search
top

The Mid East Issue.

(cartoon courtesy AF Branco at Comically Incorrect.)

We hate the idea of the US killing Iranian terrorist leader Qasem Soleimani.

Our reasons boil down to one simple reason: as Christians, we believe that anyone can repent and turn away from the evil life and acts they have done and are doing. That opportunity is gone for Soleimani, and there is a part of us that is saddened by that fact.

However, we want to address some concerns that others have brought up over Soleimani’s death.

First is the so called “lack of justification” for the attack.

The rationale for this belief seems to be “we haven’t seen any rationale, therefore it must not exist.”

We didn’t realize a Facebook or twitter account means you have top secret clearance or access to briefings.

However:

Army Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters at the Pentagon:

I’ll stand by the intelligence I saw that was compelling, it was imminent, and it was very very clear in scale and scope. Did it exactly say who, what, when, where? No. But he was planning, coordinating and synchronizing significant combat operations against U.S. military forces in the region and it was imminent.

“Those of us who were involved in the decision-making of that, we would have been culpably negligent to the American people had we not made the decision we made,” he added.

Milley also pushed back against reports claiming the intelligence justifying the strike against Soleimani was “razor-thin.”

“Very, very few people saw the intelligence,” he said. He added he would be happy at the “appropriate time” to testify to Congress about it.

Critics of the Trump administration have accused the president of not thinking through the consequences of the strike against Soleimani. Trump decided on the strike after Iran-controlled Shia militia forces attacked the U.S. Embassy in Iraq.

However, both Milley and Defense Secretary Mark Esper said they were well aware of the risks and that it was necessary to protect American lives.

“We had a responsibility to act when American lives are threatened and I think that’s a responsible thing to do,” Esper told reporters. He continued:

When we looked at this operation, we knew there’d be consequences, we knew there would be risks. We knew that ahead of time. We didn’t take any of it lightly. And the forces….we knew we would have to adjust their posture, force protection posture in the immediate aftermath of this particular strike operation.

The fact that there was intelligence on Soleimani planning another attack(s) on US military personnel and US civilians leads to the very interesting question of “if you are aware of threats to people, do you allow the threats to become actual incidents and then retaliate? Or do you do whatever you have to stop the attacks from happening in the first place?”

For example, even though this is against Godwin’s Law, if the world could have killed Hitler before the start of World War II where 80 million people died including those in Hitler’s “final solution,” would killing Hitler have been a good idea?

Closer to home, if the US had intelligence on Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, should the government have simply let the two blow up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City killing 168 souls, including 19 children? Or should the government have done everything they could have to stop the attack, including shooting and killing McVeigh and or Nichols as the Ryder truck was being driven to the Murrah Building?

A trickier question would be if the government knew that hijackers had taken over American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175 and were planning on crashing them into the World Trade Center towers on 9/11, should the US have shot the planes down or waited until the attacks were completed?

As the Diplomad notes:

Soleimani was a uniformed enemy combatant active on a foreign battlefield, directing and implementing operations against US personnel and institutions, e.g., the Embassy. QS had a LONG, LONG history of conducting lethal operations against US and other Western targets, using largely proxy forces. At the time of death, he was in Iraq meeting the leader of one of those proxy militias, the one which had just attacked the US Embassy in Baghdad, and preparing further actions against us. He was not some random civilian Iranian government official whom we assassinated in his home in Tehran. He was a military man, conducting a covert military mission against us outside of Iran’s territory. His killing is no more an illegitimate act than say that of Japanese Admiral Yamamoto or of US General Simon Bolivar Bruckner, Jr.

We lean toward the idea that removing evil from the world before innocent men, women and children can be killed is a good thing. Soleimani had a long history of terrorist attacks and appears to have been planning more.

We have heard people say that Soleimani’s death will “destabilize the region.”

We weren’t aware that the region was stable to begin with. In fact, we can’t remember a time when the mid-east was “stable” under any definition of the word.

The fact of the matter is that there are always going to be people in that region who love the power of conflict and have no desire for peace of any type.

An example of this is the Camp David Accords of 1978. After the contentious founding of Israel in 1948, Egypt and Israel had waged 2 wars ( Six-Day War of 1967 and the Yom Kippur War of 1973) against each other. The Camp David Accords set the stage for peace and stability in the region.

The ultimate goal of the Camp David Accords was to establish a framework for peace in the Middle East by formalizing Arab recognition of Israel’s right to exist, developing a procedure for the withdrawal of Israeli forces and citizens from the so-called “Occupied Territories” of the West Bank (which would enable the establishment of a Palestinian state there) and taking steps to safeguard Israel’s security.

Yet the UN shunned the Accords, failing to pass any resolution supporting the basic framework of peace and stability in the region. Egyptian President Anwar Sadat who had negotiated the Camp David Accords for Egypt was assassinated by the Egyptian Islamic Jihad after a fatwa was issued by Muslim cleric Omar Abdel-Rahman, who was later convicted of a role in the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center.

Anyone who thinks the region is “destabilized” hasn’t been paying attention for the last 80 plus years.

You have also heard and seen that the Iranian people are angry and crying out for revenge. What you haven’t seen is that people in Iran recognized Soleimani as a monster and represented an oppressive regime and are celebrating his death and thanking Trump for pulling the virtual trigger:

Iraqi’s also are celebrating:

It may be a while before the full ramifications of this strike will become clear. Some are saying there will be attacks on US bases. Those attacks should be met with great force in return.

This is not a partisan issue to us. It is time that we show the world that we are not punching bags willing to give countries money and then have them use that money against us down the road.




2 Responses to “The Mid East Issue.”

  1. Thomas L Gaume Jr says:

    Soleimani was the mastermind behind the Beirut Barracks Bombing in 1983, as a survivor of that peacekeeping mission I say, good riddance.

    Remember the 241 innocent people who died in that attack.

  2. D. G. says:

    We have been playing Rocket Frogger out here since the attack on QS, and the attack on the Embassy was, in reality, just a bad protest with some bad actors from Iranian backed militias. No shots were fired, and no one was killed, despite the temporary breach of the Embassy compound that was quickly pushed back.

    QS was also in the region to continue to destabilize the situation that had played out over the past 6 months, with over 600 civilian protesters being killed by Iraqi forces, and the PM resigning as a result of the all the negative turmoil. QS wanted there to be chaos so they could continue to attack US interests in Iraq, which stands against the case for democracy and civilized society.

    Now that Iran has made a tragic and egregious error in shooting down the Ukranian flight, the international community will hopefully come down on them collectively, so that the US can step back from the issue and let it take care of itself.

  3. […] we noted the other day, protests in Iraq and Iran over their oppressive regimes area starting to take place. Many of the […]

top