truly am skeptical that the United States of 2020 is ready for an Operation IRANIAN FREEDOM, fiscally, politically, and above all socially. Maybe even militarily, to a limited extent. Although Iran obviously doesn’t stand a chance against us conventionally in the long haul and there is no way the war will end in anything but the regime’s downfall, this is going to be a more intensive operation than the military has had for a long time, running over weaker opponents. And we’re a lot rustier than the general public estimates.

    Iran is three times the size of Iraq with far rougher terrain, has way more strategic depth, and has national cohesion to a degree that nobody else in the region except for Israel truly has. It’ll be ugly. “Winnable”, but uglier than anyone is guessing.

    But that’s not my main point here. This is: the last half-century should show explicitly that tactical ass-kickings mean nothing without a coherent, favorable political result-and thus a strategic victory-at the end. And I don’t see us getting that. We’re just going to get a far nastier, bigger Iraq. And the USA of today is not the USA of 2003. Our structures and social ties have taken such a beating at the hands of our rulers that all bets will be off when the war inevitably goes sour. To say nothing of further bankrupting an already pillaged state.

    • Replies: @A123
  412. @Futurethirdworlder

    Take for example the mass aerial bombing of civilians in WW2 and the Nuremberg trials.

    Bad example, no Luftwaffe officer was ever tried by the western allies for air attacks (only such case I know of was Alexander Löhr, who was executed in Yugoslavia partly because of the bombing of Belgrade in 1941), because it was recognized that German actions in this regard hadn’t been really worse than what the allies themselves had done. Similarly with the U-boat campaign, when parallels with the US submarine campaign in the Pacific were pointed out. So there was at least some consistency in 1945/46.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  413. @Charles Erwin Wilson 3

    Iran chose war with us in 1979 and have been fighting us ever since… Iran started the war, and escalates it as far as possible until we respond.

    Really the current situation starts with Trump coming into office with the Iran nuclear proliferation treaty in place, not in 1979. What about the US shooting down an Iranian passenger airliner flight 655 in 1988? Iran did not use that as an excuse to attack the US mainland or to escalate what you describe as an ongoing war.

    You sound as if you have perhaps lost a family member in the mid east wars. Well, my grandfather was long ago stoned to death by a mob in Mosul, Iraq, when he had 6 young children, which ultimately affected the whole of my family over several generation, but you have to let go of the past and deal with the present moment.

  414. Anonymous[166] • Disclaimer says:
    @S. Anonyia

    My theory is that Jack is a disinfo agent, probably Hasbara but possibly for the U.S, too. Nothing else explains how often he is able to make these detailed posts.

    Or maybe Jews are just smart, as reflected in the IQ data people talk about around here.

  415. J.Ross says:

    How To Attack Americans Without Fear of Government Interference
    General Qasem Goofusani demonstrates the incorrect method. He is videotaped outside one of our overseas outposts, well outside our borders, and makes no effort to clarify that his enemies are white. Justice is swift in his case.
    Gallant Pirate Captain al-Minisauta demonstrates the correct way to safe, hassle-free terrorism. He’s well within US borders, possibly having claimed to be a “refugee,” and his target is specifically white. The government will do nothing. In fact, so comfortable does al-Minisauta feel that he has uploaded his adventures to social media.
    https://www.bitchute.com/video/4ncybuqhLNa1/

  416. mobi says:
    @German_reader

    Then why are so many commenters here writing that killing Soleimani was a fantastic idea, because “Iran shouldn’t have attacked our embassy”

    Much (most?) of the gung-ho commentary here is (((deflection))).

    In case you’re new here.

  417. Just another day that I miss Merle Haggard

    AMERICA FIRST

    “Let’s get out of Iraq and get back on the track”

  418. @Vendetta

    “Soviet production never produced enough material to sustain the war effort in any key area.” from: https://weaponsandwarfare.com/2019/01/15/lend-lease-to-the-ussr/

    Regardless, the overarching point is still true: if Britain and America had negotiated their ways out and left Germany to fight the Soviets alone, they could have bled themselves out.

  419. @res

    I think anyone who expected Trump to back down was being foolish given his personality and the example of Jimmy Carter in 1979 staring him in the face. By the way, notice that both incidents occurred less than a year before a US presidential election.

    Good thing many American voters, as much of the reaction in this thread shows, are a bunch of suckers who don’t give any more of a damn for constitutional law than our so-called leaders do. It really is ridiculous and disgusting that anyone could celebrate this aggression.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  420. mobi says:
    @Vendetta

    “Now they say that the allies never helped us, but it can’t be denied that the Americans gave us so many goods without which we wouldn’t have been able to form our reserves and continue the war,

    We didn’t have explosives, gunpowder. We didn’t have anything to charge our rifle cartridges with. The Americans really saved us with their gunpowder and explosives. And how much sheet steel they gave us! How could we have produced our tanks without American steel? But now they make it seem as if we had an abundance of all that. Without American trucks we wouldn’t have had anything to pull our artillery with.

    Georgy Zhukov

  421. bomag says:
    @anonymous

    …was CIA

    Station Chief is a pretty open position. You can’t slide much between these two as to level of importance and job description.

    The ones snapping to attention here are leftists who like to wax on about the virtuousness of Iranian covert ops.

  422. HA says:
    @Jack D

    “There is only victor’s justice…. The only real principle in international affairs is “might makes right.’”

    Ah, and there we have it, should anyone be surprised by so frank an admission. Mind you, Jack D is not very consistent about any of this, and when people he cares about are not among the victors, then he waxes metaphysical, deploring those who have become “blind to humanity” or somesuch.

    It also seems pretty understandable why those trying to build a society where people are not simply slabs of meat for the delectation of the rich and powerful would choose to be ever-watchful of those who make Jack D’s words their guiding ethos, perhaps even to the point of excluding or expelling them. And if that should happen, it’s no big deal. Big fish eat little fish, after all.

    If I am not around, I also hope others will remember this exchange the next time Jack D mentions Cossacks, or Inquisitors or Nazis, and will remind all concerned that he and his cheerleaders have absolutely no leg to stand on. Victor’s justice, after all.

    Finally, as I recall, Jack, you’re a lawyer, right? Is this by any chance your standard closing argument? When you shout out the above words, do you also flip the bird to the opposing side before dropping the mic and stomping out of the courtroom? If so, what is the judge’s typical response?

  423. A123 says:
    @nebulafox

    I truly am skeptical that the United States of 2020 is ready for an Operation IRANIAN FREEDOM, fiscally, politically, and above all socially. Maybe even militarily, to a limited extent.

    Fear not! No such plan exists. Trump doctrine is AYATOLLAH CONTAINMENT. The goal is limiting Khameni’s authoritarian Theocracy so it cannot threaten and damage other nations.

    Trump is not going to follow the Hillary/Bush/Obama doctrine that flopped repeatedly & spectacularly. Ultra-leftist, Globalist nation building failed in both Iraq and Egypt.

    — Iraq is still struggling with internal divisions that no one from the outside can fix.
    — Egypt was able to kick out the extremists on all sides. While military rule is not ‘pretty’, it did save the people of Egypt.

    Hopefully the Iranian people will take this opportunity to free themselves from decades of failed governance. Ultimately, it is up to the Citizens of Iran to create something that people will believe in and support. It is highly unlikely to resemble what the arrogant EU and UN/NWO elites would call a ‘liberal democracy’.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @SFG
  424. @German_reader

    War is hell, German_reader.

    • Replies: @German_reader
  425. @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

    Pickett’s rhetorical Charge into incoherence.

    Taking out Saddam was aggression. Taking out this guy was long overdue justice.

  426. @HA

    He’s just trying to be a hardass about what is, not what should be. He’s also drawing the contrast between the legitimacy of national law and international law. You want to cheer on the UN this might not be the best place.

    Reasonable Institutional Center Left take:

    • Replies: @HA
  427. @Desiderius

    How profound. Interesting that someone who calls himself a Christian (iirc from previous comments of yours you’re a Catholic) approves of an argument for the mass starvation of civilians, one learns something new every day.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  428. J.Ross says:

    Iran is responding (so far) by hacking US web sites.
    They’re putting up a basic white text on black background propaganda message.
    I applaud and wholeheartedly support this turn of events: they get to say they retaliated, the neocon’s pet dog gets its nose tweaked, and nobody dies. This endorsement is not applicable to retaliations in which somebody dies.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  429. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @S. Anonyia

    I doubt this is a venue that has much hasbara attention per se because it just isn’t widely read enough and most of us are already pretty well uninfluenceable. The point of hasbara is to get people who are on the fence or who just have no familiarity with the matter at all to think a certain way. I’m sure Israel figures most of us here are a lost cause.

  430. J.Ross says:

    I’m neither happy about this nor “giving up on Trump.” As long as it doesn’t spiral out of control this is an acceptable error (cf the limited strike on Syria, which, stupid as it was, probably prevented anything bigger). And then there’s this guy, Sinead-like, reminding us about the real enemy:
    https://postimg.cc/D8tyfcGP
    Imagine a serious mainstream gentile saying we need another Babi Yar, or we need another firebombing of Japanese wood and paper cities. Or just recall what Thomas Friedman said should happen to formerly Yugoslavian civilians.

  431. Dube says:
    @Jack D

    “Might makes right.”

    Thanks, Jack. Got it.

  432. @German_reader

    Small c catholic, small o orthodox. Reformed Calvinist Presbyterian.

    Retweets are not approval. Codevilla is someone to listen to in general, but no one is perfect.

    Comprehensive sactions haven’t worked so great in Venezuela, for instance, but Venezuela hasn’t been at de facto war with my country for the better part of forty years. Regime change is unnecessary. Even a simple truce would suffice. Attacks on my country cannot go unanswered.

    • Replies: @German_reader
    , @reiner Tor
  433. @Desiderius

    Attacks on my country cannot go unanswered.

    “Attacks on my country”, lol, one could think Iran had done another Pearl Harbor. The only recent attack on “American soil” I’m aware of is some inconsequential vandalism in a reception area of the Baghdad embassy, and it’s not even clear this was in any way organized by Iran.
    The Iranian regime is no innocent, but the sense of victimhood a lot of Americans seem to nurse over Iran is laughable. In reality the US is trying to run Iran’s economy into the ground by some of the most extreme economic warfare ever seen, and all of Iran’s provocations over the last months are a (mostly quite impotent) reaction to that. You’re hurting them a lot more than they could ever hurt you.

  434. @Bill P

    “he was criticizing the headlines”

    No, I was criticizing myself for being clueless.

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
  435. • Replies: @J.Ross
  436. J.Ross says:
    @Desiderius

    >the “right” trusted the FBI
    They refuse to investigate violent crime, they confect false crimes in their ADL and SPLC inspired obsessions, and they committed what should be the most serious of crimes in attempting to scotch a presidential election. But when did the “right” trust the FBI before? Not in the 1990s, when the FBI attempted to force Americans to railroad their friends, and punished resistence by murdering their families.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  437. Alden says:
    @anonymous

    Some of the twitters are interesting.

  438. @ScarletNumber

    How many people knew the name of a rather obscure Austrian Archduke in May 1914?

    Some people are more significant for their deaths than anything they did while alive.

  439. Mr. Anon says:
    @AndrewR

    I’m obviously not criticizing Sailer for not knowing the name before this week, but I think you knew that.

    No, I did not know that and it is not obvious. It very much seemed that you were criticizing him for not knowing the name of an obscure Iranian General. Perhaps you’re just not very good at expressing yourself.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    , @JRB
    , @AndrewR
  440. Mr. Anon says:
    @Desiderius

    I’m not used to twitter; I’m used to reading actual prose rather than the brain-farts of ADD-babies. It’s not like I really give a f**k about whatever you think is important anyway. Anything that YOU think is important is almost certainly not so.

  441. res says:
    @Jack D

    What we really need is a series of homes for retired dictators all over the world.

    Not quite the same thing, but made me think of this:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fletcher_Memorial_Home

    Lyrics here:
    https://genius.com/Pink-floyd-the-fletcher-memorial-home-lyrics

  442. • Replies: @Anonymous
  443. Anonymous[424] • Disclaimer says:
    @Desiderius

    What is your point?

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  444. S says:
    @ChrisZ

    But close your eyes and say “Crass U.S.”—and I’d be surprised if an image of the President doesn’t quickly come to mind (whether you love him or hate him).

    LOL! He is one of a kind. 😉

    In regards to Mike Pompeo, as duly noted, he does indeed have close parallels with Pompey the Great:

    In this way, from his behavior and surname emerges the figure of a historic character, because Pompeo in Italian means nothing more and nothing less than Pompey.

    Both have their family origin in the same region of Italy and the Roman was with the Optimates, the conservatives of the Roman Republic.

    https://thediplomatinspain.com/en/2018/11/pompeo-and-pompey/

  445. @Mr. Anon

    Well, I didn’t know the name so criticizing me for not knowing it is reasonable.

  446. @Jack D

    There really is no such thing as international law. There is only victor’s justice. The United Nations is a debating society. The only real principle in international affairs is “might makes right.”

    I often hear that line of argument, and it’s wrong for a number of reasons.

    First, international law does exist in the sense that there really is a web of international treaties, agreements and customs out there. Many of those were ratified by the US Congress, so they are part of US internal law. When they are broken, US internal law is broken, too. For example the Iraq War in 2003 was a blatant violation of the UN Charter, which was ratified by the US Congress.

    Second, international law as a web of treaties, agreements and customs usually already serves the entrenched powers, those who are in charge. Take the inviolability of international borders: it favors those who won the last war. In the case Russia, it actually doesn’t favor them, because they lost the Cold War and then didn’t really have time to draw favorable borders to themselves as their empire dissolved, so they don’t much like their current borders, not even with Crimea included. The US managed to create a dense web of alliances around the world, and the borders of that huge alliance are inviolable – this hugely favors the US over any potential rival. The UN Charter allows for “collective self-defense,” meaning that the US is entitled to jump in whenever one of its clients is threatened.

    Third, of course, some amount of cheating is expected to happen, even on the part of the strongest participants. Especially the very strongest guy, the US, is going to get away with a lot of cheating.

    However, it doesn’t mean that an unlimited amount of cheating serves US interests. Any cheating will weaken the web of international treaties, agreements, customs, whatever. Since the US is the strongest guy, and international law favors the entrenched powers against up-and-coming rivals, this obviously means that upholding international law should be the default position of the US, because by weakening it, US power is weakening itself. They are the entrenched power.

    International law usually works in favor of the US! For example Russia opposed the internationally recognized independent formerly Eastern Bloc countries (especially the Baltic states) joining NATO. Well, too bad for Russia. Russia opposed Ukraine deposing its corrupt president (who could be bought by Russia) and replacing him with a pro-Western government. There was talk about Russia being booted out of Crimea. Russia didn’t like it – according to international law, too bad for Russia.

    But the US kept breaking international law in the previous decades. In 1999 together with its NATO allies, it attacked Serbia without provocation on Serbia’s part. Now, Serbia was an informal Russian ally with lots of cultural affinity, and so the Russians had thought they could help out their friend Serbia by using their UNSC permanent membership veto. They were mistaken: the US broke the rules. In 2003, it turned out that Russia couldn’t protect Saddam (who was not really a friend, but have given favorable deals to a few Russian oil companies), in what was to be an even more blatant violation of international law.

