Trump takes massive gamble with killing of Iranian commander

Source: Politico | January 2, 2020 | Nahal Toosi , Daniel Lippman and Wesley Morgan

The Pentagon on Thursday confirmed the killing of Qassim Soleimani, the leader of Iran’s elite Qods Force, in Iraq.

The killing of one of Iran’s top military commanders means the elimination of a dangerous U.S. foe — but it also represents a risky escalation in a volatile feud that could backfire on U.S. personnel and allies in the Middle East and beyond.

The Pentagon confirmed Thursday that Qassim Soleimani, who leads Iran’s elite Quds force, was killed in what it termed a “defensive action.” Iraqi and other media said Soleimani died in an airstrike at Baghdad’s international airport. Some media accounts described the airstrike as coming from a U.S. drone, but the Pentagon did not specify.

“General Soleimani was actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region,” the Pentagon statement said. It blamed him for recent attacks on U.S. troops and the American embassy in Baghdad.“

Even the possibility that the U.S. directly targeted Soleimani – especially on Iraqi soil – sent shockwaves around the globe, spiking oil prices and leading to instant assessments of the potential fallout. U.S. officials have long depicted Soleimani as a paramilitary and terrorist mastermind, deemed responsible for attacks on American troops in Iraq and against U.S. interests all over the world.

Some current and former U.S. officials, as well as veteran Iran observers, said the killing was an escalatory move far beyond what they’d expected.

“There’s no chance in hell Iran won’t respond,” said Afshon Ostovar, an expert on Soleimani and author of “Vanguard of the Imam” a book about Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

The strike, which also reportedly killed Iraqi militia commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, who was traveling in the same convoy as Soleimani, even astonished some members of the Trump administration who said killing the Iranian general had never been seriously considered.

“I can’t believe it,” one U.S. official said. “The immediate concern for me is: What’s the next step from Iran? Is this the beginning of a regional conflagration?”

A former U.S. official who dealt with the Middle East said the strike was especially notable because it targeted the leader of a state apparatus, as opposed to a non-state actor.

“We need to be prepared that we’re now at war,” he said.

A second Middle Eastern official said that a retaliation by Iran – known for its own assassinations abroad – could occur anywhere.


Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • Discussion
  •  Consistent #34511

     Consistent #34512

     Consistent #34513

     Consistent #34514

     Consistent #34515

     Consistent #34516

     Consistent #34517

     Consistent #34518

     Consistent #34519

     Consistent #34520

     Consistent #34531

     EVERYDAY #34533

    I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, it’s good that a major terrorist figure has been killed before he could do even more harm. On the other hand, major retaliation from Iran is a huge threat. Plus oil prices are rising and the stock market took a hit on Friday. That hit could go on for days or weeks, wiping out the market’s recent gains (and for some of us, our nest eggs).

    And our military is being deployed again to Iraq. I had hoped we were done there — fighting a war that politicians had no intention of winning. If we are going to send our troops back there and elsewhere in the Middle East, let’s hope this time it’s with the purpose of winning.

     Consistent #34538

     Consistent #34543

     Consistent #34552

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.