Comments

Iranian rocket attacks on US bases in Iraq — 60 Comments

1. Ok, still early, but here is my take. Iran blinked. These “attacks” were against Iraqi bases where some U.S. personnel are. But, no Americans were killed and damage was minimal. Iran announces that they have responded mercilessly to America. The U.S. shrugs it off or responds with a minor pro forma strike without any chest pounding. And we go on…

2. Ok. It’s time to take off the gloves and put on the pussy… front hole hats. Send in the abortionists, the planners, the Twilighters, too. Show the Iranian terrorists the pinnacle of Western progressive culture (PC). Wage social justice, cannibalize their profitable parts, and collect the Mullahs. Send notice in no selective, opportunistic terms, that they are no longer viable. Also, as we are a diversitist society, exclude no People… Person nor Posterity, but hunt, judge, and cancel them with prejudice as an inclusive color bloc.

3. They don’t understand America any more than the coastal media does. I don’t expect any tit-for-tat here, we will see a serious amount of damage in return.

4. Iran is weak but not stupid. Their only hope is to mobilize TWANLOC

   They will play for time and pin hopes on CNN, NYT and DNC.

5. I know jack and squat about the situation but suspect that Iran’s effort to storm the U.S. embassy in Baghdad demonstrated the extent of their capacities within that country. They may be able to exert some military force inside Iraq but understand it would be wiped out almost instantly by the U.S. response.

   I would also bet that Iran being unwilling to play the victim while planning more of a long term payback is a flashing neon sign indicating how bad things are for the regime. This kind of attack, which essentially invites the U.S. to destroy every site from which missiles were launched, looks like something the political leadership had to do to placate a very pissed off Iranian military. Of course, that’s assuming that this isn’t some childish “I’ll show you!” reaction from Supreme Leader Ali Kahmenei.

   I wonder what happens next if Trump gives the greenlight to send a drone down Khamenei’s chimney?

   Mike

6. If you could flip a new high tech switch and stop the heart beat of every terrorist and witting terrorist enabler in Iran without collateral damage would you do it? Or even just render them limp, immobile, and semi-comatose …

   My guess is that many, perhaps most people, even knowing that they would be further attacked and harmed if they did not, would still not do it.

   I’m convinced that many people don’t really mind being victims of others all that much; and, if not actually craving it in some twisted kind of way, just consider it as part of “the human condition” they are duty bound to endure.

   And if they woke up in a world of only happy well-disposed human beings who interacted on a voluntary basis, they simply would not know what to do with themselves.

7. Iran is weak but not stupid. Their only hope is to mobilize TWANLOC

   They will play for time and pin hopes on CNN, NYT and DNC.”

   Yet they claim to be strong and willing to go all the way. But remember the “highway of death”? Apparently, according to those with progressive and enlightened sensibilities, you are not supposed to strike at malefactors who’ve struck at you, once they begin running away or are demonstrated as weaker.

   This is because … something …

   I don’t know. Everyone is guilty, so no one is guilty? Or, none of us have a right to be unmolested, so bad people are just actually acting normally and we “have to” accept it? .. or, I don’t know … some thing or another.

8. I would kill them all. In a heartbeat.

9. I’ll second what Roy Nathanson said: Iran launched an attack they can call a response, but Trump can claim no Americans were killed, so no response is warranted on our part.

   The question is, will Iran launch another attack some time down the road, maybe hitting a navy ship or unleashing their sleeper cells inside the USA? As of right now, both sides can say they’ve evened the score; perhaps both sides will let things stay where they are. If only Trump could lay off Twitter for a few days. . .

10. Apparently the missiles didn’t have very accurate guidance. Was that on purpose? Fire some poorly aimed missiles and not cross the red line of killing Americans to save face? Or are their missiles that bad? Lots of speculation on that tonight.

    If there was bad damage or casualties, an immediate, overwhelming response would be called for. But now, IMO, Trump can take his time. Offer to talk, maybe. Tell them he doesn’t want regime change, only a change in the regime’s behavior. I think he’s trying to adhere to the old adage, “Walk softly, but carry a big stick.” Works for me.

11. At one point in my life I was pretty far down the Prog road.
    All the “simple” conservative approaches seemed primitive and lacking wisdom, compassion, etc.

    Now Gvdl says “I would kill them all. In a heartbeat.”
    Sounds rock solid to me these days.

12. Falling asleep on couch, clicking the remote. There’s CNN. Look, 8 talking heads and a map of Iraq completely covered with lots of big red circles. Clicked to Fox, couple of people talking and map of Iraq with two little red circles. Then I turned off the tv.

13. Here’s a link to an article about Diego Garcia, where six B-52’s were to arrive in the past 24 hours. Scroll halfway down, and there’s picture of a B-2 dropping a GBU-57 “bunker buster,” which was designed to pierce the mountains beneath which Iran has been developing nuclear weapons. Given that the Iranians have incontrovertibly committed an act of war, I think right now President Trump has enough “political cover” to take out Iran’s nuclear threat. Yesterday, the Iranians announced that they are proceeding full speed ahead to enrich weapons grade uranium. Some have estimated they only need six months. We don’t need to wait until enough Americans, or Israelis die to eliminate this problem.

14. Esther on January 7, 2020 at 11:27 pm said:
    Falling asleep on couch, clicking the remote. There’s CNN. Look, 8 talking heads and a map of Iraq completely covered with lots of big red circles. Clicked to Fox, couple of people talking and map of Iraq with two little red circles. Then I turned off the tv.
    * * *
    Scott Adams was right about Americans watching two different movies.
    At this point, we are not even in the same theater.