    That’s how we arrived in 2014 at the Ukrainian crisis. Russia had to make a quick decision, and it decided to break international law. My thesis is that had they been able to prevent the bombing of Serbia in 1999 and the destruction of Saddam’s Iraq in 2003, they would have had something to lose. But their calculations in 2014 didn’t contain that: they could see that no matter how scrupulously they would adhere to international law, it would be broken by the Americans whenever it favored them anyway. So they had nothing to lose by breaking international law: they knew that the US would break it next time. (As it did in Syria. Would the US not illegally occupy Syrian oil fields, had Russia not occupied Crimea? lol)

    So what you will have is a world in which no-one adheres to rules at all. It will still be good to be the strongest guy, but expect no mercy when, under local circumstances, or perhaps, due to the rise of China, even globally, you will be weaker. The more you break international law, the more likely others will break it, too, whenever they feel they will get away with it.

    • Replies: @Sam Malone
  447. @Desiderius

    Attacks on my country cannot go unanswered.

    How lacking in self-awareness you have to be to consider the situation (where the US kept attacking an Iraqi Shiite militia for weeks, and when a mob responded by storming the US embassy, killed a major… Iranian general) as “attacks on your country.”

  448. @reiner Tor

    What are iranians doing in Iraq? If Iraqis don’t want a u.s Embassy they can ask them to leave and sever diplomatic ties. Until then an attack on an an embassy is an attack on the country. The last time iranians were involved in an American embassy the results werent too pretty.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  449. @Dr Van Nostrand

    Iranians are doing the same thing as Americans: they are there at the invitation of the democratically elected Iraqi government. You Americans created democracy in Iraq, I hope you enjoy it mightily. I can assure you that in the Iraq of Saddam, no Iranian general would have traveled freely around.

    Regarding the embassy, a mob from a funeral procession of militiamen killed by a US airstrike went there. No one was killed, nor captured, so killing an Iranian general entirely legally in Iraq together with an Iraqi general was certainly not a proportionate response. (He wasn’t on some secret mission, it was entirely out in the open.)

    I don’t know if this will result in a war, but it’s certainly illuminating how Americans (and this unfortunately includes Trump and the majority of his supporters) apparently still enjoy, if not fighting, then at least risking, more wars for Israel.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @JMcG
    , @Desiderius
  450. JRB says:
    @Mr. Anon

    The problem with the USA and its inhabitants is that they are acting more and more like they are the chosen people. They now really seem to believe this. To them every non-American is by definition obscure, just because he is non-American. 99% of Americans know next to nothing about what’s going in other countries. They don’t feel the need, because (maybe unconsciously) they regard all other countries as far inferior to the USA. Even here on this platform a large majority of American commentators seem to be totally blind to their own hypocrisy. The Americans have been blundering through the world for decades now, doing far more harm than good. Hopefully their politicians have now reached “peak stupidity” because otherwise this will not end well. America is in the process of losing all its well meaning friends except for Israel and Saudi-Arabia. If this continues even the now vassal-states in Western-Europe and Eastern-Asia will at some point in the future break the ties. There is a real risk that in the future America will be on its own against the rest of the world.

  451. Pegasus says:
    @anonymous

    Maybe this is where all this anti-white rethoric and leftist self-hate is originating from.

    Sailer and his avid supporters, I’d say 80% of the commenters here, not only they don’t protest the constant US bullying in the world, but even go on to moronically rationalize and half or even fully support it with a kind of weird pride. Even joke about it.

    Well hello, his fanbase are mostly right-wing, middle-upper class white Americans – 80-90%?. Admittedly the most vociferous of the chest-thumpers here are either hasbara shills or Christian zionist morons- Jake D, Clyde, Bardot Kaldian, Lot probably using sockpuppet accounts, Desiderius, nebulafox etc.

    This hate and disgust coming -ironically- from right winger “German Reader” is awfully similar to that coming from SJWs, it seems to me.

    And this is the beauty of zionist game. The “donors” order and pay in advance for a shitshow in the Middle East to protect USAs most important “ally”, then the USG over-delivers, and even makes the US taxpayer pay back all the money (7x?) the tribesmen spent buying pro-Israel “influencers” within the USG… yes, pay back 7 times the initial investment… 3.5 billion a year in “humanitarian help” to USAs best little buddy, and they spent for it, what, half a billion in “donations” – kickbacks – a year?

    Who knows, most probably the Adelsons and Singers get even most of their coin back. Rinse and repeat. Beautiful. But this is secondary.

    The really masterful stroke is, who gets the heat for all that bullying? Why, Trump, Pompeo…. and Whitey, i.e. “right wingers” from America and Europe get it. And I kinda see the point after reading the great majority of Sailer fanboys comments. And Sailer himself personifies this stereotype. White, boomer, right wing, golf aficionado, always pointing out blacks and latinos bad habits. Not Jews’ though. Absolutely oblivious to US meddling in Latin America, Middle East, Europe… He even frivolously jokes about it from time to time, this “post” being exhibit A.

    But you gotta give some credit to the tribesmen. They really know how to play this game.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @anonymous
  452. MEH 0910 says:
    @Steve Sailer

  453. @German_reader

    “That’s a lame strawman.”

    This from the guy who, based on a few pro-war posts here and apparently his tireless research into the scientifically irrefutable hard data core known as twitter (emphasis on “twit”) has taken it upon himself, like a menopausal cat lady, to indict the entire population of the United States as a bunch of slack jawed, warmongering and bloodthirsty yokels, and further wish for our extinction by foreign Mexican hordes.

    Unlike you, I don’t take your views as representative of the entire heritage German citizenry and I don’t wish to see Germany overwhelmed by ME hordes by Merkel’s Mongrels.

    You have also taken for granted the mostly polite discord you have received here, but then again, our host, you you so ignorantly scolded as parochial (LOL) has been filtering out some of your harsher critics. Irony abound.

    • Replies: @German_reader
  454. AndrewR says:
    @Mr. Anon

    One of my New Year’s resolutions is to be more trusting and patient, so I’ll take your word here, and I’ll spell it out for you and the rest of the short bus crew:

    Sailer’s response to the most significant event in US-Iran relations since 1981, and the riskiest (and, by almost any reasonable account, stupidest) act of Donald Trump’s presidency was extremely and disappointingly flippant. No, most of us didn’t know who Soleimani was. That doesn’t excuse Sailer’s middle school sarcasm here. He’s not too cool to not care about a huge event like this.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  455. bomag says:
    @HA

    What Desiderius said.

    Plus, the judge can rule because his agents,the police, have established authority through might.

    • Replies: @HA
  456. @reiner Tor

    fantastic comment, thank you.

  457. @HA

    Excellent job taking Jack on over that despicable statement. I notice he’s avoiding making direct responses to those querying him on it. And thanks for reminding us how differently he spoke in that other thread – in high-minded moral tones – when it concerned danger to his own race.

    If I am not around, I also hope others will remember this exchange the next time Jack D mentions Cossacks, or Inquisitors or Nazis

    We should, we really should.

    • Replies: @HA
  458. Dan Smith says:
    @ben tillman

    So far the Iranian response has been to vandalize a non-essential US government website. Sounds like a bunch of millennial twerps.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  459. Anon[930] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    I just want to say, its’ kind of weird hearing a “Hitler did nothing wrong” argument from a Jew.

  460. HA says:
    @Desiderius

    ” He’s also drawing the contrast between the legitimacy of national law and international law.”

    Oh, pull my other leg now. You’re clearly not paying attention. As Jack D’s not-a-big-deal comments on Weinstein, Epstein, and Leo Frank make clear, “might makes right” is a universal axiom with him that extends far beyond international affairs. Don’t be obtuse.

    Clearly, people like that pose a problem for anyone trying to build a city on a hill that isn’t as brutal as the surrounding nature, red in tooth and claw. But note that when it comes to making sure people like him (regardless of what tribe they belong to) don’t get the upper hand, Jack D shifts gears if the result is that people like his grandfather get brutalized. Might makes right is forgotten for a moment while he cries his crocodile tears and agonizes about how we’ve blinded ourselves to humanity. If you see no problem with that, you’re exactly the chump he wants you to be, and that’s a problem, too. The city on a hill won’t function if wolves are allowed to run rampant, but it also can’t have too many sheep lazily munching away while they ignore what is approaching.

    As for the rest who read these comments, I’m hoping this time, given how the mask has slipped, and how what is seen cannot easily be unseen, it’ll be a little different. But it’s their choice.

    And for the record, I have little regard for UN debating societies either. But claiming that they’re the only possible alternative to perpetual “might makes right” is a straw man.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    , @Jack D
  461. Anonymous[329] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    Pompeo told CNN that Soleimani was planning to “take actions” or perhaps even take “a big action” that would “put dozens if not hundreds of American lives at risk” and then he went on to characterize these actions as “threats located in the region.”

    So according to Pompeo/Trump, Soleimani was in the process of starting a war by killing Americans in the Middle East

    Read Pompeo’s comments more carefully. They are weasel words. He only says that S was planning actions in the Middle East that could “put American lives at risk.” He does not say that S was planning an action to have Americans killed.

  462. Anonymous[162] • Disclaimer says:

    Clyde: >”what the hell was this hotshot Iranian general doing in Baghdad.”

    Attending the funerals of 25 Muslims murdered By Trump to “avenge” the one, alleged, unnamed, probably imaginary “American mercenary” killed by a Mossad false-flag operation.

    The US learned nothing about the depths Israelis will go to to get American GIs to die for it a la Iraq. Now Zionists want Southern good ole boys to die for the Fourth Reich in Iran.

    Now, what the hell were Americans doing in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, etc.?

    What the hell are Ashkenazis doing in Palestine?

    >”He should have stayed home.”

    Ditto Hazar Jews, American GIs, etc.

    >” I am glad we whacked him”

    Adolf was glad he whacked WWII Juden, too. Your point?

  463. Anonymous[162] • Disclaimer says:
    @JRB

    Russia and China will stay in the background, lending money, proving intel, selling advanced weapons, etc. Russian will sell/lend air-defense weapons, supersonic missiles, etc. China will provide loans and silkworm missiles.

  464. Jack D says:
    @reiner Tor

    One news item going around (and I believe it) is that Soleimani was targeted not as part of some Zionist plot to help Israel, but more or less by accident. I like this theory because it is so random and stupid – the OPPOSITE of a conspiracy, which is what life is really like.

    What supposedly happened was this – after the Embassy “demonstrations”, Trump was given a list of possible responses by the Pentagon. Really the Pentagon had some specific response in mind – I don’t know what it was – bomb an Iranian oil terminal or something. Whoever presents the list to the President is supposed to guide the President into picking the “right” choice. But in order to make it seem as if the President has a role as the commander in chief and is not merely the captive of the Permanent Government, they give him a list and don’t just say “We’re bombing an oil terminal . Here, sign this”, the way that they do to the Queen of England. In order to flesh out the list they give a range of options. On the low end, “Issue a statement denounce the Embassy attack.” (This is the one that Obama would have picked). On the high end “Kill Soleimani”. When the President’s finger hovers over a “wrong” choice, the generals are supposed to talk him out of it. But Trump, being Trump, went for the high option and the horrified generals could not get him to change his mind. (Luckily the high option was not “Nuke Tehran”.) History is made thru such tragi-comedy.

  465. @HA

    And for the record, I have little regard for UN debating societies either. But claiming that they’re the only possible alternative to perpetual “might makes right” is a straw man.

    Of course that is the case in principle, and perhaps some day there will exist meaningful international institutions to enforce international law. Those aren’t the institutions we have. Jack is doing the usual Alinskyite move of using the radical to pull the center to where he wants it. In this case it is back closer to reality.

  466. @Jack D

    Giving credence to self-serving beltway gossip only alienates you further from anyone here inclined to give you credence. This sort of thing is Nichols grade.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  467. @Anonymous

    To give you a better class of ankle to bite. Mine is pretty lean on this topic.

  468. Jack D says:
    @HA

    You’ve got it wrong, for someone who seems unusually interested in my past statements (I feels as if I have found my Boswell, although with Jewish luck I have an anti-Semitic Boswell). My grandfather (and grandmother and aunts and uncles) weren’t brutalized, they were murdered. My father was brutalized. And the only reason that he survived and that I am here is because Roosevelt had a lot more (if not better) tanks and airplanes than Hitler so that they made it to his camp a little before he had finished starving to death. It was all down to might and nothing to do with right.

    There is no justice in a war – the virtuous die like flies, knaves get medals, etc. Justice is obtained (or not obtained, more often than not) in a court room, years and years after the fighting is over (and those fighting have to assess the usually small likelihood that it will ever catch up with them), but while the cannons sound justice is mostly irrelevant to the matters at hand. If Trump the casino magnate had openly put a hit out on a man, he would have been jailed. But Trump the President can sign such orders without fear of justice – just as you say, that which is permitted to Jupiter is not permitted to cattle.

    The key though is to make sure that the righteous are the ones who are mighty. We don’t allow crazy people to have guns and shouldn’t allow crazy countries to have nukes. Personally, I thank God every day that the United States is the most mighty nation on earth so that its might is the one who make right and I pray that it stays that way.

  469. HA says:
    @Jack D

    “The key though is to make sure that the righteous are the ones who are mighty.”

    Backtrack all you want — it’s not going to work with me. You didn’t exactly tie yourself into knots wondering whether Weinstein, Epstein, or Leo Frank were “righteous”. (They didn’t either, I’m guessing.) Again, that’s a qualifier you switch on and off whenever it suits you.

    So save it for those who don’t already see through your game. And as noted earlier, don’t flatter yourself about how worthwhile or memorable I find your output. What I try to remember and keep track of is my own output — I find it a useful habit — which sometimes means remembering the comments that prompted it. And to the extent I forget, which happens, this website conveniently allows commentators to look up their past comments, and their preceding ones.

    And I’m genuinely sorry about your relatives, but as I noted, you have no leg to stand on when it comes to complaining about things like that. At some point you might start seeing a historical connection between attitudes like yours and what, sometimes centuries down the line, they eventually lead to, but I doubt you will.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  470. JMcG says:
    @reiner Tor

    Reiner, it really seems that you are being deliberately obtuse here. The Iranians have been responsible for the deaths of quite a few Americans in Iraq. They have been instrumental in extending the misery of the Iraqi people for years past what a relatively bloodless invasion and decapitation required. Whatever you think of the Invasion of Iraq, you can’t deny that the Iranians have made things worse. Do I wish that we would pull every single US military asset back to our borders? Yes, fervently. But wishing won’t make it so.
    Maybe killing generals will work better than blowing up wedding parties in the manner favored by Obama. Killing Khadaffi didn’t seem to work, but I don’t recall anything except celebrations on the left after that.
    I wish it were a better world Reiner, but it’s the one we have.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  471. Jack D says:
    @Desiderius

    Whose interest would be served by this gossip? It sounds like something the Permanent Government would do (the Permanent Government is shocked that Trump actually “interfered” with the foreign policy of the US regarding Ukraine – in their view the “foreign policy establishment” is supposed to make foreign policy and the President is supposed to rubber stamp it). And what Trump did sounds like something Trump would do.

