Seems Increasingly Likely Trump Just Made Up the 'Imminent Threat' Posed by Soleimani

Homepage | Forums | Main Forums | General Discussion | Seems Increasingly Likely Trump Just Made Up the 'Imminent Threat' Posed by Soleimani

Viewing 5 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #249962
      Ohio Barbarian
      Moderator
      • Total Posts: 13,627

      New reporting out Monday further erodes the White House narrative that President Donald Trump was justified in ordering the assassination of Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani earlier this month because Soleimani posed an “imminent” threat to American targets.

      According to NBC News, Trump authorized Soleimani’s killing in June—seven months ago—on the condition that Iranian actions resulted in the death of an American. The assassination was pushed by Iran war hawks John Bolton and Mike Pompeo, who wanted the U.S. to carry out the killing in retaliation for Iran shooting down a US. drone in June. Trump responded to the push by responding “that’s only on the table if they hit Americans,” according to a person briefed on the discussion.

      Discussions on targeting Soleimani began even earlier. From NBC:

      The idea of killing Soleimani came up in discussions in 2017 that Trump’s national security adviser at the time, retired Army Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, was having with other administration officials about the president’s broader national security strategy, officials said. But it was just one of a host of possible elements of Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran and “was not something that was thought of as a first move,” said a former senior administration official involved in the discussions.
      Middle East analyst Juan Cole added to the mounting scrutiny over Trump’s “imminent” threat narrative on Monday. Writing at his Informed Comment blog, Cole noted:

      [Soleimani] does not appear to have killed or had killed any Americans at all in the past decade, and from 2015 because of the U.N. Security Council nuclear deal with Iran, Soleimani was not an adversary of the US in recent years. In fact, he was often a de facto ally and the U.S. Air Force gave him air support at Tikrit and elsewhere in the campaign against ISIL (ISIS, Daesh). In fact, for a while there Soleimani was fighting ISIL and al-Qaeda-linked militias in Syria in tacit alliance with the Kurds supported by the United States at a time when Israel allied with an al-Qaeda affiliate in the Golan Heights.

      Moreover, the entire narrative of the Trump administration was undermined by Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdelmahdi, who told Parliament on Jan. 5 when he asked its members to kick out the U.S. military, that he had personally invited Soleimani to Baghdad as part of a back-channel set of negotiations between Saudi Arabia and Iran aimed at cooling down tensions between the two. Soleimani did not sneak into Iraq on a covert mission. He flew on a commercial jet and went through passport control with his diplomatic passport.

      While an attempt was made to invade the U.S. embassy on the Wednesday before Soleimani’s arrival, that was done by members of the Iraqi militia, the Kata’ib Hizbullah, who were angry that on December 30, the Trump administration bombed its bases in northern Iraq and killed some two dozen of its fighters.

      Cole suggested the Trump administration appeared to be taking a page from the George W. Bush administration, which set up the Office of Special Plans to amass sketchy evidence to push the narrative of a threat of weapons of mass destruction posed by Iraq.

      Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have also found evidence presented to them by administration officials to be unconvincing.

      Among that group is Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.),  who pointed to Defense Secretary Mark Esper’s comments to CBS Sunday that he “didn’t see” any specific evidence about four U.S. embassies being targeted by Soleimani.

      Speaking on MSNBC’s Kasie DC show Sunday, Merkley said, “the whole imminent argument is basically made up and they’re trying to backfill and give that some substance.”

      “But it wasn’t there,” Merkley said. “It wasn’t in the [Senate] brieifing. It wasn’t detailed… and there’s Secretary Esper trying to square the circle and having a hard time doing it.”

      Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has also contributed to the doubt over the administration’s stated justification, telling Fox News last week that the administration actually didn’t know when or where the purported “imminent” attacks were going to take place.

      Soleimani’s killing has sparked Agnes Callamard, United Nations special rapporteur on extrajudicial executions, to call this month for an impartial probe.

      Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

      It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.--Eugene Debs

      If Democrats don’t stand for the people, why should people stand for them?--Jim Hightower

    • #249975
      NV Wino
      Moderator
      • Total Posts: 4,877

      Seems?

      “As we act, let us not become the evil that we deplore.” Barbara Lee
      “Politicians and pro athletes: The only people who still get paid when they lose.” William Rivers Pitt

    • #249979
      game meat
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 1,216

      Do you really think he would do something that? Just brazenly tell lies to the American people?

    • #249981
      HassleCat
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 3,199
    • #249998
      sadoldgirl
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 774

      Of course they were all in on the lie. Outside of that

      I don’t think that Trump remembered that “Bethlehem

      Doctrine” of imminent attack excuses, but Bolton

      would have from W’s administration’s preventive

      war explanation.

    • #250013
      retired liberal
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 2,542

      Now imagine these same people, in our government, if the Vice-President or the Secretary of State* was taken out while on a peace mission to another country. They’d want a radio-active, glass parking lot installed in some innocent country’s capital city, before most of the facts were known.

      *Yeah, I know, neither would have a clue about what a proper peace mission would consist of.

      We are an arrogant species, believing our fantasy based "facts" are better than the other person's fake facts.

      If you are wrong, it will be because you are not cynical enough.

      Both major political parties are special interest groups enabling each other for power and money, at the expense of the people they no longer properly serve…

Viewing 5 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.