    I’m taking my cue from JE Dyer (as usual; had to wait for her to suss out the situation and comment on it).

    https://libertyunyielding.com/2020/01/07/iran-launches-more-than-a-dozen-missiles-at-iraqi-bases-used-by-american-forces/

    So far, the missiles have landed at or near three bases: Al-Asad air base in Anbar Province, Irbil (the military facilities co-located with the international airport), and Camp Taji, just north of Baghdad. (Note: so far, the Pentagon is not including Taji in their tally of bases struck.)
    There are no reports of casualties at this point. Please duly note: these are Iraqi bases. There are no “U.S. bases” in Iraq. The U.S. is hosted by Iraq at some of Iraq’s military bases. There are or have been other coalition contingents (e.g., UK) at Al-Asad; not sure if there are any still at Irbil. Reporting has indicated some national contingents pulling out of Iraq in the last few days.

    It’s likely that most have been pulling and relocating forces, including the U.S. When I wrote about the infamous “poorly worded draft letter” on Monday, my going-in assumption was that we were removing troops (and probably civilians in Baghdad and elsewhere) from locations where Iran would probably target them.
    …
    I urge caution on all spot reporting about this. There are a lot of “reports” out there of things that make no sense or couldn’t happen. Iran has posted video supposedly showing “dozens” of missiles being launched at U.S. targets in Iraq, but Iran publishes so many misleadingly edited videos and video fakes that it’s not worth bothering with them. The Pentagon’s count of “more than a dozen” (Jennifer Griffin of Fox had it as just about a dozen, perhaps a few more, an hour ago) is more reliable.

    https://libertyunyielding.com/2020/01/07/iraq-once-again-trump-is-inside-everyone-elses-ooda-loop/

    A great kerfuffle arose on Monday when a “leaked” letter from an American general officer in Iraq appeared to indicate that the U.S. was preparing to pull out of the country. This, according to the letter, was because of the vote in the Iraqi parliament, whose effect was to function as a demand for the U.S. to remove its armed forces.* [footnote on its non-binding, non-quorum nature]
    …
    Social media and spot-commentary went high order. Some were cheering for the keeping of another Trump promise (to bring the troops home). Others were lambasting Trump for threatening Iraq one day with sanctions if we were asked to leave, and then ordering a pull-out the next. Disorder! Chaos!

    Defense Secretary Mark Esper later said there were no plans to pull out of Iraq. He even added that they were trying to track down the letter:
    …
    The AP report has General Milley calling it an “honest mistake.”
    …
    The reference to a poorly worded draft document makes no sense – which means there’s something going on here that isn’t accurately conveyed by the mainstream media reporting. The media reporting seems to be in no worse faith than usual. But it’s being done by a lot of people who don’t know any better.

    At any rate, the fact that the letter appears to have been “leaked” is a red flag. The first spark that should trigger in our brains is a question about the identity and purpose of the “leaker.” (Believe me, I’m being sparing with the scare quotes here. Communication in the age of frenziedly partisan media is basically inseparable from scare quotes. Almost everything belongs in them.)

    If we’re talking honesty here, this smells like an information operation. Hard to say. But who cares? Esper says we have no plans to leave. That would ordinarily end it.

    Except that there are an awful lot of reports of Air Force transport aircraft suddenly coming and going in Iraq, and U.S. helicopters moving in and out around Baghdad. And that naively worded letter got multiple confirmations before Esper disavowed it. Or at least disavowed the most obvious take on it; i.e., that the U.S. plans to pull out of Iraq.

    Trump’s detractors naturally see all this as confusion and incompetence, suddenly endemic in the Department of Defense because Trump is in the Oval Office. Trump’s supporters are split: some thought only hours ago that our troops would be pulling out, and were thrilled, but now aren’t sure what to think. Others suggest Trump engineered the Iraqi “demand” for us to leave so that we’d have a ready excuse for it, whatever might come afterward.
    …
    Choose however you want to see Trump: as an incompetent boob or a clever prestidigitator. The effect of Monday’s work is that attention has been called to potential U.S. force movements in Iraq. But those movements haven’t been definitively explained. The DOD signals were mixed as the day wore on; the media don’t look smarter than anyone else. The whole situation is a head-scratcher. The media can retail new “leaks” about it all, but little by little, the “leaks” will be less believable.

    Meanwhile, I expect there will be force movements, including some out of Iraq. If our troops are present in big concentrations in Iraq, Iran’s proxies in the country can force a form of ground war on us as part of any confrontation.

    But if our troops are not there in big concentrations, Iran can’t do that.

    The same can be said of big concentrations of Americans in any capacity (i.e., civilians). We’ll see where this goes; it may be that no one is being cleared out of Iraq and no one will be. But if Trump needed space and a period of uncertainty to get ahead of the sitting-ducks problem, he’s just arranged for it.
    …
    And remember: Trump doesn’t want to have to bomb Iran. He wants Iran to give up the 40-year career of radical adventurism in the Middle East without putting us to the trouble of bombing Iran. But that goal can’t be achieved without posing a credible threat to shape Iran’s decision matrix.

    I don’t know what Trump intended on Monday, but what his Defense Department achieved at the end of the kerfuffle was preemption of the “leak” factory that seeks to sabotage his policies. In effect, the leak factory’s model was used against it, to create noise and shape the direction of the public’s attention. It’s, shall we say, pretty funny that an Iran-backed militia website was induced to post the “poorly worded draft letter,” and that’s how the mainstream media became aware of it. The media saw in it whatever they were going to see anyway, which kept them busy. Iran saw what seemed, for a time, to be a signal of U.S. withdrawal – while also learning that the BUFFs were arriving in D.G. Honestly speaking, I don’t think either of these impressions for Iran was conveyed by mistake.

15. Something fishy about this, right from the first reports. Doesn’t add up, and still doesn’t.

    Was that it? Or was that the set-up? Do we repeat the fake missile-strike a few more times?