    The comedy (and the tragedy – see the impeachment) comes, as it so often does, from a “failure to communicate”. You have a troupe who are supposed to participate in some bit of Kabuki theater but one of the actors has decided that he is going to write his own script (and hasn’t bothered to tell the other actors – maybe he knows that they won’t like it anyway or he just doesn’t give a damn because he is (at least the nominal) head of the acting company and he can do whatever he damn well pleases or at least he thinks so). The play is under way and suddenly this guy is spouting lines that he isn’t supposed to say and beheading characters that he isn’t supposed to behead and the other actors are shocked and trying to keep up with the guy who has gone off script but they’re not doing a very good job of it.

    I think we have all been in social situations where some other person (or maybe even you) are supposed to “take the hint” and for whatever reason the other person doesn’t “get it” (or doesn’t WANT to “get it”) and ignores the hint and at that point for whatever reason (maybe he’s your boss) you can’t shout out, NO YOU BLOODY FOOL, TAKE THE HINT, I REALLY DETEST LAMB and have to pretend that it’s all fine and you end up not getting your way. This is the same thing except that instead of an unwanted leg of lamb for two, you have a dead Solemaini.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  472. Ragno says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    We have to fight a war with Iran now.

    You guys make me laugh.

    We’re ALREADY fighting a war over there; have been for years and years.

  473. Anonymous[162] • Disclaimer says:
    @James Braxton

    Get the sequence right.

    Mossad (most like) shlt-stirs on Christmas Day, killing 5 on Iraq-Syria border. Recall how Israelis lose their collective stool when a Tribalist is even “looked at funny.”

    2 days later an unknown, unnamed, “alleged American” was killed. No proof provided to date.

    The USA responds by murdering 25 Iraqis, wounding 40.

    Angry Iraqis storm the US embassy in response, none entering it. It was more like ranting in the hallway outside a Harvard dean’s office.

    A revered Iranian general…who stopped (along with Russia) US-Israel proxies who were paid to remove Assad a la Hussein/Gaddafi…flies to attend the funeral of the said murdered 25.

    The cowardly US drone-kills him via the joysticks of a pimply incel “gamer” somewhere in, prolly, Texas. A revered Iraqi military bigwig is also killed.

    Having murdered the equivalent of 12,000,000 Americans in Iraq; having endlessly provoked Iran with no blowback; the USA now thinks it can do anything it likes anywhere, any time with impunity.

    I suspect a few large missiles hitting Tel Aviv, Haifa, and other Jewish cities would remind the Tribe…yet again… what real pain really feels like.

    I also suspect Iran (aided behind the scenes by Russia/China) will respond by hitting the USA hard when and where it least suspects it.

    America, like all smug bullies, will never stop until stopped.

    • Troll: Desiderius
    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @James Braxton
  474. Anonymous[162] • Disclaimer says:

    Below is a link to an interesting item for gungho, bellicose, “Let’s go kill some Persian putzes!” yahoos to consider. It was written by a Marine who actually saw combat. He’s also covered things military for sundry publications.

    He penned the piece 10 years ago. I suspect Iran has increased its options, armaments, and resolve since then.

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2010/11/fred-reed/lets-attack-iran/

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  475. Jack D says:
    @HA

    My point, in the case of Epstein, Weinstein, etc. is not that they are “righteous”. It’s pretty obvious that they are far from it (although for years some of the same people who are eager to throw them overboard now fawned over them as if they were).

    The point is that the women who are accusing them are not righteous either, or anything close to righteous. As Kissinger said about the Iran-Iraq War, sometimes you wish that BOTH sides could lose. In fact, this was the attitude of the law in the past. If two criminals have robbed a bank and are fighting over how to divide the spoils (let’s say the statute of limitations has passed and they are not worried about being prosecuted) the law says that a legitimate court of law will not hear their dispute. Let’s say that one was the mastermind and the other one was an underling who was only reluctantly talked into participating in the robbery (but now he has been “cheated” of his share). The courts don’t care – they are still all a bunch of criminals and don’t belong in a courtroom with honest people. It’s a principle of courts of equity that the person seeking equitable relief from the court must have “clean hands”. These women do not have clean hands. That they are “bad” doesn’t make the -steins good, it just means that they are all bad and I wish they would go away and not parade around with their feminist lawyers as if they were born-again virgins. Only in our shameless society is such a thing possible.

    • Replies: @HA
  476. @reiner Tor

    It is interesting in retrospect how much the Iraq War planners must have counted on secularizing and deracinating the Iraqi populace (or at least the ruling class) as successfully as their predecessors did the same to your own.

    Sucks to be rootless.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  477. @Jack D

    Jack, it’s Pinch.

    He’s talking out of his ass as always. If Punch lays off the shiksa none of this happens.

  478. HA says:
    @bomag

    “…the judge can rule because his agents,the police, have established authority through might.”

    But if that’s his only justification for being up on the bench, he’s not much of a judge, and it’s not much of a justice system, is it?

  479. @MikeatMikedotMike

    to indict the entire population of the United States as a bunch of slack jawed, warmongering and bloodthirsty yokels

    Not the entire population, but it sure seems like an accurate description of anybody still supporting Trump and his unhinged Mideast policies at this point. I can understand to some extent why people voted for him in 2016 (you can check my comments from the time, I even was foolish enough to congratulate you guys), but there’s no excuse for supporting this madness anymore.

    You have also taken for granted the mostly polite discord you have received here

    lol, I know, how presumptuous of the servant to criticize his master.
    It’s really high time Europeans see you for what you really are and break with you completely, before you manage to drag us into a civilizational war which can only end in catastrophe. American WNs can keep their “my white brothers” nonsense to themselves, there is no common ground with you.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  480. HA says:
    @Jack D

    “My point, in the case of Epstein, Weinstein, etc. is not that they are “righteous”. It’s pretty obvious that they are far from it…”

    And clearly, that doesn’t stop you from taking their side, as in “come on, what’s the big deal, really?” If anyone thinks I’m characterizing any of that unfairly, again, just click on his comments (thanks, Ron Unz) and ctr-F for Weinstein or Epstein, or else start with the links I already provided.

    Face it, Jack. Recall how Hillary, after making her “deplorables” speech, was savvy enough to realize right away that she had “stepped in it”. Whereas you desperately want to keep trying to convince us — or else yourself — that you’ve done no such thing, but it’s not going to work. (Self-awareness never was your strong suit, was it?)

    • Replies: @Jack D
  481. Anonymous[329] • Disclaimer says:
    @Pegasus

    then the USG over-delivers, and even makes the US taxpayer pay back all the money (7x?) the tribesmen spent buying pro-Israel “influencers” within the USG… yes, pay back 7 times the initial investment… 3.5 billion a year in “humanitarian help” to USAs best little buddy, and they spent for it, what, half a billion in “donations” – kickbacks – a year?

    You have to increase that $3.5 billion by a large percentage of the $750 billion annual US military budget, much of which is spent towards checking Israel’s enemies or protecting US citizens from the blowback of doing so.

  482. @Anonymous

    But if that’s his only justification for being up on the bench, he’s not much of a judge, and it’s not much of a justice system, is it?

    By what standard? We’re ruled by people who believe such questions are meaningless. In that case one has to beat them at their own game before something better can be rebuilt. And that is raw dominance.

    gungho, bellicose, “Let’s go kill some Persian putzes!” yahoos

    If you’re paying any attention to such people you’re doing so to satisfy your own vanity, not to advance the conversation. They don’t matter.

  483. MEH 0910 says:
    @Jack D

    • Replies: @Jack D
  484. anonymous[245] • Disclaimer says:
    @Pegasus

    Worthwhile take on the HBDittoheads.

    Notice, though, that a few were embarrassed, straining to see Mr. Sailer’s post as wry commentary, even after he said otherwise.

  485. HA says:
    @Sam Malone

    “We should, we really should.”

    Thanks. We should indeed, but I have my doubts that it will happen. The accusations of antisemitism that trail anyone who reads this site have their effect, so that when some of the readers here — who worry that those accusations might actually be true (or at least worry that people will believe that about them) — come across someone like Jack D, who oftentimes tells them things they agree with, they’re overly eager to claim him as someone on their side. See, they can’t be anti-Semites, because look at all the times they’ve clicked on Jack D’s “agree” button!

    For the record, I don’t like antisemitism either, and the obsessive, knee-jerk, intellectually lazy behavior it inevitably leads to, but man, I’m getting really fed up with the racket that antisemitism accusations have become. Especially when people like Jack D start playing that card.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    , @Desiderius
  486. nebulafox says:
    @Jack D

    For the classical age Greeks, in Homer’s Iliad, what is often missed is that for them the Trojans would have been the side of civilization, not the Greeks. They are the polis they’d recognize in their own time. Inside the city, the social ties of husbands and wives, parents and children, they fully function. There is mercy to the weak, understanding to the governed, a desire for normality to return, an understanding that war shouldn’t be the main purpose of human life. As Fagles commented, those were sentiments that had no place in the armed camp off shore.

    But the Trojans had the defects of their virtues: they were not as at home in the ugly business of war as the Acheans. The main champion of the Trojans is a guy who might have been a great warrior, but was truly meant for peacetime: as a husband, as a father, as an heir to the throne. It was him saying goodbye to his wife and infant remains one of the classic scenes of Western literature, not him slaying somebody. But he was doomed to die in battle to the man who has no family, no ties, whose main purpose in life is simply to kill people, and has just let several of his comrades die over a petty quarrel over a slave girl: the man who was utterly, totally made for war, who finds his purpose in there.

    This all made one of the biggest points (another one was the sheer futility of it all in the beginning of Book 12) of the Iliad much clearer: no matter how great your civilization is, it will be doomed to destruction if met by an outside force of superior might. Armed force can only be warded off by a superior armed force. So, if people over 2500 years ago clearly understood this, why do we not today? Why do we have people who do think that war can be anything other than the unambiguous, amoral-for better or worse-expression of the extremes in human nature?

    (You could even go further back than that: I don’t think the lessons of the Iliad would have been lost on anybody in the Old Testament.)

    The only answer I can think of is that war and strife has become such an alien, abstract experience for most Americans that it can be thought of otherwise. Which speaks to the success of previous generations, along with America’s charmed luck in geography. Which, well, what are you supposed to do about that?

    >We don’t allow crazy people to have guns and shouldn’t allow crazy countries to have nukes.

    But a lot of people in Israel (Meir Dagan was no one’s idea of a lefty) have made the point that Iran is a cold but rational player who knows that Israel has hundreds more nukes than they can ever hope to get. Quite a different take from the constant drumbeat of “them crazy mullahs!” that you get in the American media, despite Israel being the one genuinely having a lot to lose if the Iranians reach nuclear ambiguity.

    How do we prevent Iran from getting there eventually? Even if the mullahs were to somehow disappear, I don’t think a different Iranian regime could be persuaded not to pursue one, not after the events of the last several decades. That just leaves keeping up the current Middle Eastern status quo, and I’m beginning to wonder how long that can go with a United States increasingly hollowed out and ravaged by oligarchs. Our basic societal structures have taken a battering in the last couple of decades, when they haven’t been completely perverted: i.e, John Q. Little’s life can be ruined over the wrong Tweet while there exists no accountability whatsoever for our elites, with those presiding over major disasters continuing to enjoy influence. That’s not a recipe for long-term success at the imperial game.

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @Anonymous
  487. nebulafox says:
    @HA

    I’m completely indifferent to Israel (as I am to any foreign country) and definitely think that they should have no veto over our foreign policy. I also believe many left-wing American Jews are vastly out of touch with the political reality of how the new Diverse America is going to view them, i.e, as the whitest of all white people.

    Does that mean I hate Jews, would deny Jewish or Israeli achievements in history, or think they are behind the world’s ills? Conflating the two is Grade-A intellectually lazy BS that is beneath my time to address. And if there’s one big hatred I sense underneath the surface of American culture these days, it is for cancel culture being applied with impunity on the flimsiest of grounds, especially to those who lack power. I have a high enough opinion of the American people-and a dim enough opinion of our rulers-to believe it isn’t going to be tolerated for much longer. As per the laws of Newtonian politics, that’s going to lead to an explosion of the Overton Window.

    • Agree: Desiderius
  488. Anonymous[292] • Disclaimer says:
    @jimmyriddle

    I’m going to guess some hapless military guy. But smarter would be to pick a neocon functionary who is not so well protected and not take credit, leave it ambiguous. Could have been Iran, could have been some lone wolf, could have been some WN outfit, who knows?

    The logistics would be easier. American VVIPs are very well protected, and Iranian capabilities are limited.

  489. MEH 0910 says:

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    , @MEH 0910
  490. Jack D says:
    @nebulafox

    the man who was utterly, totally made for war, who finds his purpose in there.

    Hitler in one sentence.

    The only answer I can think of is that war and strife has become such an alien, abstract experience for most Americans that it can be thought of otherwise.

    This is not a new problem for America. There was a huge pacifist movement before WWII. If anything it’s better now because most sane people understand that the oceans no longer shield us and that we are all vulnerable to attack by hard men.

    In the long run we are all dead. No empire lasts forever either. The only thing that we can hope for is to keep it going as long as possible, but as you say we have sure been doing a lot of counterproductive things. But we are pretty far out in front for now so it may take a while before we are seriously challenged. And America has a way of rising to the occasion when it has to. Or at least it did at one time.

    As for Israel, the Mullahs have, in a very rational way, pointed out that Israel is very small so that 1 nuke aimed at Tel Aviv would be the end of them whereas Iran is very big so that they might be able to withstand a bunch of nukes. I would hope that this is just idle observation on their part but I fear that they are serious. I would not want to find out the hard way.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    , @Anon
  491. Anonymous[162] • Disclaimer says:
    @bomag

    >”Well, we had this guy [CIA operative William Francis Buckley], who was killed in a rather grisly manner”

    “[Buckley’s] words were often incoherent; he slobbered and drooled and, most unnerving of all, he would suddenly scream in terror, his eyes rolling helplessly and his body shaking. The CIA consensus was that he would be blindfolded and chained at the ankles and wrists and kept in a cell little bigger than a coffin” ~WIKI

    To wit: WFB was treated like Palestinian teens routinely tortured by God’s own IDF for shitzundgigglz.

    Zionists, neocons, and Evangelicucks only care about Juden/Xtians. They consider all others to be subhumans.

    Alas, occasionally those subhumans do unto Zionazi-con-cucks what the latter do unto them.

  492. Anonymous[329] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    My grandfather (and grandmother and aunts and uncles) weren’t brutalized, they were murdered.

    You don’t know that. In all likelihood they survived and ended up living their lives behind the Iron Curtain.

  493. Madeleine Brand talks with constitutional scholar Noah Feldman, a professor at New York University and advisor to Iraq’s now-defunct Coalition Provisional Authority, about the contents of Iraq’s draft constitution. The document proposes greater autonomy for Shiite Muslims and Kurds, and many Sunni Muslims feel left out of the political process.

    https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4811914

    Dem Witness Noah Feldman Penned Fawning Defense of Islamic Shariah Law

    https://tennesseestar.com/2019/12/05/dem-witness-noah-feldman-penned-fawning-defense-of-islamic-shariah-law/

  494. Jack D says:
    @Anonymous

    Mossad (most like) shlt-stirs on Christmas Day, killing 5 on Iraq-Syria border. Recall how Israelis lose their collective stool when a Tribalist is even “looked at funny.”

