On May 3rd, 1944, operatives from German naval intelligence located American General Dwight Eisenhower in a hotel room in London. They shot their way inside, killing the general and seven members of his war planning staff, thus preventing the imminent invasion of Europe, a massive attack that would have led inexorably to the downfall of the Third Reich. Good work, dedicated Nazis! D-Day has been canceled!
Okay, that didn't happen.
But Donald Trump's hit on Iranian general Qasem Soleimani was meant to perform a similar function, based on the notion that killing that one man would prevent planned actions from going forward.
Now folks (mostly Democrats) want to hear from the intelligence community on the subject of this "imminent attack." How imminent was it? When was it supposed to kick off? Who or what was the target?
And so forth.
I say: Why bother?
This was not Jack the Ripper taunting a newspaper, saying he's going to eviscerate a couple more woman, soon as he gets his knives back from the Clean Shave Sharpening Service.
In that particular case, take out Jack, women will be saved.
(Until the next misogynist lunatic hits the scene.)
But unless General Soleimani was planning to strap on a suicide vest and work his way into a room full of key targets, a room only he could have gained entrance to, all the questions about the so-called imminent attack are moot.
The one thing we can be pretty sure of is that whatever attack the general was planning will not go forward in the way he envisioned. It will be much worse.
It will have to be.
We have harnessed the outraged sentiment of a newly united Iran to commit acts of revenge that will dwarf Soleimani's original plans. We have acted to insure their sacred national manhood is on the line.
The American intelligence community can only save Trump now by presenting incontrovertible evidence that Iran is perfectly hog-tied, incapable of retaliation in any way, no matter what their leaders might say in a fit of patriotic bluster.
More than that, we must see evidence that the Iranian government is fully prepared to reign in any and all local militias, as well as lone wolves all over the world, preventing anybody from avenging the death of the cult hero who inspired them to do God's work in opposing the Great Satan.
Anything less will not be good enough. And nobody in the Trump administration is even hinting such evidence is about to be vouchsafed to Congress.
Instead, Trump is relying on dire threats to keep Iran in line.
According to the Secretary of Defense, it's now up to Iran to de-escalate the situation. We hit their number two guy, and we're going to need them to just suck it up.
Trump has tweeted he has 52 targets locked and loaded, including cultural sites. Told he can't do that, he whined repeatedly about how the enemy is "allowed" to kill Americans and so forth, but he's expected to follow some stupid rules.
Hey, he got this country out of an international agreement to fight climate change. He trashed NAFTA. He pulled us out of the Iran nuclear deal. He's banging away at Obamacare. He's good at stuff like that. Maybe he's thinking it's time to step away from the finger-wagging Geneva Convention.
On the TV show Criminal Minds, the profilers are always looking for the trigger that set the "un-sub" on the path to murder. For the Soleimani hit, it seems the trigger was Trump watching the attacks on the US embassy in Baghdad.
After excoriating Hillary Clinton for the mess in Benghazi, he was determined not to fall into the same trap. He would act to prevent such an outrage.
But what action to take? Ask the Pentagon for suggestions.
It's been reported the military folks were stunned that Trump landed with both feet on the option to assassinate Soleimani. It was the heaviest hit, the one previously offered to other presidents, but not taken.
Not taken because the risk of escalation was too great.
But Trump can't be bothered with hypothetical future stuff. He's the president who takes bold action, no matter what.
He saved American lives, no doubt about it. If only by creating a situation that calls for our citizens to leave Iraq, and by sending selected military units out of the country to Kuwait, where they can be safer from reprisals.
He absolutely saved a few particular American lives.
The question is, what other lives will be lost? Lives of American soldiers in the area, lives of Americans in other countries, lives in the US itself.
There is simply no telling how far this will go.
But we can be pretty sure of one thing: The situation will almost certainly escalate.
Could all this have been avoided? Maybe.
Instead of a drone aircraft strike, what about a drone automobile strike? With a dead guy wired to the steering wheel, a remotely piloted car could have t-boned Soleimani's vehicle in a fiery crash. And who's "driving"? A Shi'ite militia man with a grudge, maybe, his car full of dynamite designed to take out a wayward girlfriend. Could happen, right?
Make Soleimani's death look like a tragic accident. At least in this version we're not firmly on the path to war with Iran.
Or was war with Iran Trump's plan all along?
It's been pointed out Trump has a major tell. Whatever term he uses to damn one of his many enemies, the epithet best describes not his intended target but Trump himself.
In the run-up to Barack Obama's reelection, Trump went on the record stating Obama would secure his second term by invading Iran. "As sure as you're sitting there," Trump assured his audience, Obama was going to invade Iran to get himself another four years in the White House.
We now have to wonder: Who was Trump really talking about?
No comments:
Post a Comment