    Was the idea to draw, say, a Partiot anit-missile launch, into Iran? Draw a reciprocal counter-strike, say cruise missiles from ships?

    This does not look like it was a real “ballistic missile” launch, at Iraq or the Americans. Maybe say, Iran launched something, even just lobbed up an empty missile-casing, which they dropped into their own desert … and then local proxies in Iraq were supposed to send a couple field-launch rockets toward American positions … and our guys were supposed to panic, do something dumb?

    But the Americans didn’t bite. “No ballistic missiles here, Command. Couple small firecrackers … but the bad boys, SCUDs, whatever – they’re no-shows!”

    Not real action. Not yet. But stay on those toes, guys! :))

16. Remember “Trump is unhinged! Who knows what the Orangeman will do!”

    And THAT is what I’m loving about Trump. He is not going to do something unhinged (like they fear); but it will be an appropriate response, even if the MSM and the democrats don’t agree.

    Further, Iran had to react to the assassination of Soleimani for a show of strength to their own people; but, it is that fear of what the unhinged Orangeman would do that caused their attack to be less than it could have been.

    All those Iranians gathering at the dead terrorist’s funeral are NOT there for true grief; they are there out of fear of not SHOWING enough grief. Imagine if the Iranian leaders did nothing? The Iranian people would then see how weak their leaders are; which could lead to further unrest by the Iranian people.

    I think the leaders in Iran know that a direct war with the US will cause them to be truly regime changed. After all, two countries on their East and West borders have fought wars with the US and lost. While we might not be viewing the situation as a complete win for us, it did lead to “regime change” for those two hellholes. New crappy leaders might be in charge; but the old ones are gone. THAT has got to be weighing on the minds of the Iranian leaders.

    So, it is better to have a “show” of retaliation instead of an actual attack that will bring the US into a direct war with them.

    In sum, to avoid further domestic unrest and a direct war with the US, they had to pretend to “vanquish” the US; but not vanquish too hard.

    Trump’s only real problem will be the democrats. But, so far, he has handled them well.

17. I’m trying to parse this “Federalist” article by Edward Chang, “a defense, military, and foreign policy writer”:

    “Whether You Like It Or Not, The United States Is At War With Iran”
    https://thefederalist.com/2020/01/07/whether-you-like-it-or-not-the-united-states-is-at-war-with-iran/

    “The Federalist” generally prints solid stuff and I certainly agree with the title. However, Chang seems to want it all ways. Iran is wrong, Trump is wrong and you, the readers, are wrong. But Chang’s approach is vague beyond the subtitle:

    Only the absence of retaliation or some lower-level action that gives both sides a face-saving way out of the predicament can restore deterrence. Otherwise, fight’s on.

    But here he seems to give the show away:

    There’s no straightforward approach to dealing with the world’s “bad boys” and, until recently, the United States has handled the situation as prudently as could be expected.

    What? US policy “until recently” was to pretend everything was okey-dokey with Iran and send pallets of cash which Iran used to fund its terrorist proxy campaigns while continuing its creep towards nuclear weapons. That Iran is now using Suleimani’s death as a pretext to go public on the latter is only removing the fig leaf.

    In Chang’s conclusion he grandly declares that after Iraq throws US forces out of Iraq at Iran’s insistence:

    …there’ll be nothing left for Americans to preserve nor protect in Baghdad, and we’ll finally have reached the end of a long, tragic road. Maybe then Washington will choose to let it be.

    I don’t think there is a magic solution to Iran specifically and the Middle East in general. I don’t like endless wars and I don’t like aggrieved empire-builders boiling the world like a frog as they expand towards nuclear weapons.

    Chang’s real agenda seems to be we need more well-paid work for clever boys like himself to explain how we’re always getting it wrong.

18. Iran is attacking – they are deliberately provoking Trump and the USA. But not very effectively, in terms of killing Americans.

    Their weak oligarch mullah’s had to do some response to save face, but now Trump has all the cover he needs to do whatever he thinks is best.

    Trump-fan Don Surber says: “Believe in Trump”

    Trump had a meeting just a few days ago with the Saudis, and other talk with the Israelis. Trump knows a LOT that I don’t know. As President, virtually every policy decision he’s made has been arguably the right one, including the pull back from Turkey-Syria reducing support for Kurds – which I initially criticized.

    I echo bookworm’s thoughts on the GREAT tweet Neo noted:
    I am also reminded as Trump boasts about the military that Trump, unlike past presidents, is not afraid to use it. .
    http://www.bookwormroom.com/2020/01/07/trump-sends-out-a-masterful-tweet-to-calm-the-nation/

    Trump struck fast in Syria, and won against ISIS, and the US is disengaging without being stuck in Nation Building. Dems hate Trump, and America, winning.

    ….. If the Dems had their way, if we’re to fight with Iran, we must reduce our military until it’s the equal of theirs!

    Since America is privileged to have a far better military, it’s Social INJUSTICE for America to use that might against the weaker Iran, the current David against Goliath-Satan-USA.

    But Trump is not attacking, he is counter-attacking / counter-punching. Just like he does in domestic affairs.

    I predict (easy for ME to say!) that Trump responds with more small attacks in Iraq against Iranian agents, and some pro-Iran Iraqis who are enemies of the anti-Iran Iraqis. Those anti-Iran Shiite Iraqis seem to be the third kind of friends Trump has a special synergy with: enemies of my enemy.

    All is well! Quote, unquote.

19. Scott Adams: Operation ‘Symbolic Revenge’

20. Some details are in now… 15 total missiles, 4 of which did not hit their targets. I am not seeing any reports of significant damage. No Americans or other coalition members were hurt. Still no solid info on Iraqi casualties.