    That’s correct – Arabs have been fighting with each other for the last couple of thousand years at least but Israel has set the ground rules – leave us out of it or you’ll pay the price. I have no idea whether they were involved in that particular attack but they have made it clear that they will not tolerate the Syrian civil war spilling over their borders.

    Friday’s attack against the Kirkuk base was at least the 11th rocket attack against U.S. bases and interests in Iraq over the last two months. The USG perhaps stretches the truth a bit now and then but I doubt that they would invent a fictional death – even from a purely cynical perspective there’s too much to lose when it’s proven to be false later.

    Now that ISIS is more or less defeated it’s natural that the remaining Arabs would go back to fighting with each other, as Arabs are wont to do, but the US had the same ground rules as Israel – leave us out of your internecine warfare or be punished. Punishment in war is a crude instrument – it’s easy to exact too much or too little but the only reason Iran and its allies were shocked is because the US was, up until now a paper tiger, like the bad parent who doesn’t discipline his kids but one day decides not to just make more idle threats but actually picks up his belt.

  495. @HA

    Jack’s working on it. That game is more of a ConservativeInc thing. But yeah, it’s pretty bad.

  496. HA says:

    “Jack’s working on it.”

    I forget which commenter on Unz’s other sites pointed this out, but there’s a passage in one of Israel Shahak’s books where he denounces Lurianic Kabbalism as being a dangerously supremacist ideology in which gentiles are something sub-human.

    Nevertheless, he is careful to note that the ideology is also full of admonitions to be kind and just towards the gentiles, as in “though they are sub-human, we, as Jews, are still called upon to treat them humanely”.

    As Shahak noted, that’s still a very troublesome way of thinking, but given Jack D’s comments about lazy drunken peasants, not to mention his rationalizations for the Sackler-esque liquor merchants who helped keep the liquor flowing (as in, they’re a bunch of drunks anyway, so why can’t we make a few bucks off of that?), indicate that he hasn’t even gotten up to that still-problematic level. To him, the local drunken peasants, or whatever, are just something to be stepped on and then forgotten, on the way to the top of the heap where everything is then justifiable. Again, it’s all very self-serving.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  497. Jack D says:
    @HA

    You keep conflating “righteous” and “not a war criminal” – there’s a lot of territory in between. Given our general moral and sexual standards in other spheres, which are beginning to make the debauchery of ancient Rome look minor league by comparison, I stand by my remarks that a business transaction between a Hollywood producer and a starlet who is willing to trade a session on the casting couch for a starring role, or between a john and a slightly underage prostitute, really is no big deal and that those who are making it into a big deal are either hypocrites or interested in cashing in financially or both and in doing so they have tried to retcon the facts to make them appear other than they really were at the time. Note that in the case of Epstein especially the justice system had already looked at what he did once and more or less shrugged its shoulders the first time. Nor has Weinstein been found guilty of anything.

    It is interesting (to me) at least, that the women who come forward to accuse these men almost never do so when they still have the possibility of using their feminine wiles as additional currency. It is only years later when that currency is completely spent and they have hit “the Wall” that they suddenly remember their “abuse”.

    • Replies: @Anon
  498. Anonymous[162] • Disclaimer says:
    @J.Ross

    >”This endorsement is not applicable to retaliations in which somebody dies.”

    Thank Yahweh no one has DIED in recent American drone attacks on other sovereign nations, right! It’s kosher for the USA to slaughter others…who must then smile while washing our feet.

    Imagine if China had invaded California, Colorado, and other states 20 years ago and still was there… killing civilians and military leaders/personnel with impunity.

    How much shite do Americans eat without reacting?

    America shit-the-bed when just 3,000 of its 330,000,000 citizens were killed on 9-11. Yet we murdered the equivalent of 12,000,000 Americans in Iraq…BASED ON LIES…and neither apologized nor compensated that nation. Meanwhile, we just handed Israel $38,000,000,000 (atop decades of other largesse) for being an arrogant, racist, rabid, rabbinical, thieving, mooching, apartheid Zionazi entity.

    We murder Muslim for kicks. They’re not human to us. Who cares if we blow up 200 Afghanis at a wedding party. What really matters is somebody looking at a bovine Brooklyn yenta “funny.”

    If there is a God He will one day, hopefully soon, turn America into glass.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  499. Journalism is announcing Qasem Soleimani is dead when you never knew he was alive.

    I heard that he hated us for our freedom, didn’t pledge allegiance to our glorious flag and was the real mastermind behind 911.

    This is the first time I’ve seen John Bolton smile in a long time…

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  500. HA says:

    “It is interesting (to me) at least, that the women who come forward to accuse these men almost never do so when they still have the possibility of using their feminine wiles as additional currency.”

    She has become old and ugly, and neither I nor my friends want to molest her now. Therefore, she must be lying. The defense rests, Your Honor.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  501. Anonymous[162] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dan Smith

    The cyber-skirmish was just to tweak-twerp-test a few US computer defenses.

    It was also a digital “Doolittle Raid”…telegraphing the enemy that it wasn’t invincible and COULD be reached (like humbling Japanese arrogance before Hiroshima/Nagasaki could be flattened).

    Iran said it would mourn for 3 days. THAT’s why there’s been no significant retaliation.

    After that, I suspect it will retaliate when, how, how much, and where it sees fit.

    Doolittle just began the counterattack. The Enola Gay ended it. Maybe Teheran will hit the Super Bowl…or have Yanks worried it might.

    America has been “cruisin’ for a bruisin’ ” for decades now, goading the sleeping Muslim giant. How many “sleeper agents” have entered via the Mexican border? How many avail themselves of America’s “open society”? Trump kicked a hungry lion. Who will pay the cost?

    I suspect Don will be shocked when the revenge attack inevitably happens in the USA or Matzovania. It certainly will be interesting to see Billy Kristolnachts’ smug smirk vanish when it does.

  502. nebulafox says:
    @MEH 0910

    Well, who didn’t see this coming?

    In practice, it changes nothing except the timeline. The Iranians are willing to agree to some pretty heavy restrictions on development to get what they more urgently need or want when the occasion calls for it. But they are never going to give up the program altogether.

    (Personally, I think agreeing to support Assad in Syria-or just being uninvolved in Syria-would have produced far better terms in 2015, and maybe a bit of a basis for improved relations. The Iranians care way more about their position in the Middle East than abstract letters in Geneva.)

    And I don’t blame them one bit. We’ve given them just about the worst mix of signals over the last couple of decades. Contrast Gaddafi’s fate with North Korea’s.

  503. nebulafox says:
    @Jack D

    >Hitler in one sentence.

    Same thought in both our minds. Different time, different place, Hitler would have been an ideal Mongol khan or Assyrian king.

    To this day, some men genuinely like war more than peace, though they are usually smart enough to never state this explicitly around women, bosses, or journalists.

    >This is not a new problem for America. There was a huge pacifist movement before WWII. If anything it’s better now because most sane people understand that the oceans no longer shield us and that we are all vulnerable to attack by hard men.

    The America of the 1930s had levels of social cohesion and ruling-class competence needed to prosecute wars successfully-or alternatively, to avoid civil strife-that the America of 2020 utterly lacks. We came close to that nevertheless during the Great Depression. What would happen to the America of 2020 with a similarly cataclysmic event?

    I actually do believe in the American people: they have a way of deeply surprising people who underestimate them. The Romans did, too, during periods where it looked like they were dead and gone. It’s just that I think that the wakeup process in the event of an emergency is going to be more prolonged and uglier, and it’ll take a complete change-over in the ruling class. The current one lacks the ability or the fortitude to reconceive America’s relationship with the world while fixing our society.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  504. Jack D says:
    @HA

    Sadly, you are not that far from the truth. They are lying because they are old and ugly and have no other way of making money any more. Their entire value lay in their youthful bodies and now that those are shot, they got nuthin’. They could have used their youth and beauty to find a good provider and settle down but they preferred to dally with rich and powerful men. Once princes (actual princes) came calling for them, now no one will give them a second glance. One night with a prince was preferable to a lifetime with a mediocrity – at the time they were willing to make that trade. Now not even the mediocrities will give them a 2nd glance.

    The other half of this equation is that they are kicking a guy when he is already down. If Harvey Weinstein was still the King of Hollywood and they still had the sex appeal for leading roles, would they be suing him or calling him up and asking him to “have coffee” with them again (see the fawning text messages that they always sent after they were “raped”)?

    No obviously this is not something that you SAY directly to the jury – the trick is to implant this idea in their mind without actually saying it. That’s why Harvey is paying his lawyers the big bucks.

    • Agree: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @HA
  505. Anonymous[354] • Disclaimer says:
    @nebulafox

    >”no matter how great your civilization is, it will be doomed to destruction if met by an outside force of superior might”

    What is “might”?

    Troy wasn’t doomed by a superior force. It fell because it didn’t heed its own seers… Laocoon and Cassandra.

    Troy had held out for what…10 years? The Greeks were tired and homesick. The latter “won” only because Trojans let their guard down. They opened their borders to strangers (sound familiar?), then literally fell down (drunk from celebrating!) on the job.

    Plus saying “superior” per military forces is like saying “fit” per evolution. What is meant by either? The French had MORE men at Agincourt, but still lost. Dinosaurs were also huge and powerful, yet died when the environment changed.

    Similarly, most of the Injuns (feather, not dot) in North America died due to diseases they weren’t immune to…NOT whitey’s guns. Similarly, the Comanche had much better cavalrymen than the US Army. They just had much less of them.

    History is filled with such happenstances. Did Sparta win the Peloponnesian Wars because it was “mightier”? Or because the plague hit Athens and, post-Pericles, Athenian leaders then became fool-hardy…risking campaigns like that to Syracuse?

    At Gaugamela, Alexander the Great had just 47,000 men. King Darius had over 120-250,000 men. Yet Alexander won. So time and chance doth happen to us all.

    Also, times and tactics and technologies change. What is “mighty” in one era can become “mighty weak” the next.

    Atop all that, “power” is constantly shifting definitions and manifestations. For example, most voters who collectively elected Trump did so for him to end Mideast and other wars. What say did THEY have in Soleimani’s murder?

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  506. Jack D says:
    @nebulafox

    The Romans did, too, during periods where it looked like they were dead and gone.

    Rome lasted another 400 years after the fall of the Republic. As Adam Smith said, there’s a lot of ruin in a nation.

    • Replies: @Johann Ricke
  507. Anon[930] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    “not a war criminal”

    War crimes don’t exist, except when someone Jack likes gets hurt.

    O brave new world, that has such people in’t!

  508. Anon[930] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    Hitler in one sentence.

    Hitler’s career ended in an apocalyptic flame-bath because he took on enemies too big for him (and disregarded all the conventions that might otherwise have protected him– some might see a lesson there), but it’s rather a leap to say that that was his “purpose” in some deep metaphysical or even psychological sense.

  509. Jack D says:
    @MEH 0910

    I don’t know who “neontaster” is but it seems to me that some of his readings of facts given in the Times piece were strained in order to make Trump look good. Maybe the NY Times reporters twisted and obfuscated the truth too, in the opposite direction – it wouldn’t be the first time, but neontaster doesn’t strike me as an honest broker either. Probably the truth is somewhere in between the opposite spins.

    The basic story – that the Pentagon gave Trump a range of choices and that he chose one of the more extreme ones in this case (after many times choosing something closer to inaction) seems to comport with the way these things are generally done and with what we know to be the case (i.e. that he did choose to hit Gen. S. and in the past had chosen much milder options). If the Pentagon was not surprised that Trump changed gears and chose a tougher option this time, they should have been.

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    , @Jonathan Mason
  510. HA says:
    @Jack D

    “The other half of this equation is that they are kicking a guy when he is already down.”

    And what do we call a man who targets messed-up teenagers? However “hot” they may seem, they’re not exactly at their best either, wouldn’t you say? So if anything, this seems fair turnaround. That’s why they call them “predators”. Their tendency to target those who are weaker than they are is implicit in the name.

    Also, as I explained earlier, this is all too convenient for the (apparently sizable number of) men who are attracted to damaged coked-up teens — Polanski, Cosby, Epstein on the high-earning end, but doubtless there must be others lower on the net-worth totem pole. Maybe such men have a necrophilia kink, so that they think the drugs and the corpse-like passivity are what they consider being “good in bed” and isn’t it hot how they’re always willing to say yes (or at least unable to say no)? Maybe they’re acting on the supposed correlation between daddy issues and a tendency to act out sexually. Who knows?

    In any case, young women (and young men, in the case of chickenhawker predators) are very convenient targets, it seems: not only are they easier to get close to because of their various problems at home, their accusations can subsequently be dismissed as the fantasies of a young, drugged, and damaged mind. Verdict: not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Sweet! High five, playa! Let’s crank up some R Kelly on the speakers and have us a party before heading down to the local MickeyD’s to look for some fresh meat once school lets out.

    And as if that weren’t bad enough, you now come along saying that even if at some point they get their act together, the women can’t be trusted then either, because they’re too old and ugly to be in the game. Another all-too-self-serving racket you’ve lined up there that I can see through.

    Yes, of course, it’s going to get messy. Of course some of these women (or the lawyers — like yourself — that they contact) are primarily trying to get a payment, and to find someone else to blame for their troubles. Not every guilty man will be convicted, and not every innocent man will be let go. Type I and Type II. But that’s precisely why it’s a really bad — criminally bad, in a very fitting way — idea to be taking damaged young drug-cases to bed in the first place. So I can’t muster much sympathy for Epstein, or his friends like Prince Andrew. Had they been true friends they would have taken him aside and said, dude, sell the windowless van and be satisfied with plastering waifu posters on your bedroom wall. Or whatever the high-net-worth version of that is.

    In any case, had such women not spoken up, there’s little doubt in my mind that Epstein and Weinstein would have just kept going till they dropped or until the money for the pills and coke was completely exhausted. And if being aware of that made some of their now-adult victims sore (Paltrow was supposedly particularly incensed that he told some women “I made her a star because she gave it up for me, don’t you want a piece of that, too?”), I get that.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @Jonathan Mason
  511. SFG says:
    @A123

    That’s their problem.

    Iran is not an existential threat to the USA. If we poke them, they may hurt us. We don’t need anything they have.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  512. @J.Ross

    The right that you see at the RNC. Look at Julie’s picture.

    The people who have the ultimate call whether we have President Trump or President Pence, and they like Pence alot.

  513. @SFG

    We won’t be poking them.

    Nothing to worry yourself about.

  514. Jack D says:
    @HA

    In any case, had such women not spoken up, there’s little doubt in my mind that Epstein and Weinstein would have just kept going

    I doubt this. What happened really was that the political environment changed. These allegations had been kicking around for years. Epstein was tried and given a slap on the wrist.

    Lawyers always say that they are suing in order to send a message and prevent the same horrible thing from happening to another victim, but this is bullshit – they could care less about any other victims unless said victims have also signed a contingency fee agreement with them. In class action suits they are willing to sell out millions of victims for a 5 cent payout each as long as they get millions in legal fees.

