Hibernation
I almost thought it was Spring, with all the anti-war Democrats emerging. It's seems like only yesterday, that Smilin' Joe Biden went on record saying that if Iran attacked any American facility it would be considered an act of war and warrant "any" retaliation. I think Iran is way past due.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I hear you! International ANSWER protests, it’s like old times.
I was personally under fire by Iranian 107mm rockets MG Soleimani’s organization provided to Iraqi militias more than once, so in my mind it’s fair game. Nothing personal, but we do try to kill each other once in a while. Either of us have more in common with Soleimani than any of us do with these “anti-war” communists at ANSWER.
Events outside of Washington DC, and perhaps New York and a few other cities, are just counters on the board to them. All that matters is power in DC. It is the only thing that is real to them. What happens in the Midwest doesn't have any reality for them, let alone the Middle East.
Therefore you can say one thing about Iraq in 2003 and another in 2004, and different things every year, without penalty. Does this help us win the next election? is the only question that matters to them.
Is this what Pres. Trump had in mind all along? He's reported to have taken the Iraqis up on their request to get the heck out of their country. https://www.nationalreview.com/news/u-s-led-coalition-to-move-out-of-iraq-in-accordance-with-parliamentary-vote/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=breaking&utm_campaign=newstrack&utm_term=19083627
There's a lot of bellyaching about proportional responses, how killing Soleimani might not have been proportional, and on and on.
Pf-f-f-f-t. A response isn't proportional until it's so overwhelming there's no need to follow it up because the enemy has been rendered incapable of retaliating against our response. Less than that just prolongs the damaging and killing by allowing further exchanges and so cannot be proportional.
Trump raised Iran's 35 with 52, and the Iranians answered with 290. We're not responding proportionally yet.
Eric Hines
He's [Trump] reported to have taken the Iraqis up on their request to get the heck out of their country.
It seems even the National Review isn't immune. Its claim: The letter’s authenticity was confirmed by multiple reports.... Meaning that NR is making up rumors, just like the rest of the NLMSM so often does. It's sad that such a pub has chosen to put deliberately unsubstantiated remarks on a par with on the record remarks that say the opposite.
Eric Hines
Is it really a fake? Someone ginned up that DOD letterhead?
Yeeeeeeeeee, I don't know. It was sent to Iraq by "mistake"? Not just leaked to the press? Something weird is going on. https://www.dw.com/en/us-military-sends-iraq-withdrawal-letter-by-mistake/a-51907519
Every once in a while, even deliberately unsubstantiated rumors accidentally coincide with fact. Such coincidences don't at all legitimize rumor-manufacture.
As to the letter, it apparently does exist--if this collection of gossips can be believed: multiple news outlets including Agence France-Presse and Reuters
Two things of interest here: both NR and DW simply are repeating the same AFP/Reuters rumor instead of doing actual, original reporting. And, JCS Chairman General Mark Milley has confirmed the letter's existence and said, This was a mistake from McKenzie. It shouldn't have been sent. Mistake, indeed; it seems to have been an early (I surmise from its characterization of "poorly worded" and not even signed) draft. McKenzie (CENTCOM CC) and Seely, who sent out the draft, both need to be reassigned.
The weird thing going on consists in rumor-monger journalism, which is my longstanding beef, and incredible sloppiness by flags who should know better.
Eric Hines
Post a Comment