    I am sticking with my initial assessment. This was a face-saving slap by Iran. The U.S. can let it pass as “no harm, no foul”. After the initial shouting, Iran will go quiet, hoping that the U.S. turns its attention elsewhere.

21. Also, I would quibble about the title of this posting. It was not “U.S. Bases” that were targeted. They are Iraqi bases, in which some International Coalition forces are stationed. It is an important distinction. The U.S. can correctly state that Iran did not attack U.S. assets.

22. Lee Smith, Tablet Mag: IRAN AND AMERICA ARE SUDDENLY BOTH NAKED

    rtwt

23. Following Lee Smith’s analysis, Iran’s choice was shrewd and awful. Who posted that text from one of them referencing the Lockerbie jetliner catastrophe? That plane that crashed last night was the meaning of that text.

    So they’ve given Trump the choice — play the old game of pretending Iran is not killing innocent people, especially Americans, wherever it can; or go all-out. If the missiles did as little damage as is being reported, then he might select the all-is-well option. But that leaves the Ukraine flight. How many dead, 176 is the number I believe I heard? How many Americans leaving Tehran?

    If Lee Smith is right, it follows that it’s the same old game, packaged up together. Iran had nothing to do with the plane accident. Right, do-nothing U.S.A.? So we can go back to pretending — but 176 passengers are dead after Iran tweeted the Lockerbie flight data.

24. Apparently zero Americans; 60 Canadians among the total.

25. The saddest thing about all this right now is that there are people in our government and congress, on campus and in news studios, who woke up this morning itching to hear the news that there were American casualties.

26. I take the tentative view Kai Akker, that Pres. Trump’s “be here now” attitude can enable him to begin naming names among our enemies, so to speak. That is, where ‘naming names’ means unzipping a guy with the nifty Ninja Hellfire missile, or misting him with the standard sort.

    An example: Mahdi al-Muhandis — late departed with Gen. Soleimani — will have been replaced by a new head of Kataib Hezbollah. So, name him, track him, kill him. Same with Qais Khazali, Hadi al-Ameri, Mo Daqduq, etal. One by one (but quickly, don’t piss about), each Iranian proxy head in Iraq dies, publicly. Then destroy these orgs to their roots: encourage Iraqis intending to be free, now suffering, “help us help you”.

    Gloves off, down you go, bad guys. No more pretend, no more games by your rules: we’re playing our way now. We’re at war with you. Act out of step Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (rest assured, he will), and you with your 52 trippy sites disappear.

    In the meantime continue to repeat to Iranians and Iraqis both: freedom lovers! Now is your chance. Move for yourselves.

27. I agree with Roy also. The Ukrainian airliner crash adds another dimension, but I saw several reports that it may have been a Iranian missile that took it down after the government withdrew their statement that an engine failure caused the crash. Maybe an attempt to blame the US for the crash??

    Trump stated, I believe, that if any Americans are killed he will strike back hard. So, as he has been very consistent in his promises, and no Americans were killed, I would expect no response. Bait thrown out into the lake by Iran, and the big bass ignores it.

28. Lee Smith’s other article this morning, NY Post: Offing Soleimani gives Trump an excellent chance to exit Iraq

29. sdferr — Iran fired 12, 13 ballistic missiles at bases holding American forces. I don’t get the semantic distinction over “base,” Iraq or USA — they wanted to kill Americans and are merely lucky they didn’t. Unless they are phenomenally skillful in firing missiles and almost-hitting-but-missing, if that is conceivable. They hinted of a plane crash and then a plane crashed. If we were ever going to fight back, is this not the time? So, if you have plans you’ve announced to strike 52 sites “fast and hard” — don’t be Obama; strike them right now and be done with this game. The world would cheer, while tsking publicly.

30. I think the misses were intentional where the missiles flew full length, cock ups where they didn’t. DJT said don’t kill or injure Americans (and semi-sotto voce “nor our allies”; these, we note, were injured or killed here). The pants pissing Iranians aimed not to kill or injure Americans, while simultaneously saying “80 Americans were killed”. And “This strike was a slap in the face. It isn’t enough”.

    It isn’t over. Obviously.

31. Iran has rightly been pointed out as being the world’s biggest supporter of terrorism, staging terrorist attacks using the myriad of terrorist proxy groups they arm, train, and direct.

    I think the key point to understand here is that–as some commenters have pointed out–Iran has attacked, has already been at war with the U.S. for many decades, one major example being the Iranian’s 1979 seizure of our Embassy in Tehran, and their imprisonment of our Embassy staff for 444 days.

    Then, in April 1983 there was the destruction of our Embassy in Beirut by a Muslim terrorist car bomb and, in October of that same year, the devastating terrorist car bomb attack by Iran-backed proxy Hezbollah against our Marine barracks in Lebanon, which killed 241 Marines, with another Muslim terrorist attack that same day killing an additional 51 French soldiers at a separate location.*

    So, during the last five decades, we’ve always been under attack by and at war with Iran, and this is just the latest chapter in that war.

    *See https://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/the-1983-marine-barracks-bombing-connecting-the-dots

    See also https://www.infoplease.com/world/disasters/man-made/terrorist-attacks-in-the-us-or-against-americans

32. Iran seems to have shot down a Ukrainian airliner with lots of Canadian citizens aboard. Probably some IRGC fool with a missile expecting the US to retaliate. We need do no more as attention turns to the Iran ineptitude with modern weapons. They have announced they will not provide access to the Black Box of the airplane. Ukraine has announced that it is withdrawing its statement that engine failure was the cause and has ended flights to Iran. No doubt PM blackface will have a strong statement on the deaths of 63 Canadian citizens. Just kidding with the last,

33. No doubt PM blackface will have a strong statement on the deaths of 63 Canadian citizens. Just kidding with the last,

    The smart money says half the Canadian political class as well as most street-level adherents to the Liberal Party, the New Democratic Party, the Green Party, and the Parti Quebecois will blame Big Yank for this disaster.