    • Agree: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @HA
  515. Dube says:

    The Jack D slot has been upgraded to AI. Stay tuned for more frequent and fascinating diversions.

  516. @Jack D

    Rome lasted another 400 years after the fall of the Republic. As Adam Smith said, there’s a lot of ruin in a nation.

    Counting the Byzantines, whom the Arabs called Romans, that would be a good 1500 years.

  517. @HA

    That puts him squarely in the middle of our ruling class, snobbery-wise. We’ve got to peel them off one way or another. I say we keep working on Jack, Jack works on his friends and we go from there.

  518. • Replies: @anon
    , @Anonymous
  519. 22pp22 says:

    Epstein gave us a glimpse behind the curtain. His job and Robert Maxwell’s job was to gather dirt and use it to blackmail powerful people.

    We know Israel wants to turn the Middle War into a chaotic warzone and wants America to do its dirty work. The Russians have nothing on Trump, but maybe Netanyahu does have something.

    Do they also want to fix it that there is no viable state in Europe? Did Israel have something on Merkel? Does that explain her incomprehensible decision to open the borders?

    • Replies: @LondonBob
  520. MEH 0910 says:
    @Jack D

    It appeared to me that the Kurt Anderson tweet was the source of the Trump rumor:

    I was originally going to post the Kurt Anderson tweet in reply to your comment, as confirmation of the gist of it. But first I searched for the quote Kurt Anderson provided and then found the nobody “neontaster’s” dissection of it.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    , @MEH 0910
  521. • Replies: @J.Ross
  522. J.Ross says:
    @Anonymous

    >How much multikulti do Americans eat without reacting?

    Every white person in the west is required to not react to all the Muslims and mestizos and blacks killing us and diminishing our lives every day like a Palestinian family forbidden by the occupying state from mourning their child.

    >America should be destroyed

    Think of all the Muslims that would kill. And, since all American defensive priority is outside our borders, what would that stop?

  523. J.Ross says:
    @MEH 0910

    Flabbergasted! Obama tried (and failed, by righteous mutiny, which is worse than defeat for him) to invade Syria, succeeded in destabilizing Lybia (perhaps permanently), and ordered nearly three thousand drone strikes without talking to Congress.
    Flabbergasted! Notice how all anti-Trump journalism is babbling about telepathy performed on anonymous people? Instead of journalists reporting facts, gossips relate that they heard (or telepathed) that somebody felt something in reaction to Trump. Were any of the flabbergasted the same people present when Obama decided that he could kill Americans without a procedure?

  524. J.Ross says:
    @Desiderius

    I could not have foreseen that Israel, Saudi Arabia, and ISIS remnants would be happy about the death of the guy who defeated ISIS

    Yeah, well, that’s what neocon security experts do, they could-not-have-foreseen things.

  525. @Jack D

    The basic story – that the Pentagon gave Trump a range of choices and that he chose one of the more extreme ones in this case (after many times choosing something closer to inaction) seems to comport with the way these things are generally done and with what we know to be the case

    What really happened was that wily courtiers from the Pentangle who had been bribed by Burisma approached the Mad King while he was watching TV in his pajamas after his daily bath and diaper change and he tried to wave them away.

    “But, sire”, they said, “all we have here is a list of war criminals we would like you to pardon. If we court-martial our psychopaths, this just hands victory to the Evil Empire. Just sign your name at the bottom and the People will praise you as a Great Leader and say that you are showing Fahrvergnügen which means “leading brilliantly.

    The King, who just wanted to get back to watching TV programs of his Friends praising his great Name, quickly signed the papers and dismissed the courtiers who immediately arranged for the killing.

    Now the King did not want to start a war in the Middle East, so when he heard about the killing and the aftermath, he soon realized he had been tricked and executed his own courtiers and found some little boys playing in the street and invited them to come to the White Palace and be his new advisors.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  526. @HA

    Paltrow was supposedly particularly incensed that he told some women “I made her a star because she gave it up for me, don’t you want a piece of that, too?”. I get that.

    In reality Weinstein was the ONLY man to whom Paltrow did not give it up in her quest for stardom, and so she was justifiably aggrieved.

    • Replies: @HA
  527. @German_reader

    The Iranian regime is no innocent, but the sense of victimhood a lot of Americans seem to nurse over Iran is laughable.

    Indeed, even in the case of Trump indirectly referencing the 52 hostages in Iran in 1979-80 when saying that he had identified 52 targets in Iran.

    Would those be the 52 hostages, who were tortured, killed, and had their heads displayed on spikes outside the embassy for no good reason, due to the US refusing to return the Shah for trial, or the 52 hostages who were eventually released in exchange for the release of Iranian funds held by American banks.

    • Replies: @German_reader
  528. J.Ross says:

    Apparently, upon angering Trump, both Iran and the DPRK experienced [raising eyebrow] uh, “earthquakes” [restoring eyebrow], centered, as drunk chance would have it under a blue moon, on their nuke sites.
    https://postimg.cc/k6qPSNRb

  529. @Jonathan Mason

    John Limbert, one of the diplomats taken hostage in 1979, has actually come out and said he doesn’t want his ordeal to be used as justification for Trump’s policies:
    https://www.msnbc.com/david-gura/watch/fmr-iran-hostage-does-trump-care-about-iran-or-just-undoing-obama-s-work-76078149815?cid=sm_npd_ms_tw_ma

    The whole thing strikes me as utterly irrational (all the more so when one considers how close Trump is to Saudi-Arabia and doesn’t seem to care all that much about Saudi-Arabia’s role in supporting Sunni jihadism which actually has killed thousands of Western civilians in the last 20 years). Given some of Trump’s recent tweets I’m beginning to wonder, if the man isn’t clinically insane. He’s certainly unfit for his office.

    • Agree: utu
  530. @Anonymous

    For example, most voters who collectively elected Trump did so for him to end Mideast and other wars. What say did THEY have in Soleimani’s murder?

    For those who understand how wars end, we say “Good work, about goddamned time.”

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  531. @Jack D

    I thank God every day that the United States is the most mighty nation on earth so that its might is the one who make right and I pray that it stays that way.

    Agreed. The USA has spent blood and treasure and has freed more people than any other nation in the history of the world.

    Global commerce depends on freedom of the seas, which is guaranteed by the US Navy.

  532. Always cute to see impotent Europeans reliving their hoity toity glory days. If this were my present I might be inclined to do so too:

    https://www.glamour.com/story/four-european-countries-now-ha

  533. J.Ross says:

    More like this: Nobody died when Iran targeted the US with savage bants.

    Iranian caller on TV: “America has no hero that we can target… It’s a huge country but no real heroes… Who are we going to assasinate there? Spiderman? SpongeBob?!”

  534. fnn says:

    It looks like no one has yet pointed out that Iraqi PM has said that Suliemani was lured to Baghdad to participate in a peacekeeping mission and then murdered.

    Report of what Iraqi PM said to Parliament.Not only did #Iraq vote to kick us out, PM said #Suleimani was carrying a diplomatic response after PM had been lyingly asked by #Trump to mediate a toning down between #iran and #SaudiArabia. So our leaders lied to us too. Again. https://t.co/TzcdqDhUuI— Mitchell Plitnick 🔥 (@MJPlitnick) January 5, 2020

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    , @Jack D
  535. utu says:
    @HA

    Good job. I wish you could do it full time. Every Jack needs a guardian angel to protect him from himself.

    • LOL: HA
  536. @German_reader

    “Not the entire population, but it sure seems like an accurate description of anybody still supporting Trump and his unhinged Mideast policies at this point. I can understand to some extent why people voted for him in 2016 (you can check my comments from the time, I even was foolish enough to congratulate you guys), but there’s no excuse for supporting this madness anymore.”

    You’re a bigger fool to believe Hillary wouldn’t have been making things in a lot worse for Europe up to this point. That is no defense of Trump. For most of us Trump was, and continues to be, a lesser of two evils.

    “lol, I know, how presumptuous of the servant to criticize his master.”

    Stay with me here – refer to context. You’re being treated fairly by people you claim to be imbeciles. It kinda flushes your premise down the toilet.

    “It’s really high time Europeans see you for what you really are and break with you completely, before you manage to drag us into a civilizational war which can only end in catastrophe. American WNs can keep their “my white brothers” nonsense to themselves, there is no common ground with you.”

    I would love nothing more than for the US to pull the entirety of its military assets from Europe and leave you to your own defenses. It might wise you and those who think like you up a little bit. As far as “common ground,” I’m afraid you’re more right than you realize. Most of your female descendants will be incubators for middle eastern men, whether they like it or not. Too bad really, as your TDS would be better directed at your own civilizational traitor, Mizz Merkel.

    But at any rate I don’t believe you. If you believed in what you say, you’d leave this website and never return. You’ll be back. Envy is a helluva drug.

  537. Mr. Anon says:
    @Desiderius

    For those who understand how wars end, we say “Good work, about goddamned time.”

    As is increasingly clear from your posts, you understand next to nothing.

  538. Jack D says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    you are showing Fahrvergnügen

    Trump no sprechen sie Deutsch. He’s “Swedish”.

  539. HA says:
    @Jack D

    “What happened really was that the political environment changed.”

    Yeah, that can always happen, so tread lightly. Those who are big fish now, may find themselves to be not so big.

    In particular, at least a few of Epsteins clients/victims/whores/whatever decided that in addition to wanting to have that sexual currency, as you refer to it, they also want to be seen as more than that — something you apparently have trouble with. It’s one of those women-don’t-know-what-they-want-but-they-know-they-want-it-all things. They’re kind of like men that way, but I digress. Maybe this happened after these women became old and shriveled, as you imply, or maybe it happened when they had kids of her own and realized the dangers of reducing people to nothing more than a certain number of units of that sexual currency. Who knows? Anyway, as often happened, the climate shifted and the game was up.

    And now, it’s a big problem for everyone. Blue-haired feminists/lesbians will use this to tar all men. I realize that. I also realize there are indeed some women into the bad-boy thing enough to where being against Weinstein makes the man they’re with LESS likely to get laid (hint: if she expresses a fondness for Lana Del Ray, swipe left hard, bro, and don’t you dare put your junk in that), and those hapless MGTOW types similarly use such deviants as an excuse to tar all women. In other words, the war of the sexes will continue to be as it ever was, only more so.

    And of course, none of what Epstein or Weinstein did excuses the personal failings of the women who took him up on his offers. Same goes for the Chinese who wallowed in DutchEastIndian opium dens, or the Appalachian yokels who got hooked on oxy due to the Sacklers campaigns, and the same goes even for those drunken Russian peasants who frittered away the little they had in those taverns we mentioned a while back. I get that. But that doesn’t mean that all the pushers and the enablers who got rich off them (or used them to score points with powerful people) deserve a pass, or any sympathy whatsoever.

  540. J.Ross says:

    He’s gone too far! Trump won’t get away with it this time! Trump avoided that sham impeachment but this could mean a real removal from office! President Trump, surrounded by Iranian advisors, at a meeting of the joint chiefs of staff proposed a radical new approach that would combine diplomacy with theater. The original proposal was to strand a US Navy vessel where Iranian boats could reach it. However, it would have to be totally weaponless, lightly crewed, and something the Iranian … uh, “navy” could handle. Trump’s like, get river boats. Right away an admiral demands to know how the world will accept riverine craft in the ocean. Trump’s like “talk to the hand,” then slaps the admiral with the crispy hand of Qasem Soleimani. But then somebody points out that when the sailors see the Iranians, they’ll just drive away or call for help. Okay, so sabotage the engines and remove the radios. So Trump’s brilliant idea is to have two engineless unarmed riverine craft without comms in the ocean off Iran. And let US sailors be captured and publicly humiliated by a hostile power. The idea is, the president will save them at the last minute with (pre-agreed-upon) diplomacy, and the whole thing demonstrates that we are playing by a newer, more stable set of rules, and that Iranians keep their promises.
    Thank god the Joint Chiefs immediately arrested him and made the whole thing public. Although, if they pulled it off, who on earth would believe such a story anyway, especially coming after the legalization of domestic propaganda?

  541. HA says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    “In reality Weinstein was the ONLY man to whom Paltrow did not give it up.”

    Yes, thank you for that — I later realized I forgot to mention that, and I should have, but my 5 minutes was up.

  542. J.Ross says:
    @fnn

    A deceit-prone US government and a deceit-prone Muslim government or two do not add up to or subtract their way to the truth. Our claim was that QS was on video leading rebels he had already organized in previous visits. Will this video be released? If it is, that would clarify things. Of course some will say that he was on his way to help feed elderly orphans with obscure cancers. As a claim that isn’t enough to knock out the other claim. Granting it for purposes of argument, it doesn’t falsify our claims (he had done stuff in the past and was going to do more soon) or expose us to a particular charge (how dare you lie to a terrorist in a manner consistent with daily vice police operations!) so meh.
    https://ibb.co/Vm0cxzr

  543. Jack D says:
    @fnn

    PM said #Suleimani was carrying a diplomatic response

    Q. How can you tell when an Arab is lying?

    A. You check to see if his lips are moving.

    Seriously, this is not a part of the world where you can accept what people tell you at face value. Somehow our politicians (at least the Republicans) are all pathological liars (I’ve “learned’ here that no American contractor even died) but when some foreign politician speaks it is God’s honest truth? Soleimani was known for many things but diplomacy was not one of them.

    Even if he was tricked into going there on a “diplomatic” mission (he wasn’t) then think of warfare as being like a Mafia feud. It’s par for the course to lure your enemy to a peace meeting and then knock him off (see The Irishman). Soleimani was Jimmy Hoffa and he just got played. A trusted friend (it’s always a trusted friend) picked him up at the airport and then, boom! He got complacent, he trusted the wrong people, he didn’t take the proper precautions and he paid the price. That’s life in the Big Leagues. Live by the sword, die by the sword. How many people did Solemaini lure to their death?

    • Replies: @Anon
  544. Anon[930] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    Q. How can you tell when an Arab is lying?

    A. You check to see if his lips are moving.

    Aren’t we being a little anti-semitic today, Jack?

    Check the hood and robes this morning?

    • Replies: @Johann Ricke
  545. utu says:

    “Soleimani was known for many things but diplomacy was not one of them.” – You are mistaken.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-soleimani-insigh/how-iranian-general-plotted-out-syrian-assault-in-moscow-idUSKCN0S02BV20151006

    At a meeting in Moscow in July, a top Iranian general unfurled a map of Syria to explain to his Russian hosts how a series of defeats for President Bashar al-Assad could be turned into victory – with Russia’s help.

    Major General Qassem Soleimani’s visit to Moscow was the first step in planning for a Russian military intervention that has reshaped the Syrian war and forged a new Iranian-Russian alliance in support of Assad.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @black sea
  546. MEH 0910 says:
    @MEH 0910

    Robert Wright Retweeted:

    • Replies: @Dube
  547. Dube says:
    @MEH 0910

    Death to Twitter re-posts!

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
  548. Jack D says:
    @utu

    That proves my point. He didn’t go to Moscow to make peace. He went to plan war. Ditto for Baghdad.

    • Agree: Johann Ricke
  549. @Anon

    Aren’t we being a little anti-semitic today, Jack?

    Check the hood and robes this morning?

    I think it would be hard to top Baghdad Bob’s performance during the invasion of Iraq. But there he was, mouthing these obvious falsehoods. The difference between the right and the left is that the right “notices” things about races, ethnic groups and religions – and not just about Jews. And one of these things is that Arabs and Muslims are prone to dissimulation, deceit and outright fantasy at a rate that is off the charts.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @Anon
  550. Anonymous[239] • Disclaimer says:

  551. black sea says:
    @utu

    I don’t think people unfurl maps in meetings anymore. What with Powerpoint and all.

  552. LondonBob says:
    @Known Fact

    Soleimani looks more like Gianni Versace.

  553. LondonBob says:
    @22pp22

    It is very clear that the US political elite’s fealty to Israel can’t be fully explained by just campaign donations and favourable media coverage, if anything these matter less these days and yet the capture of US institutions by the Israelis is more complete than ever.

  554. S says:
    @ChrisZ

    God forbid that the future should regard Jared Kushner in the same way we do Julius Caesar.

    This guy has an interesting take on the subject..

    From the time he was born they told him he was perfect. And so he was. No one’s spine towered taller than Jared Kushner. He had been trained for the best by the worst…

    ..Trump will bring in a messiah for the Middle East. At least that’s what they expect of him. Peace will reign as a golden child sounds it from his horn.

    In Rome, narratives like these were hatched by Triumverates. Governments within governments. Secret societies working in the open. But we are inside a much older drama now. The story has swallowed us deep in its cave. America will love the golden child’s gleam as he lights up a cavern of darkness.

    As rehearsed, Marc Antony stood up in the crowd and said. “I wonder? Could it be that Julius Caesar is a God who walks among us?”

    The puddles of revelry in the courtyard stopped in unison. They turned to Antony like a compass as pearls were clutched at the thought. The subversive insertion of divinity spread through everyone’s mind like venom.

    Caesar waited the prescribed three minutes and eight seconds before speaking, “Now. Now.” The grumbled ripples parted as Caesar addressed the inquiry like a matador. “Marc Antony lays laurel where no man’s feet may go. I assure you, by my mother’s complaint, my feet were made from clay, not heaven. As was my cock that crowed that very first morning.”

    The crowd burst into laughter at the joke. Caesar had stuffed his fingers into his armpits and charged through the crowd as if to peck Marc Antony for his suggestion.

    These men held the vanity of laurels between them. Two years later, Julius would be hailed a god in his newly consecrated temple. The golden boy rose from the injection of drama penned the night before.

    https://www.jtrue.com/blog/the-second-coming

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
  555. MEH 0910 says:
    @Dube

    Ida Bae Wells Retweeted:

    • Replies: @black sea
    , @Dube
  556. Yngvar says:

    It seems the geopolitical theory about horses is about to get tested.

  557. Anonymous[648] • Disclaimer says:
    @Adam Smith

    Sutton Hoo Ship Burial Helmet.

  558. black sea says:
    @MEH 0910

    You know how there used to be these T-shirts that said, “It’s a Black Thing. You wouldn’t understand”?

    Well, the fascination with Nipsey Hussle is definitely one of those things.

  559. Dube says:
    @MEH 0910

    Now put it in your own words.

  560. Jack D says:
    @Johann Ricke

    Being realistic instead of pretending that all races are the same is the real “multicultural” approach. When someone like Baghdad Bob or the current PM of Iraq speaks his main purpose may not be to convey the literal information that his words appear to convey as if he was some kind of truth telling robot. In his culture and given his situation, where his very life may be in danger if he says the wrong thing, there may be values that rank much higher than literal truth telling – avoiding loss of “face”, displaying loyalty to a (feared) leader, etc. Compared to these imperatives, an interest in telling the truth may be pretty far down the list of important values in their culture. Lying is so common in Arab cultures that they get into the habit of doing so and will do so regarding even trivial matters just for the hell of it or to keep their lying skills tuned up. Apparently, polygraphs don’t work on Arabs because they are such practiced liars from an early age that they show no stress when they lie.

    When American accept statements from Arab leaders at face value given what we know about their relationship with the truth, either they are displaying shocking naivete or else they are just trying to score points – they detest Trump or America or the West and are willing to take the word of anyone who says anything that confirms their views.

    • Replies: @Anon
  561. @HA

    If I am not around, I also hope others will remember this exchange the next time Jack D mentions Cossacks, or Inquisitors or Nazis, and will remind all concerned that he and his cheerleaders have absolutely no leg to stand on. Victor’s justice, after all.

    No, what Jack means is that the power dynamic is what properly governs the relationship between states. It is just a modern restatement of the Athenian statement to the Melians, as reported by Thucydides ” Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” This is different than saying murder is okay as might makes right. Neither Jack nor the Athenians thought so. Now one can disagree with them – I do – but it’s not the same thing.

    I think the idea is that inter-state relationships are necessarily amoral, as sovereignty pretty much precludes even-handed justice. There is after all a reason that Milosevic ends up on trial in the Hague and not say Curtis LeMay.

    • Agree: Jack D
  562. @S

    This guy has an interesting take on the subject..

    If by interesting you mean completely deranged tin foil hat then yes. Julius Caesar was one of the most talented men in History. Brilliant general, politician and writer. Jared is a mediocrity in his own Age, let alone historically.

    • Replies: @S
  563. danand says:

    Yea, we’re leaving Iraq:

    F820B1DC-39F9-46AD-8C0A-D6C842368988

  564. MEH 0910 says:

    • Replies: @Jack D
  565. Dube says:
    @kaganovitch

    No, what Jack means is that the power dynamic is what properly governs the relationship between states. … I think the idea is that inter-state relationships are necessarily amoral, as sovereignty pretty much precludes even-handed justice.

    Strike the word “properly” if you want a “necessarily amoral” reading:

    The power dynamic is what governs the relationship between states.

    “Governs”” is a metaphor, and in an “amoral” or descriptive reading, may reduce to “expresses:”

    The power dynamic is what expresses the relationship between states.

    Beyond that descriptive claim, Jack D expresses approval of the assassination by using the words “right” and “righteous.” Not everyone agrees with his attitude of approval.

    Next, if necessary, “right” and “righteous.”. Or we could continue in amoral hypothetical neutrality with, say, “smart” and “stupid.”

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  566. anon[100] • Disclaimer says:

    Searching the web for “qasem soleimani” turns up some things.

    A speech in 2018
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-usa-threat-idUSKBN1KG16V

    “We are near you, where you can’t even imagine … Come. We are ready. If you begin the war, we will end the war,” Qassem Soleimani said in a speech in the central city of Hamedan, Tasnim reported.

    Involved in the Benghazi attack. Remember when SecState Hillary! didn’t pick up the phone at 3 AM?

    Yeah, that’s the one.

    https://nypost.com/2014/06/20/how-irans-spy-chief-paid-for-the-benghazi-attack/

    • Replies: @Jack D
  567. @German_reader

    Sad you had to say it so clearly.

    Anyway, the reconquista of the formerly Mexican part of the US is the bastard child of ignorance and greed as well.

    Completely avoidable.

  568. @kaganovitch

    The Athenians paid dearly in the end.

  569. Jack D says:
    @anon

    He’s the Wizard of Oz of Iranian terror, the most dreaded and most effective terrorist alivedead.

    There, Trump fixed it for you. And this is the thanks that QS gets for helping to elect him. Then Khamenei calls him up to complain and Trump tells him “talk to the hand”!

  570. Jack D says:
    @MEH 0910

    What was in the boxes? Did they need 4 different boxes to hold all the pieces?

    Trump missed a big opportunity today. 1 more missile strike and he could have taken out the entire leadership. If Khamenei tries anything, he’ll get to find out what Trump meant by “cultural treasure”. Maybe he didn’t mean mosques.

  571. @reiner Tor

    How lacking in self-awareness you have to be to consider the situation (where the US kept attacking an Iraqi Shiite militia for weeks, and when a mob responded by storming the US embassy, killed a major… Iranian general) as “attacks on your country.”

    Embassies are sovereign territory. The people in the American Embassy are Americans. Their lives, in service of America, are rightfully protected with force. Attack the embassy and expect a harsh response.

    You are shilling for the Iranians. It’s your choice, but Trump is delivering the wise course of action. The action consistent with America First. Get used to it.

    • LOL: German_reader
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  572. HA says:
    @kaganovitch

    “No, what Jack means is that the power dynamic is what properly governs the relationship between states.”

    No, that doesn’t wash. As noted earlier, the “might makes right” ethos is likewise evident in his wildebeest-among-lions (which is not my observation) opining on Epstein/Weinstein/LeoFrank/Rotherham, his cracks about drunken jealous peasants (not to mention the fine blamelessly upstanding tavern-owners who likewise made money off of keeping them drunk and then, like him, mocked them because of it. Shikker iz der Goy.) It is in no way limited only to international relations, whatever you or he may subsequently say by way of damage control. (And by the way “international relations” is a pretty nice euphemism for assassination. In other words, I see what he just did there. )

    As my linked comments also show, they are a stark contrast to the “where-is-your-humanity?” dramatics he displays when he’s talking about people he cares about.

    Like I said, Hillary was dumb enough to make the “deplorables” speech, but she was at least savvy enough to realize she had “stepped in it” as soon as she left the podium. This time around, his mask slipped a little too far. Pretending that isn’t what happened is just going to dig him in deeper. And though I won’t bother looking up the specifics (though in one case it was in a comment directed at me,I think, so you can probably find it yourself), I do recall that others have noted in the past that when it comes to flakking for Epstein and Weinstein, he really lays it on thick. I mean, he’s absolutely shameless. Anyone who keeps laying it on that thick will at some point make a mess on the floor. That’s just gravity. Newton’s first law.

  573. HA says:

    “No, what Jack means is that the power dynamic is what properly governs the relationship between states.”

    No, that doesn’t wash. As noted earlier, the “might makes right” ethos is likewise evident in his wildebeest-among-lions (which is not my observation) opining on Epstein/Weinstein/LeoFrank/Rotherham, his cracks about drunken jealous peasants (not to mention the fine blamelessly upstanding tavern-owners who likewise made money off of keeping them drunk and then, like him, mocked them because of it. Shikker iz der Goy.) It is in no way limited only to international relations, whatever you or he may subsequently say by way of damage control. (And I think you’d agree that “international relations” is a pretty nice euphemism for assassination, which is what we’re really talking about. In other words, I see what he did there.)

    As my linked comments also show, all that makes for a stark contrast to the “where-is-your-humanity?” dramatics he displays when he’s talking about people he cares about.

    Like I said, Hillary was dumb enough to make the “deplorables” speech, but she was at least savvy enough to realize she had “stepped in it” as soon as she left the podium. This time around, his mask slipped a little too far. Pretending that isn’t what happened is just going to dig him in deeper. Lastly, I won’t bother looking up the specifics (though in one case it was in a comment directed at me or one I replied to, I think, so you can probably find it yourself), I do recall that others have noted in the past that when it comes to flakking for Epstein and Weinstein, he really lays it on thick. I mean, he’s absolutely shameless. Anyone who keeps laying it on that thick will at some point make a mess on the floor. That’s just gravity. Newton’s first law.

  574. @German_reader

    You must admit it is a bit rich to have a German (I note that Herzog seems to contradict you) scold us about everything from:

    I spent much of last night reading Twitter, the amount of chauvinistic Americans celebrating this was nauseating.

    Oh, we are happy that our enemy is dead? Come to the USA with me and visit our veterans who have been maimed. And then we can go on to visit the families of those who died as a consequence of the dead Iranian General’s actions. Those are my people. But then, next we are on to

    There was a nuclear agreement

    which delivered billions in unmarked US currency to enable untraceable terrorist activities. And this:

    Americans should read more about 1914, to learn how easily miscalculations can lead to disaster

    Would you like to compare reading lists? And this:

    Wow, nice, real humanitarian, sort of like the Wehrmacht before Leningrad.

    That is your Wehrmacht, not ours. But this summarizes your perspective:

    Hope you MAGA guys will be drowned in Mexicans, since you’ve learned nothing at all since 2003, it will be better for the rest of the world when you’ve become disenfranchised.

    Thanks, we will keep this in mind for the future. When you need help, my first thought will be your comments.

  575. @Charles Erwin Wilson 3

    Come to the USA with me and visit our veterans who have been maimed.

    Unfortunately hardly any of them have been maimed on US territory actually defending the US from foreign invaders, but have been the victims of various US governments which have pursued numerous foreign wars, most of which have had disastrous consequences particularly for the brave people who have joined the US military in the hope of serving their country for the better good, but have been horribly abused to serve the interests of rich, powerful men, vainglorious politicians, and corporations.

    They, just as much as General Soleimani, have been responsible for the killing and maiming of our troops.

    When I am asked whether I support our troops, my answer is always that the best way to support our troops is to vote for politicians (if there are any) who will keep them out of harm’s way in pointless wars that leave them physically, and even more often mentally damaged.

    When I am asked to “buy a toy for a military child” my answer is usually that I would like our military to be paid enough so that military parents can buy toys for their children themselves.

    Trump has said that Soleimani was killed to “prevent a war”, but, using that line of thinking, who else needs to be killed to prevent a war?

  576. Mr. Anon says:
    @AndrewR

    One of my New Year’s resolutions is to be more trusting and patient, so I’ll take your word here, and I’ll spell it out for you and the rest of the short bus crew:

    You shouldn’t throw around the retard accusations. You always struck me as rather dull.

    You always seem to be whining about how people don’t understand you. Perhaps your prose isn’t very clear. If you think Steve shouldn’t have made a joke out of it, say that. You didn’t. You criticized him for not knowing the dude’s name. A lot of people didn’t. Did you? Since when?

    • Replies: @AndrewR
  577. Mr. Anon says:
    @German_reader

    Bad example.

    No, good example. The German’s aerial bombing of Guernica, Warsaw, Rotterdam, London, and Coventry was held up as examples of their barbarism, just as their artillery bombardment of Paris had been in WWI and the Franco-Prussian war. And it was barbaric. No less barbaric was the aerial bombardment of German and Japanese cities in WWII.

  578. Anonymous[270] • Disclaimer says:
    @bigdicknick

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  579. Anonymous[270] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dube

    Good comment.

  580. @Charles Erwin Wilson 3

    Come to the USA with me and visit our veterans who have been maimed.

    Strikes me as a stupid argument, if there’s a war with Iran (for what? for vengeance?), you’ll have a lot more maimed veterans to care for, and quite a few dead to mourn.
    And as I wrote above, the sense of victimhood is pretty ridiculous, given that the Iraq war (and the decision to declare Iran as part of the “axis of evil”, with the clear implication it would be next on the list for regime change) was a choice taken by Bush II’s administration, and one enthusiastically supported by many Americans. It wasn’t forced on you, so don’t cry so much about the (wholly predictable) consequences as if some grave injustice had been done to you. Instead ask yourself, whether you want even more of that, and for what reason.

    That is your Wehrmacht, not ours.

    Sure, but if one takes the arguments of a lot of you keyboard warriors here and on other places on the net (“War is hell, everything allowed in it to win”, “No such thing as international law”, “Turn Iran into a parking lot” etc.) to their logical endpoint, you get something like the Wehrmacht. Maybe you should think a bit about, whether you really want to go there.

  581. @Anonymous

    Wrong, sir.