34. Apparently a significant number of the Canadian victims were students of Iranian birth/descent returning to Canada after a group trip.

35. Reza Khaasteh, @Khaaasteh twitter: “Khazali, the commander of Iraq’s Asa’ib al-Haq says Iran’s missile attacks on US base was in retaliation for Gen. Soleimani’s assassination. But Iraqis will still avenge Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis’ death themselves”

36. Just for fun, I’ll throw in a conspiracy theory. John Kerry, with senior Democrat backing, encouraged Iran to launch a non-attack attack to draw the “unstable, warmongering” Trump into an unequal response that they can then claim is proof Trump has pulled is into a war no one wants but him.

37. And then, Janet, when impeachment newstyle makes Nancy President, and AOC Secretary-General, the Green New Deal will leave all those Arabs high and dry with then-worthless oil. While we stand tall among the windmills! Top of the world, Ma!!

38. I seldom agree with Kevin (“just go ahead and die already fly-over dimwits”) Williamson anymore, but I DO agree with his analysis and recommendation here.

    https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/qasem-soleimani-killing-non-absurdity-declaring-war-with-iran/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=article&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=top-bar-latest&utm_term=fifth

    McCarthy & others have amply demonstrated that the current AUMFs and history of Iran’s attacks on American forces legally and ethically justify taking out Soleimani and ither Iranian henchmen, but Congress has been ducking its responsibility for decades, as KW points out, so that they can throw bricks at the President (of either party) when it is to their political advantage to do so.

    Companion pieces for debate:
    https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/01/repeal-authorization-for-use-of-military-force-congress-must-take-back-war-making-powers/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=article&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=top-bar-latest&utm_term=thirteenth
    Repeal the AUMF
    By KEVIN D. WILLIAMSON January 5, 2020 6:30 AM

    https://www.nationalreview.com/news/pelosi-announces-house-will-vote-on-war-powers-resolution-to-curtail-trumps-iranian-options/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=article&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=top-bar-latest&utm_term=tenth
    Pelosi Announces House Will Vote on War Powers Resolution to Curtail Trump’s Iranian Options
    By ZACHARY EVANS January 6, 2020 8:05 AM

39. It needs to be repeated, over and over again, so that it remains in the forefront of our consciousness, that in any sane world the Obama Administration’s 2015 “Iran deal” which, as merely one part of it, reportedly allowed the Iranian government to access around $150 billion dollars in formerly blocked funds (we’re really not sure if that was the extent of what they got, because all of the details of this great “deal” have not been released for public perusal), and, then–to add insult to injury–handed the Iranian regime–chief funder of world-wide terrorism–$1.7 billion dollars in the form of pallets full of unmarked/untraceable cash—delivered by unmarked plane in the middle of the night, and thoughtfully divided between several different currencies, no less–would be seen as suicidal insanity.

    Yet, that’s what the Obama Administration did.

    Did no one in that Obama Administration happen to think that it was very likely that some large percentage of especially that untraceable cash was soon going to be making its way to fund a myriad of Iran’s proxy terrorist groups?

    To pay for the men and equipment to deal death to American soldiers and civilians, as well as many others?

    This wasn’t a “deal,” it was a payoff, and perhaps a payoff that even paid for some of the missiles they lobbed at us last night.

    This insane, suicidal, easily seen as counterproductive action alone should serve to permanently disqualify anyone who served in that Obama Administration from ever again serving in any government position–I’m lookin’ at, among many others, you Jean Francoise Kerry, and you “what State am I in,” “Lunch bucket Joe” Biden.

40. Trump didn’t announce any retaliation this morning. So far, so good. Iranians missed, either deliberately or incompetently.

    The Ukrainian airliner crash is very fishy. My husband has flown that airline. High quality, and never had a major incident before this. Killing 60 or so Canadian-Iranians is not a very smart move.

41. re the plane crash. Hell stay away from anything to do with Ukraine, sinister stuff from them. Russian operatives infiltrating there causing trouble? Putin desperately wants Ukraine back, thats not debatable!
    ( lol)

42. sdferr on January 8, 2020 at 7:22 am said:
    Lee Smith, Tablet Mag: IRAN AND AMERICA ARE SUDDENLY BOTH NAKED

    rtwt
    * * *
    Second the motion.

    Smith’s analysis is spot-on IMO, and demonstrates why the Heartland finally pushed back against the Ruling Class and elected Donald Trump.

    “President Reagan’s decision not to respond directly to the [1983] attack was part of a tacit agreement that America and the Islamic Republic entered into during the 1979 U.S. Embassy takeover in Tehran. It mirrored similar arrangements with the Soviet Union in which neither superpower held the other directly accountable for the actions of proxies in order to reduce the likelihood of a nuclear cataclysm.” – Smith

    In some defense of Reagan (although I thought then and now that he was wrong to buy into it), there was still a possibility that the Soviet Union would weigh in on Iran’s side (for whatever reason), but that justification for letting the Iranians bully and batter the US and ME eroded after 1989, and there was no ethically justifiable (debatable?) reason for letting them continue their terrorist adventures for the next forty years.

    “It is only because Americans and other Western powers have declined to call out Iran and have instead appeased it, that an obscurantist regime whose major exports are energy, pistachios—and terror, of course—appears like a formidable adversary.” – Smith

    This applies to other states as well as Iran.
    We didn’t neutralize North Korea early on because China was holding their coat during the fight; President Trump is pulling away all of their economic & possibly military cover as well.

    “Donald Trump was vilified when he exited the Iran deal in May. But in the eyes of the foreign policy establishment, he committed an even graver sin by exposing the 40-year-old lie that U.S. policymakers, right and left, had cultivated to rationalize their collective unwillingness to protect Americans from Iranian terror.” – Smith

    Deep dive into the psychological & political dysfunction of the Left & Right Uniparty Elites (yes, it’s memetic, but idiomatic shorthand is the name of the game).

    “The Iranian revolution was evidence to our ruling class of how much their fathers had gotten wrong—and thus proof of their own virtue.” – Smith

    And a historical summary of how failing to confront Iran only enabled more killing.

    “…as Tablet colleague Tony Badran has written, Hezbollah was seeded in Lebanon in the mid-’70s by “Iranian revolutionary factions opposed to the shah.” U.S. policymakers preferred the fiction that Hezbollah was a homegrown product because it supported both their emotional needs and their policy goals: The West had earned the righteous anger of the natives, and there was nothing to be done except atone by way of offering human sacrifices.” – Smith

    None of which sacrifices included anyone responsible for the situation.
    I propose some Constitutional Amendments on the order of requiring at least two years military service prior to election to President, VP, or Congress.
    I haven’t figured out a way to hang them for losing a war, as was common in the past.

    “Six U.S. administrations were complicit in turning Iran into a regional power. In that context, the Obama administration’s decision to flood Iranian war chests with cash and recognize its right to build a nuclear bomb was the logical culmination of the rot eating away at the Beltway for four decades. It was perhaps to be expected that an outsider who often doesn’t know when to keep quiet, and can’t stay off Twitter, would be the one to sing out like the boy in the fairy tale.” – Smith

    I’m still waiting for Iran to produce that list of American politicians on its payroll (paid with US money, at that).

43. As we remember Iranian terror atrocities I submit the case of William Buckley. Although under the auspices of Hezbollah it seems certain there was Iranian involvement.

    “After Buckley’s kidnapping, three videos of Buckley being tortured were sent to the CIA in Athens. Interpreters noticed puncture marks indicating he was injected with narcotics. According to several sources, as a result of his torture, he signed a 400-page statement detailing his CIA activities. In a video taken approximately seven months after the kidnapping, his appearance was described as follows:

    Buckley was close to a gibbering wretch. His 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.”

44. Reagan made the trade with Iran trying to get Buckley back, even if they just wanted to learn what he had disclosed. It was a mistake but understandable. What I do not understand is why the Marine guards had unloaded M 16s that day in Beirut. That sounds like it was lower level stupidity of the sort that prevented the doctors at Fort Hood from reporting Hassan’s radicalism.

45. Ok… so far, and including the pundits writing for ENTERTAINMENT, are not getting it nor are they telling it, and its not even sure they know it. Not one person on this thread so far has been able to delineate anything because they do NOT separate from what “everyone knows” and do NOT assess things in any realistic way. PERIOD… (I always call it as I see it)

    Why would Iran use missiles from Iran rather than from its proxy groups in other countries?
    That will become clear, at the end of this post

    Does Iran think it will win this game of chicken?
    No, it KNOWS it will because this is not Irans game. Never was, never will be, nor is anyone paying attention to anything other than the magicians right hand and ignoring everything else on stage.

    The only person on this thread that might be questioning things to get to better answers Is Ted.
    Ted Clayton: Something fishy about this, right from the first reports. Doesn’t add up, and still doesn’t.

    Of course it doesn’t add up!!! Leaving out a lot of terms, a lot of items, one cant get to a valid total EVER, and the American public and Neo refuse to assess anything in any way that would include ALL the terms of the computations! Ever… so, it’s a lot of distracted hand wringing, but never a decent analysis that leads to a predictable outcome or knowledge of what happens next. But we forget, as I have been told many times, we are NOT here to get anywhere fast, we are here to be entertained, and short, and enjoy “going nowhere slowly” (till the next distraction).
    About the only thing correct in all this is assessing that this goes back decades, and is not new, and that is it.

    Where is our real enemy in all this? Russia has ALWAYS been our enemy in this, since they quit on Hitler and became Frenemy…

    What are the real goals here and what matters? Sorry, but in a society in which the people are nothing, bringing them up is a nothing, they are only important to Americans in the way Americans assume that they are important. (classic projection ignoring differences)

    How is this PROXY chess game played? This is always ignored, its always surface bs. Look through all the comments and all of them treat Iran as an entity in and of itself like the super powers (that still exist even though they claim not)… Only the super powers are like that, or major powers, all the others are entities that live under one umbrella or another, and are NEVER free to choose, decide, or act on their own (under worse threat of loss, like advisors that are guiding them leaving)

    Next post: Getting into it…

    One more thing before I do. Can we PLEASE get our terminology, right?
    Iran does not have (general category) ballistic missiles they have SRBMs, SHORT RANGE ballistic missiles.

    the differences ARE CRITICAL to answering the first question.

    Iran has no proxies – so it can’t use the proxies – they belong to RUSSIA, all of them are Russian proxies, under Russian control and determination – not Iran. Iran itself is one of russias proxies. Ergo Russia commenting on this attack (on behalf of its proxy).

    Moscow Times: ‘U.S. Can’t Help But Respond’: Russia Reacts to Iran Strikes on U.S. Bases
    https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2020/01/08/us-cant-help-but-respond-russia-reacts-to-iran-strikes-on-us-bases-a68836

    Without being able to order others to act on its behalf, it is stuck using its own SRBMs, or way expensive and low productive MRBMs.
    Fateh-110 200-300km Max: 186 miles
    Fateh-313 500km Max: 310 miles
    Shahab-1 (Scud-B) 300km
    Shahab-2 (Scud-C) 500km
    Zulfigar/Korramshahr 700km Max: 434 miles
    Qiam 700-800km Max: 497 miles

    Why did they attack what they did? Without spending huge sums on limited self-protective weapons, they could not hit much else from their own country.
    Shahab-3 1,000-1,300km Max: 807 miles
    Sejjil 2,000km Max: 1242 miles
    Im leaving the Emad out as its too new and has shorter range than Sejjil

    IF they fired from Naft Shahr it would be about 300km to the base: at the limit of their SRBMs… without incursion into another countries borders, they cant reach much else..

    If iran is a proxy of russia, then iran does not act on its own, and it takes all the blame to itself as everyone is giving. meanwihle, our leaders are under no such public illusions given reports and analysis that DOES include what i am saying.

46. Hezbollah was seeded in Lebanon in the mid-’70s by “Iranian revolutionary factions opposed to the shah.”

    Not buying.

    “Six U.S. administrations were complicit in turning Iran into a regional power.

    What makes Iran a regional power is that

    1. 80 million people live there;

    2. that they produce (per capita) about $18,000 worth of goods and services each year outside of their extractive industries;

    3. that they can generate about $70 bn worth of fuel and mineral exports each year;

    4. that they’re willing and able to build up their quantum of human capital through schooling, achieving nearly universal literacy among their late-adolescent and young adult population, enrolling nearly all of their young children in primary school, enrolling about 85% of their adolescents in some sort of secondary schooling, and now enrolling so many people in tertiary schooling that it’s as if they collared 70% of their late-adolescent population;

    5. that they devote to military uses a slice of their productive capacity in excess of the global mean (2.7% v. 2.1%). (NB, they have the world’s 25th largest economy).

    6. Their military is experienced in battle.

    7. They’re unscrupulous, ambitious, brutal, and focused.

47. Looks like there are still plenty of debatable things.
    I believe the primary objectives on both sides can be reconciled, but only if Washington quits pretending reality is something it isn’t (as Lee Smith said above).
    You could call it, “The Art of the Diplomatic Deal.”

    https://nypost.com/2020/01/07/offing-soleimani-gives-trump-an-excellent-chance-to-exit-iraq/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
    Offing Soleimani gives Trump an excellent chance to exit Iraq
    By Lee Smith January 7, 2020 | 8:05pm

    https://nypost.com/2020/01/07/bugging-out-of-iraq-now-would-be-a-gift-to-iran-isis-and-other-villains/
    Bugging out of Iraq now would be a gift to Iran, ISIS and other villains
    By Shay KhatiriJanuary 7, 2020

48. Trump’s address this morning; he seems to be channeling Lee Smith a bit.

    https://nypost.com/2020/01/08/trump-to-address-nation-about-iran-missile-attacks-at-11-a-m/

    This video is only 2 minutes long; the full speech and transcripts should be available on the ‘net soon.

49. Not buying.

    Yeah, Tony Badran doesn’t know his Hezbollah from a hole in the ground.

50. Off topic, but it’s unjust to smear Kevin Williamson as desiring the death of anyone. He called for people to move away from dysfunctional communities, he did not call for people in those communities to die.

    Which is why he said they needed “U-Haul”.

51. As we remember Iranian terror atrocities I submit the case of William Buckley. Although under the auspices of Hezbollah it seems certain there was Iranian involvement.

    JimNorCal: I sure haven’t forgotten. Blood-chilling.

52. Off topic, but it’s unjust to smear Kevin Williamson as desiring the death of anyone. He called for people to move away from dysfunctional communities, he did not call for people in those communities to die.

    Williamson used as his exemplar Kentucky’s poorest county, which has a population of < 7,000 people. (Chris Hedges' preferred exemplar was McDowell County, WVa, which has a population that's 75% off-peak consequent to employment declines in coal mining). If you wanted to be overly charitable, you'd put this down to innumeracy, a vice of people who prefer story to data. I'm not inclined to cut these characters any slack; this is rhetorical gamesmanship.

    Williamson grew up in Lubbock, Tx. He's made no secret of his contempt for his mother and for the culture of which she was a part. Lubbock's not an affluent town. Personal income per capita in the Lubbock commuter belt is about 20% below the national mean. However, the employment-to-population ratio in the City of Lubbock was in 2017 0.62, which is higher than the national mean. SNAP enrollment nationwide in 2017 encompassed 12.9% of the population in the country at large; in Lubbock County, Tx, it wasn't very different at 13.6%, in spite of the fact that lower incomes generally would mean that a higher share of the population would meet eligibility criteria. The homicide rate in the city has bounced around 5 per 100,000, which is the national mean. The robbery rate, at about 175 per 100,000 is about 75% above the national mean, but this is a densely-settled metropolitan municipality, and you would expect that given how infrequent are robberies in exurbs, small towns and rural areas (however, the frequency of rape, aggravated assault, burglary, and car theft is quite elevated in Lubbock – burglary especially). It's a place that could be better than it is, but I'm not seeing coarse-grained evidence of severe dysfunction.

    Williamson's also been known to sneer at non-exotic populations for their deficient entrepreneurship in comparison with our gorgeous immigrant populations. If that were so, you'd expect self-employment income to be more prevalent among hispanic and asian populations (which are quite immigrant rich) than among white and black populations (which are immigrant-poor). Self-employment income is about 1/2 as prevalent among blacks as it is among the other coarse categories, but hardly differs between the other three. I don't doubt that there are ethnic subcultures more entrepreneurial than others, but this notion that whites are a bunch of slackers who should be ashamed at the commitment and energy of 'Americans-by-choice' is just calumny. By the same token, employment-to-population ratios hardly differ between coarse racial categories, bar some mild depression among blacks.

    By the way, the IRS 990 forms National Review has filed over the years have made plain the fiduciary failures of NR‘s board. Both Richard Lowry and Williamson were paid absurd salaries (at one point > $200,000 a year) to work atop a donor-dependent NGO with a staff of fewer than 50 (and, nb, neither held the title of ‘publisher’ or ‘managing editor’). His contemptuous disposition toward people being paid market wages in Lubbock is distasteful.

    You have to work at it to be unjust to this obnoxious Anton LeVay lookalike.

    / rant off.

53. You have to work at it to be unjust to this obnoxious Anton LeVay lookalike.

    Hey! Ta-Nehisi Coates says he reads Kevin Williamson regularly. That’s got to count for something…

54. Frederick on January 8, 2020 at 2:25 pm said:
    Off topic, but it’s unjust to smear Kevin Williamson as desiring the death of anyone. He called for people to move away from dysfunctional communities, he did not call for people in those communities to die.

    Which is why he said they needed “U-Haul”.
    * * *
    Fair enough. A little bit of conflation in the memory banks.

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/10/mobility-globalization-poverty-solution/

    It was the right thing to do. Some towns are better off dead.

55. In Slovakia and the EU, the local news is emphasizing how the leaders are all calling for “stability”. These elites don’t seem to understand their own hypocrisy in NOT calling for stability before Iran attacked.

    But they seem quite relieved Trump isn’t moving towards war vs Iran at this time.

    I don’t believe Iran is a proxy for Russia. But I do believe the commies have a lot of influence. Plus, I love pistachios, but we pay for US ones now that we can’t buy any from Iran. (We got 4 pistachio trees for my desert-living sister for her B-day)

    artfl clearly identifies what we want, by claiming we never have it:
    never a decent analysis that leads to a predictable outcome or knowledge of what happens next.

    I’m very interested in predicting the near term outcomes and “what happens next”. I actually haven’t seen much of that from artfl.
    What will Trump / USA do next (in the next week? next 4 weeks? next 3 months?) For the next week (to Jan 15), here are my quick predictions:

    a) No Iranian/Iraqi killing action (35%)
    b) A few specific actions that kill a total of less than 100 (43%)
    c) Some significant action that kills more than 100 in one place (20%), which can include other (b) actions
    d) Very significant actions that kill more than 1000 (2%)

    Analysis that leads to much higher probabilities would be welcome. For instance, somebody who thinks Trump won’t do anything right now other than twitter and meetings might think:
    a-80%, b-15%, c-5%, d-0% (gotta add up to 100%, that’s why 2% & 43% above)

    Since this is NOT a “prediction site”, seldom are alternatives so clearly delineated.

    Predictions are really hard, especially about the future.

56. I think that it would be a very nice gesture for President Trump to put out a Twitter message extending the gratitude of a thankful nation to John Kerry for the fine job that he did a few weeks ago misleading the Iranians with bad advice into making a tactical error.

57. WLD on January 8, 2020 at 10:33 pm said:
    I think that it would be a very nice gesture for President Trump to put out a Twitter message extending the gratitude of a thankful nation to John Kerry for the fine job that he did a few weeks ago misleading the Iranians with bad advice into making a tactical error.
    * * *
    Do you write for The Bee?
    😉

58. And about that wonderful, absolutely essential, must have “Iran Deal.”

    I’ve seen reports that say that the Iranian’s “negotiators” never even actually put any of their signatures on the deal, signed off on it.

    What the hell kind of non-deal “deal” is that?

    It appears that the odious Kerry-led Obama crew were “negotiating” with themselves–and sitting on both sides of the negotiating tale–giving away stuff until the terms of the “deal”–our acts of capitulation, and Jizya payments–were acceptable to the Iranians.

    The whole supposed point of this “deal” was, of course, to halt Iran’s progress toward building nuclear weapons.

    However, according to reports, one major part of this supposed “deal” specifically banned our inspectors from having access to several key Iranian facilities where such research could have been carried out.

    Finally, keeping it real, given their statements, their behavior–and their decades long, relentless drive to acquire nuclear weapons–does anyone really trust or believe that, even if the Iranians say that they will halt their efforts, that they really will?

    I don’t think so.

    If you have any sense at all, you don’t and won’t believe whatever they say, supposedly “agree to,” or even supposedly “sign” unless any formal signed agreement gives you full, complete, and unfettered access to their entire country, the ability to locate, and to thoroughly inspect any and all of their facilities, to verify things fully, repeatedly, and on the ground, and to dismantle and remove any nuclear material or related equipment you find.

    According to reports, this supposed “deal” did not give us anything even remotely close to this.

59. Hopefully, Ukraine kept a few of the Russian ICBMs they were supposed to turn over to us or the UN, I forget which, and will nuke Iran! /sarc off

    Re William Buckley, the story going around in intelligence and military circles at the time was that several Russians from their embassy had been kidnapped at the same time. The KGB grabbed the brother of one of the kidnappers and started sending pieces of him back to the kidnappers. The Russians were released. I don’t know whether this really happened, but everybody believed it, and I don’t recall any Russians being kidnapped in Lebanon during that period..

60. Richard – the Russians invented the Smirnoff Principle.

    https://amgreatness.com/2020/01/08/the-smirnoff-principle/

    Back in 1981, “Fort Apache, the Bronx” hit the big screen starring Paul Newman and Ed Asner, a political and physical lookalike of Jerrold Nadler. In this drama, police toss an innocent Puerto Rican youth to his death from the roof of a building. Leftist critics viewed the film as cinéma vérité about conditions in Reagan’s America, but they got some pushback from Russian actor-comedian Yakov Smirnoff.

    “This is nothing,” Smirnoff said. “In Russia, KGB throws guy off roof to hit guy they really want.”

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>