    They do not care about Christans in the Orient. To the contrary, sadly.

    The murder victim’s role in giving Syrian Christians some breathing space made him so much more hated by this bunch.

  582. @German_reader

    Why accept this slander of the Wehrmacht?

    How these bearers of the double standard behave when confronted with guerilla activity they have shown often enough.

    • Agree: JMcG
    • Replies: @German_reader
  583. @Jack D

    He went there to save — among others — Christianity in Syria, slated for destruction by the usual suspects.

  584. Anonymous[270] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

  585. @Jack D

    It’s not fully impossible, but if true, it makes all the people claiming it to be a part of some master strategy look like fools.

    That said, there are reasons to think that it’s not an accurate description of events. Lots of people in Trump’s entourage (like Pompeo) have been actively working on making a war happen. There are reasons to think that there was some elements of premeditation on parts of the USA ruling regime.

  586. @JMcG

    you can’t deny that the Iranians have made things worse

    President Dubya I made it clear with his Axis of Evil idiocy that Iran would be next on the list. Iran responded in the most logical manner to this threat, and did what it could to make life hell for the American troops in its neighbor. It’s like claiming that the Poles, by shooting back at Hitler’s troops, made things worse for the civilians there.

    If you want to end the Forever War in the Middle East, you need to find politicians who don’t keep meddling with military force there. Or you can, of course, enjoy the Forever Military Adventure.

    I wish you good luck under President Dubya II. After the tax cuts, he might give you the new big war. Are you sure this was why you elected him?

  587. @Desiderius

    Americans telling me that I’m rootless is rich.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  588. @German_reader

    the Iraq war… was a choice taken by Bush II’s administration, and one enthusiastically supported by many Americans.

    Exactly. When Trump says “they are allowed to kill our people with roadside bombs, but we are not allowed to hit their cultural targets. It doesn’t work like that…” all I can say is this is not true.

    Two days ago I was driving on US 301 in Florida at 60 mph when I heard a loud noise as if a helicopter was overhead and about to land on top of my car. The noise became deafening. I stopped the car and found that one of my rear tires had blown out.

    I did not think for one moment that I had been hit by an Iranian IED, because I have never heard of that happening except in foreign countries where there are invading US troops who have illegally invaded a sovereign country based on false intelligence about weapons of mass destruction such as germ warfare and poison gas.

    Bit of a difference between trying to kill invading soldiers of a foreign power in your own country and sending people to blow up motorists in the US, but possibly Trump in the fog of his dementia does not know the difference.

    Furthermore I remember writing numerous posts online in more than one forum in the months before the Iraq war questioning the accuracy and veracity of the intelligence about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq as unproven at best, and urging Americans not to support a speculative invasion of Iraq on the word of people like Dick Cheney who said “we know they have WMD and we know where they are.” Well, he they didn’t and he didn’t, so how can anyone ever trust anything coming out of the White House again without proper verification?

    The sad thing about the Iraq war, is that many of those who were wrong about it have never come to terms with the fact that they were wrong.

    Incidentally, although I do not wish to dwell on the details, which are still painful, 80 years ago, my grandfather, who was a foreign official in Iraq was stoned to death by a hysterical mob in Mosul, leaving 6 young children, the last of whom died a few weeks ago, so I am not by any means someone who loves Iraqis or Iranians.

    But one simply has to be objective, and just because one had a family member, friend, or neighbor killed or crippled while on military service in Iraq or Afghanistan, this is not a valid reason to advocate the commission of war crimes by the US, or to pardon war criminals on our side. On the other hand, convicting our own war criminals gives us moral standing.

    • Replies: @German_reader
  589. AndrewR says:
    @Mr. Anon

    No, like Sailer and most Americans, I didn’t know his name before last week. Unlike Sailer, and like most Americans, I didn’t turn the potential catalyst for WWIII into a lame joke about how dumb journalists are for expecting me to know who Qasam Soleimani was.

    Anyway you can keep raging at me. I’m sure Sailer appreciates your valient white-knighting for him. I know he’s seen it, bro.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  590. @Jack D

    When the President’s finger hovers over a “wrong” choice, the generals are supposed to talk him out of it. But Trump, being Trump, went for the high option and the horrified generals could not get him to change his mind.

    Yes, but the mischievous part is placing that option on the list at all. There is no one who is not aware that Trump is not of sound mind, no matter what they may pretend, so placing unwanted options on the list is playing with fire. Someone wanted this option placed in front of the President.

    In any case, if this is how decisions are being made, it is just another demonstration of Trump’s incompetence and another reason to impeach. If you can kill a senior official to prevent another war, you can certainly impeach to prevent another war.

    The US can reinstate the nuclear agreement with Iran, negotiate a trade deal with Iran, and negotiate a cultural exchange program with Iran so that Iranians can see that the US is not all bad.

    The US could call for a major international conference of all the middle eastern nations and major powers to work towards long term peaceful solutions for the Middle East and provide a forum for solving regional issues by negotiation. Obviously it would be a process and would not immediately produce results, but nothing is ever achieved without exchanges of views.

    • Agree: Rob, German_reader
    • Replies: @Anonymous
  591. @reiner Tor

    If you don’t think your populace is, and particularly your rulers, you’ve got (much) bigger problems than Americans. As I said, it was largely Americans who did this to you, but now is the time to get your own house in order before anyone will take you seriously about anyone else’s.

    As for my roots, we’ve traced a little under half to just outside Kassel. Maybe someday we’ll be reunited.

  592. Anonymous[193] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    The US could call for a major international conference of all the middle eastern nations and major powers to work towards long term peaceful solutions for the Middle East and provide a forum for solving regional issues by negotiation.

    The Israelis don’t want that.

  593. J.Ross says:

    America’s Corbyn, millionaire socialist Bernard Sanders, has now said the dumbest thing anyone has said about this affair:

    “This guy, you know, was, as bad as he was, an official of the Iranian government,” Sanders said. “And, you unleash — then, if China does that, you know, if Russia does that, you know, Russia has been implicated under Putin with assassinating dissidents.”

    “So, once you’re in the business of assassination, you unleash some very, very terrible forces,” he added. “And, what I’m seeing now in this world as a result of Trump’s actions, more and more chaos, more and more instability.”

    https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/01/07/bernie-sanders-soleimani-strike-putin/

    “Official of the government” =/= soldier under arms and actively operating outside his country.
    “Has been implicated” = stuff we made up.
    “Assassinating dissidents” =/= killing a uniformed enemy soldier in a war. Don’t dissidents have to be in or from the society they’re dissenting from? Am I a Chinese or Israeli dissident? No, I am an American, and my bloviating about those countries is not dissent, and would be even less so if I picked up a weapon and attacked them like QS did to us multiple times.
    “Unleash” doesn’t really fit after W committed an economy-wrecking strategically unnecessary Hitlerian war crime, and then Obama ordered 2,800 assassinations by drone (plus other activities). As with the Syrian airfield, as dumb as that was, we are seeing Trump outmaneuver the Vindlands to limit response rather than continue American overseas ravening.
    ———
    Really hilarious hearing NPR try to take Iran’s side today. I’m trying to remember if I ever heard of Soleimani doing anything categorically “diplomatic” before this, in all those times he was photographed in a military uniform in Syria, what with him being a major general with a frontline reputation and not a “diplomat.”
    Iran, we would like to negotiate!
    Excellent! Stay right there, we’re sending over our best special operations tactician!

  594. @but an humble craftsman

    Why accept this slander of the Wehrmacht?

    I wouldn’t want to claim that American forces have ever approached the depths of criminality reached by the Wehrmacht on the Eastern Front or in the Balkans.
    I do find it disturbing however that a lot of American nationalists use arguments that seem to imply they’d want the US military to be unrestrained by any moral or legal considerations whatsoever. I really hope that such sentiments will never become the basis for official policy, but under someone like Trump (who apparently intends to use the convicted or suspected war criminals he’s pardoned for his re-election campaign, to the consternation even of many military men) I’m far from sure about that.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  595. @Jonathan Mason

    so I am not by any means someone who loves Iraqis or Iranians.

    I don’t either, I take an extremely dim view of Islam in general, and obviously I would prefer it, if Iran changed its political system away from the Islamic republic.
    However, a great Mideast war, maybe a genuine war of civilizations in the long term, won’t end well imo. Trump’s policy has given new legitimacy to the anti-imperialist claims of the Islamic republic and is empowering the worst and most radical elements within Iran. I don’t think a war would end with a pro-Western liberal democracy in Iran. More likely would be either state collapse and terrible anarchy (with lots of spillover effects to Europe, would also greatly favour a resurgence of Sunni jihadism in Iraq and Syria), or the Iranian regime survives in a much more militant form and really builds nuclear weapons. I don’t see how any of that could be preferable to the situation before Trump ended the nuclear agreement.

  596. Anon[930] • Disclaimer says:
    @Johann Ricke

    And one of these things is that Arabs, Jews, and other Middle Eastern peoples are prone to dissimulation, deceit and outright fantasy at a rate that is off the charts.

    FTFY

    “One Greek to fool two Turks; one Jew to fool two Greeks; one Armenian to fool two Jews” is an old saying. Arabs are amateurs.

    • Replies: @JRB
  597. Anon[930] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    Baghdad Bod is a counterexample to your thesis. He was an astonishingly inept liar, yet he was the propaganda mouthpiece for his country; i.e. the best liar the government could find.

  598. J.Ross says:

    A Serb anon heartily endorses all coming American actions targeting the Islamic Republic of Iran and offers this helpful map:
    https://postimg.cc/R30ncZJP

  599. Anonymous[976] • Disclaimer says:
    @German_reader

    I wouldn’t want to claim that American forces have ever approached the depths of criminality reached by the Wehrmacht on the Eastern Front or in the Balkans.

    Didn’t Germany have a greater justification for fighting than the United States does?

  600. S says:
    @kaganovitch

    If by interesting you mean completely deranged tin foil hat then yes.

    Naah, but you’re welcome to your opinion.

    Everyone has one.

    Human flight, travel to the moon, and (to be discovered in the future probably) the existence of extra-terrestrial life of some sort, were all figuratively decried as ‘deranged tin foil hat’ by some at one time.

    Julius Caesar was one of the most talented men in History. Brilliant general, politician and writer.

    And, or, depending upon point of view, a ‘brilliant’ demagogue who more than anyone brought down a republic and set the template for a centuries long dictatorship.

    Jared is a mediocrity in his own Age, let alone historically.

    LOL! I can only imagine the same or something like it was said of the original Julius Caesar early on by his detractors in his day.

    This ‘mediocrity’, or what ever he may be, has his office at the White House closer to Trump’s than anyone else. Kushner, as can be readily found on the net, has also been quite involved in many of the Trump administration’s endeavors.

    Anyhow, at least for myself, I’ve never pretended to make a comprehensive point by point direct comparison between Julius Caesar and Jared Kushner. Rather, the comparison that has been made has been a very broad one in regards to the latter’s potential achievement of major political power in the perhaps not so distant future.

    To be sure, though, as mentioned, Jared does have at least some real political power even now.

    We’ll see what transpires.

    May just have to agree to disagree on the subject and leave it at that.

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
  601. @German_reader

    Strikes me as a stupid argument,

    Given that you are dim, it is not surprising that you come up with that as a response.

    if there’s a war with Iran (for what? for vengeance?), you’ll have a lot more maimed veterans to care for, and quite a few dead to mourn.

    You are describing the kind of stupid war that Bush 43 loved, and Obama could not quite detach himself from. Trump has no commitment to a stupid war. We can destroy Iran without losing a single American. But hey, I understand that Germany has made a lot of money advancing the interest of Iran, and against American interest. So you want to make money on the spread – and you know there is no downside. You get the profits and we pay the costs. OTOH it takes a long time to reap the whirlwind. An immigrant will own your property, live off your pension, and treat you with contempt. Enjoy your retirement.

    BTW, you are too stupid to understand that the Wehrmacht was a fantastic example of what German ingenuity can do. Hitler’s abuse of the Wehrmacht does not diminish its remarkable achievements.

    You are not only unworthy of posting here on an American site, you are unworthy of being a German.

  602. Well, lobbing a few rockets in the general direction of a couple of bases with US soldiers in Iraq seems like a pretty mild kind of retaliation, so maybe this whole war will just be reduced to a simmer.

    However we really need some world leader to show a bit of statesmanship and pull the leaders of the US and Iran together by the scruff of their necks and knock some sense into them.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @German_reader
  603. Anonymous[976] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    However we really need some world leader to show a bit of statesmanship and pull the leaders of the US and Iran together by the scruff of their necks and knock some sense into them.

    Haven’t the Iranians been behaving sensibly all along?

  604. @Jonathan Mason

    so maybe this whole war will just be reduced to a simmer.

    That would require Trump to change course with his maximum pressure policy and drop at least a few sanctions, and I don’t believe he’ll do that. A lot of people in his circle are determined to bring about regime change in Iran at any cost, they’re unwilling to work for real negotiations, and unfortunately he seems to listen to them.

    However we really need some world leader to show a bit of statesmanship

    But who should do that? The Russians and Chinese can’t be effective mediators due to their own disputes and rivalries with the US. Macron is trying to do something (really odd that he’s now a figure one has to put hope in), but in general the Europeans are too weak and can’t agree on a coherent position.
    All depends what Trump will do now, hopefully he’s got enough sense not to bomb Iran (probably depends on what he sees on Fox News or the other cable shows he’s watching).

  605. Mr. Anon says:
    @AndrewR

    I’m hardly raging at you. Just pointing out that you are a tiresome jerk who gets bent out of shape about minutiae. Not that it isn’t obvious to everyone.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
  606. @S

    And, or, depending upon point of view, a ‘brilliant’ demagogue who more than anyone brought down a republic and set the template for a centuries long dictatorship.

    You can make a case for that, I won’t deny it, but for sheer talent he’s hard to beat. I’m pretty sure that if Jared writes his memoirs(or more likely has them ghostwritten)no one will be reading them 200 years let alone 2000 years from now.

  607. JRB says:
    @Anon

    All this duplicity didn’t do the Greeks, Jews and Armenians much good in the first part of the 20th century.

  608. MEH 0910 says:
    @MEH 0910

    Twitter timeline leading to Soleimani-go-boom:

    • Replies: @AndrewR
  609. US assassinates Solomon-I, in Iraq, in a Quasi-Shia State, in the wee hours of the morning.

    Y would a Iranian Gen – who is anti-Israel and America, fly from a Commercial/Military Airport in Iraq – when the US embassy was firebombed just a few days ago ? He would have known that all his e-signatures would be tracked by the Americans,second by second,and there would be no dearth of spies at the hangar,ATC,Airport who would ply the Americans with precise coordinates of the General’s flight patterns ?

    Surely after the US embassy bombing the Good General would have been told by his team to exit Iraq ? Could a general be so careless or foolish – that he would think that he could exit from a designated airport,after the US embassy escapade – and with another designated terrorist (designed by USA) – with makes it a double prime target – and with no collateral baggage ? In ISIS days – he was fighting with the Americans – and those days are over.

    Persian Shia’ism is not a suicide cult – it appears to be one – but it is not.So the general was misled into complacency and entrapped by some , in the Iraqi state, to take that flight – and the US embassy firebombing might also have been a false flag operation as the US troops shot no one – id.est., no firebomber was killed.But the sons of Xerxes and Cyrus cannot be so naive and foolish.The General would not have boarded that plane unless he was secured by the Russians and Tehran.2000 years ago, the Jews inserted a fake verse into the Old Testament and Talmud – to state that Cyrus was the messiah- and showed it to Cyrus – who like a fool, believed it, and rebuilt the Temple !The General had read the Torah,Talmud,Hebrew Bible and the History of the Jews and the Nassara

    CNN portrays the killing as a “Trump rash reaction” – but it is not.Ultimately,the USA will go to war with Iran – as the Americans do not trust the Persian Shias – on the N-Bomb,and the Persians do not trust the Jews or the Nassara. Soleimani was just the catalyst to push the Persians into the N- Suspension, and go full N-throttle – which is what the Persians have done – and which is what the Americans wanted.

    [MORE]

    Iraqi govtt will kick out the US troops and the US troops will not leave – as that is what the Americans (and Kurds,Nassara,Sunnis) really want.To be precise, the Kurds,Suniis do not want the Yankii to leave – but that they be asked to leave – so that their mortal fears of living under Persian Shias is brought to the fore – for a partition of the Iraqi state

    What the Americans want is to trifurcate Iraq – which will happen inevitably post Soleimani – and which is what the Persians also seek,although the Persians would like to Shia-ise the whole of Iraq.Persian security interests are preserved by destabilising and burning Iraq to create a “sea of fire” between them and the US/Israel and satellite Hezbollahs all over the Gulf,especially encircling the Saudis (The Soleimani Doctrine).But now,they will be happy with a trifurcation

    After trifurcating Itaq the Persians will export their franchise and the brand to all Shia regions in GCC and Africa (where the USA has lesser troops and even lesser interest).Even the EU/PRC will be pleased – and this will look like an amicable solution (already crafted) – after creating a well planned disaster (assassinating Soleimani)

    There was no inpending attack by Soleimani – just lies and deception of the American state.There are many heads of Terror Groups in the Gulf who can be killed, with or w/o collateral impact – but they are never taken out – not even by Israel or ISIS (Israel Secret Intel Service).The Americans chose a Persian Shia,when the whole Sunni world hates Persia and the Persia Shian, and killed him in a Quasi Shia State – and so there is no empathy or support for the Persians – even after the assassination – not even from Russia and PRC.

    Obviously,the Russians,PRC,EU would have known – and they did not tip off the Persians and the Americans shot off 4 Hell Fire’s – and THERE WAS NO COLLATERAL PRESENCE AT THE AIRPORT AT THAT TIME. A marked man would travel in the presence of ample collateral baggage – like the Hamas and Hezb, do in Gaza – to provoke Collateral damage,and then the Christian empathy,by Amanpour on CNN

    The Persians have launched a muffled attack at a site which it knows, hosts no Americans, using missiles which have the capacity to hit US barracks,and knowing that the site hosts Iraqis – where the Iranians had ample intel and time to affix missile coordinates for the terminal descent – and they did not.The Persians used BM with intent,SO THAT THE AMERICANS could track their launch and loading and set up – AND THE AMERICANS did NOT TAKE OUT THE LAUNCHERS AND SILOS – before take off.

    The whole story stinks and if it ends with the Persian missile strike – it will stink even more.Odds are there will be more strikes by the Persians and US will make 1 strike (at least) on Persian soil – to further aggravate the Persians into the N-Bomb – and then disaster will come when either side hits civilians by plan or strategy

    A few days ago,the Iranian media mentioned the US blowing up of a Iranian Airliner long ago.Coincidentally,a NATO nation – Article 5 nation – had its commercial aircraft blown up in Tehran- with no survivors – at take off time – with all tanks full,Ukraine is a nation that Trump and the USA have sworn to protect.

    Just providence of coincidence and incidence.No one is reporting on the passenger list – surely there would no Shias on the plane.

    The Nassara do not understand 1 simple thing.For the Persians and also the Sunnis,the path to salvation and evolution, as per Shia Theology and Philosophy – goes via the Bed of Armageddon – as that is when the Mehdi will return

    As an aside, the Hindoos sent a terror-spy to Pakistan, via Iran, on the cover of a port project.The spy was busted in Pakistan.Hindoo History and Persian History shows that whenever, the Persians support the Hindoos or Indians – some disaster occurs.Soleimani supported the Indian Terror-Spy.

    The wisdom of the “children of Cyrus,Darius and Xerxes”,encapsulates the “transcendence of Human thought”, the “Deuterosis of the Dindoo”, as under:

    A “Persian dictionary”,titled “Lughet-e-Kishwari”,published in Lucknow in 1964,gives the meaning of the word Hindu as “chore [thief], dakoo [dacoit], raahzan [waylayer], and ghulam [slave].

    Evidently the Gates of Hell are ajar.In essence,the world is overpopulated.If The Indians and South East Asians (besides Thai women) were to disappear,the Garden of Eden would return.Then there are Arabs,who allow Hindoos in their nation and let them build temples in Arab nations and extol Hindoo Gods – such vermin should also die.dindooohindoo

    And then there are Muslims – who will not answer 1 simple question – Was Soleimani a Mujahid and now a Shaheed.Soleimani- the Persian,named after Solomon-the son of David-David the messiah of Israel.

    Solomon bore the Curse of Allah on the Jews – as per the Hebrew Bible – id.est the Jews are cursed by Allah,due to the sins of Solomon.

    Y did the Russians and Tehran not protect Soleimani ? They allowed him to be killed .

  610. AndrewR says:
    @Mr. Anon

    Clearly not everyone thinks making a lame joke downplaying what could be the catalyst for a world war is “minutiae.”

    I’m starting to think you’re Sailer’s alt he uses to anonymously attack people so he can maintain an official air of humility. There are few other explanations for why you are always defending him despite his clear ability to either openly defend himself or to simply not publish my comment. Hint: the latter option he has chosen many times, even when there was nothing remotely inflammatory or controversial about my comment. This censorship is a large part of my willingness to criticize him so readily.

    But anyway, Sailer doesn’t need you to defend him and I don’t need to read your constant insults, so go ahead and have the last word which I won’t read.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  611. AndrewR says:
    @MEH 0910

    Is Khamenei really behind that account? I’m not convinced of that, although if he is then it was indeed reckless to say “you can’t do anything.” Donald Trump is a child who doesn’t respond well to dares.

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
  612. J.Ross says:

    https://postimg.cc/6TR1Jxt3

    A photo circulating Iranian social media purports to show the tip of a TOR type Iranian rocket near the crash site of the Urainian 737-800 which expoded and crashed at the same time as the missile exchange.

  613. MEH 0910 says:
    @AndrewR

    https://www.bostonherald.com/2020/01/01/iran-supreme-leader-stokes-twitter-war-with-donald-trump/

    As Americans waited to see how the U.S. would respond to an Iranian-backed Iraqi militia’s embassy attack, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei taunted President Trump on Twitter Wednesday — taking Trump on at his own game.

    “That guy (President Trump) has tweeted that we see Iran responsible for the events in Baghdad & we will respond to Iran. 1st: You can’t do anything. 2nd: If you were logical — which you’re not — you’d see that your crimes in Iraq, Afghanistan… have made nations hate you,” Khamenei’s official English-language Twitter account posted.

  614. Mr. Anon says:
    @AndrewR

    <blockquoteClearly not everyone thinks making a lame joke downplaying what could be the catalyst for a world war is “minutiae.”

    No, of the posts I’ve seen in this threat, clearly only don’t think so.

    I’m starting to think you’re Sailer’s alt he uses to anonymously attack people so he can maintain an official air of humility.

    Then you really are stupid.

    There are few other explanations for why you are always defending him despite his clear ability to either openly defend himself or to simply not publish my comment.

    I’m not “always defending him”. I do often agree with him, in which case I occasionally say so.

    Hint: the latter option he has chosen many times, even when there was nothing remotely inflammatory or controversial about my comment. This censorship is a large part of my willingness to criticize him so readily.

    A lot people claim they are censored here. Mostly they seem to be deranged or peevish. You don’t seem to be the former so maybe you are the latter. Or maybe you just don’t know how to make a post. If the site is so disagreeable to you, maybe you should just leave. Or not. I’ve already lost interest.

  615. @Anonymous

    I would also support drone strikes on the people who organize the occupation of a dean’s office, so your analogy fails.

    • Replies: @Anon
  616. US assassinates Solomon-I, in Iraq, in a Quasi-Shia State, in the wee hours of the morning.

    Y would a Iranian Gen – who is anti-Israel and America, fly from a Commercial/Military Airport in Iraq – when the US embassy was firebombed just a few days ago ? He would have known that all his e-signatures would be tracked by the Americans,second by second,and there would be no dearth of spies at the hangar,ATC,Airport who would ply the Americans with precise coordinates of the General’s flight patterns ?

    Surely after the US embassy bombing the Good General would have been told by his team to exit Iraq ? Could a general be so careless or foolish – that he would think that he could exit from a designated airport,after the US embassy escapade – and with another designated terrorist (designed by USA) – with makes it a double prime target – and with no collateral baggage ? In ISIS days – he was fighting with the Americans – and those days are over.

    Persian Shia’ism is not a suicide cult – it appears to be one – but it is not.So the general was misled into complacency and entrapped by some , in the Iraqi state, to take that flight – and the US embassy firebombing might also have been a false flag operation as the US troops shot no one – id.est., no firebomber was killed.But the sons of Xerxes and Cyrus cannot be so naive and foolish.The General would not have boarded that plane unless he was secured by the Russians and Tehran.2000 years ago, the Jews inserted a fake verse into the Old Testament and Talmud – to state that Cyrus was the messiah- and showed it to Cyrus – who like a fool, believed it, and rebuilt the Temple !The General had read the Torah,Talmud,Hebrew Bible and the History of the Jews and the Nassara

    CNN portrays the killing as a “Trump rash reaction” – but it is not.Ultimately,the USA will go to war with Iran – as the Americans do not trust the Persian Shias – on the N-Bomb,and the Persians do not trust the Jews or the Nassara. Soleimani was just the catalyst to push the Persians into the N- Suspension, and go full N-throttle – which is what the Persians have done – and which is what the Americans wanted.

    Iraqi govtt will kick out the US troops and the US troops will not leave – as that is what the Americans (and Kurds,Nassara,Sunnis) really want.To be precise, the Kurds,Suniis do not want the Yankii to leave – but that they be asked to leave – so that their mortal fears of living under Persian Shias is brought to the fore – for a partition of the Iraqi state

    What the Americans want is to trifurcate Iraq – which will happen inevitably post Soleimani – and which is what the Persians also seek,although the Persians would like to Shia-ise the whole of Iraq.Persian security interests are preserved by destabilising and burning Iraq to create a “sea of fire” between them and the US/Israel and satellite Hezbollahs all over the Gulf,especially encircling the Saudis (The Soleimani Doctrine).But now,they will be happy with a trifurcation

    After trifurcating Itaq the Persians will export their franchise and the brand to all Shia regions in GCC and Africa (where the USA has lesser troops and even lesser interest).Even the EU/PRC will be pleased – and this will look like an amicable solution (already crafted) – after creating a well planned disaster (assassinating Soleimani)

    There was no inpending attack by Soleimani – just lies and deception of the American state.There are many heads of Terror Groups in the Gulf who can be killed, with or w/o collateral impact – but they are never taken out – not even by Israel or ISIS (Israel Secret Intel Service).The Americans chose a Persian Shia,when the whole Sunni world hates Persia and the Persia Shian, and killed him in a Quasi Shia State – and so there is no empathy or support for the Persians – even after the assassination – not even from Russia and PRC.

    Obviously,the Russians,PRC,EU would have known – and they did not tip off the Persians and the Americans shot off 4 Hell Fire’s – and THERE WAS NO COLLATERAL PRESENCE AT THE AIRPORT AT THAT TIME. A marked man would travel in the presence of ample collateral baggage – like the Hamas and Hezb, do in Gaza – to provoke Collateral damage,and then the Christian empathy,by Amanpour on CNN

    The Persians have launched a muffled attack at a site which it knows, hosts no Americans, using missiles which have the capacity to hit US barracks,and knowing that the site hosts Iraqis – where the Iranians had ample intel and time to affix missile coordinates for the terminal descent – and they did not.The Persians used BM with intent,SO THAT THE AMERICANS could track their launch and loading and set up – AND THE AMERICANS did NOT TAKE OUT THE LAUNCHERS AND SILOS – before take off.

    The whole story stinks and if it ends with the Persian missile strike – it will stink even more.Odds are there will be more strikes by the Persians and US will make 1 strike (at least) on Persian soil – to further aggravate the Persians into the N-Bomb – and then disaster will come when either side hits civilians by plan or strategy

    A few days ago,the Iranian media mentioned the US blowing up of a Iranian Airliner long ago.Coincidentally,a NATO nation – Article 5 nation – had its commercial aircraft blown up in Tehran- with no survivors – at take off time – with all tanks full,Ukraine is a nation that Trump and the USA have sworn to protect.

    Just providence of coincidence and incidence.No one is reporting on the passenger list – surely there would no Shias on the plane.

    The Nassara do not understand 1 simple thing.For the Persians and also the Sunnis,the path to salvation and evolution, as per Shia Theology and Philosophy – goes via the Bed of Armageddon – as that is when the Mehdi will return

    As an aside, the Hindoos sent a terror-spy to Pakistan, via Iran, on the cover of a port project.The spy was busted in Pakistan.Hindoo History and Persian History shows that whenever, the Persians support the Hindoos or Indians – some disaster occurs.Soleimani supported the Indian Terror-Spy.

    The wisdom of the “children of Cyrus,Darius and Xerxes”,encapsulates the “transcendence of Human thought”, the “Deuterosis of the Dindoo”, as under:

    A “Persian dictionary”,titled “Lughet-e-Kishwari”,published in Lucknow in 1964,gives the meaning of the word Hindu as “chore [thief], dakoo [dacoit], raahzan [waylayer], and ghulam [slave].

    Evidently the Gates of Hell are ajar.In essence,the world is overpopulated.If The Indians and South East Asians (besides Thai women) were to disappear,the Garden of Eden would return.Then there are Arabs,who allow Hindoos in their nation and let them build temples in Arab nations and extol Hindoo Gods – such vermin should also die.dindooohindoo

    And then there are Muslims – who will not answer 1 simple question – Was Soleimani a Mujahid and now a Shaheed.Soleimani- the Persian,named after Solomon-the son of David-David the messiah of Israel.

    Solomon bore the Curse of Allah on the Jews – as per the Hebrew Bible – id.est the Jews are cursed by Allah,due to the sins of Solomon.

    Y did the Russians and Tehran not protect Soleimani ? They allowed him to be killed .

  617. Anon[930] • Disclaimer says:
    @James Braxton

    No, his analogy succeeds; it shows your support for Trump is essentially identical to your support for killing students “ranting in the hallway outside a Harvard dean’s office”, which helps other people figure out how much weight to put on your opinions one way or another.

    • Replies: @James Braxton
  618. @Anon

    It must be odd to go through life taking everything literally.

  619. MEH 0910 says: