Forget About Everything Else...

[Black Aeronaut]

Trump just fucked us all over in the worst way possible.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat...story.html

[Labster]

Assassination! Franz Ferdinand Part 2: Nuclear Boogaloo

[robkelk]

The Washington Post says I'm browsing in "private mode", and won't show me the story. I know I'm not running a private window.

Is this the same story?

If it is, Trump just made himself and his senior staff legitimate targets of war. By ordering the death of another country's high-ranking politician, he's removed his own protection.

[classicdrogn]

Even if you were in a private window it should work, or it did when I tried it just now. Yes, it is the same incident.

Please excuse me while I go cuss and mumble and shout "I told you so!" in the general direction of Trump chumps.

[Matrix Dragon]

The Washington Post says I'm browsing in "private mode", and won't show me the story. I know I'm not running a private window.

Is this the same story?

If it is, Trump just made himself and his senior staff legitimate targets of war. By ordering the death of another country's high-ranking politician, he's removed his own protection.

And publicly stating he ordered it. That's... Concerning.

[SilverFang01]

Probably the GOP is going to use it as an excuse: "We can't impeach the C-in-C during a war!"

[classicdrogn]

Well, he's about as whimsical and divorced from reality as Hitler, so it would go right along with his history of serving foreign interests to remain in command.

[robkelk]

Probably the GOP is going to use it as an excuse: "We can't impeach the C-in-C during a war!"

And then the Democrats can answer that the Constitution says the C-in-C doesn't have the authority to declare war.

But that doesn't really matter. One can't be impeached if an Iranian hit squad has assassinated one in retaliation for assassinating the Iranian C-in-C.

[Matrix Dragon]

Welcome to 2020: An extremist asshole getting killed can only have bad consequences for everyone! That's a wonderful fucking omen for the coming year...

[Dartz]

It's not the getting killed part.

It's the getting killed and openly admitting they did it part. Like a puppy shitting on the international carpet and not even having the good grace to hide under the couch afterwards.

It's basically pissed off everyone. The war here is already announcing massive troop deployments on the evening news.

I thought this might've been an anti-NATO thing. The US starting a war that it's allies really don't want - then making a big freedom-fries deal about nobody going along with it. But, IIRC the North Atlantic Treay only provides for mutual defense - just as the US doesn't have to come to the aid if Germany decides to invade Russia for shits and giggles on its own, neither does Germany have to aid the US in it's new misadventure in global fuckuppery.

---

I also have to ask.

How is it possible for the President to unilaterally order things like this? Other countries have whole ministries dedicated to figuring out the consequences with decisions made amongst a cabinet - not by one.

[robkelk]

I also have to ask.

How is it possible for the President to unilaterally order things like this? Other countries have whole ministries dedicated to figuring out the consequences with decisions made amongst a cabinet - not by one.

Judging by the news reports out of DC over the last three years, this particular President has has fired anybody who disagrees with him and has surrounded himself with yes-men. If so, then his cabinet is an echo chamber, not a place of debate.

[Labster]

Welcome to 2020: An extremist asshole getting killed can only have bad consequences for everyone! That's a wonderful fucking omen for the coming year...

Oh, somewhere in this favoured land the sun is shining bright,
The band is playing somewhere, and somewhere hearts are light,
And somewhere men are laughing, and somewhere children shout;
But there is no joy in Qudsville—mighty ⁠Qasem was struck down.

[Matrix Dragon]

So... how are you going to pay for the war?

[robkelk]

Trump's going to get the Iranians to pay for it.

[hazard]

I also have to ask.

How is it possible for the President to unilaterally order things like this? Other countries have whole ministries dedicated to figuring out the consequences with decisions made amongst a cabinet - not by one.

Well, this:

Judging by the news reports out of DC over the last three years, this particular President has has fired anybody who disagrees with him and has surrounded himself with yes-men. If so, then his cabinet is an echo chamber, not a place of debate.

But also, following 9/11 the USA Congress passed sweeping military force authorisation laws that allow the President of the USA to unilaterally deploy forces in ways that previously required the consent of the congress. Those laws have never been revoked.

[Matrix Dragon]

But also, following 9/11 the USA Congress passed sweeping military force authorisation laws that allow the President of the USA to unilaterally deploy forces in ways that previously required the consent of the congress. Those laws have never been revoked.

No way THAT could ever go wrong...

[Rajvik]

no way such an august body of statesmen debating whether or not to enter a conflict that was inevitable could go wrong either, just ask the Spartans.

look, i know you guys don't like Trump, you cant help it. But think for a damn minute about what the head of Iran's Terrorist command was probably doing in Iraq, especially since he was meeting with a group of Iraqi terrorists who had already killed an american contractor and then assaulted the US embassy because of the reprisal airstrikes. IT WASNT GOING TO BE ANYTHING NICE! thinking otherwise is just deluding yourselves. Furthermore, senior officials have ALWAYS been legitimate targets, the main reason we like to take them alive is that it tends to kill the enemy's desire to fight faster.

EDIT:
I also find it amusing how the LOT OF YOU were all gaga about going to war for the Kurds and the PKK who is an acknowledged terrorist group against a NATO ally and are now pissing, moaning and wringing your hands over this, real neat.

[classicdrogn]

Once again, Raj, it's not about Trump. (He's so vain/I bet he thinks this song is about him/he's so vain...) Being angry about leaving the Kurds to twist in the wind was because abandoning allies relying on you for support is a shitty thing to do, (and threaten to do again but bigger, then walk back when called on it, nudge) while being the side who starts shit by killing someone at the "nations actually pay attention to this individual" level is both shitty and should be terrifying at the "people nations only care about in the abstract or as convenient" level like any of us here.

The fact that Trump is the one making these decisions is more reason to hate the fuckhead, certainly. If he was just an obnoxious attention whore but mostly harmless, I'd still hate him and think him a disgrace to everything the nation and the office of President stand for, but in a vaguely amused way like watching Zaphod Beeblebrox. Sadly, his regime is playing out far too realistically rather than imitating fiction.

[Dartz]

His actions seem inconsidered, unsubtle and to have continuously resulted in an immediate backlash that resulted in a weakening of American influence, a lessening of the country's trustworthiness and a generaly destabilisation of a whole area either through his need to seem strong - while making things a lot easier for Russia to expand, or dickheads like Erdogan to beat their chest.

The Iraqi government is already looking to expel US troops over it. NATO is going 'fuck no, we don't want this fight' and Europe has been continuosly pushing for an approach to Iran that doesn't involve massive expenditures of money, tanks and people.

More than that, there's no real strategery. There's no real goal. No real plan for what to do afterwards beyond killing the guy and bragging about it. It's like the only measure of strength is the ability to inflict suffering.

There's an even worse possibility, mind.
Either it's about breaking up NATO
Or - maybe it's a distraction from the political goings on at home.

[SilverFang01]

Pompeo says that they want to actually avoid a war with Iran

Yeah. Right.

Remember when Trump drew on a weather map with a sharpie to invent a hurricane warning?

See the problem with having a president who lies about literally everything is that literally everything he says must be considered 100% false until proven otherwise.

[classicdrogn]

I'll give El Cheeto this much: At least he didn't go on world television and say "it was an intelligence failure." I mean, yes, obvious to anyone whose intelligence isn't failing, but still.

[Dartz]

Is this a quote from a real tweet?

"Let this serve as a WARNING that if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets, we have targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!"

Isn't going after cultural sites illegal? Would that include museums, or mosques or what?

[robkelk]

Pompeo says that they want to actually avoid a war with Iran

Yeah. Right.

I am reminded of that scene in Full Metal Panic? Fumoffu where Chidori throws a punch and then says she's against violence.

The problem with this comparison is that FMP:F was a comedy in which somebody could do that without repercussions.

[classicdrogn]

"Motherfucker, I will pass a fist across your face until you learn how to resolve conflicts without resorting to violence!"

[hazard]

no way such an august body of statesmen debating whether or not to enter a conflict that was inevitable could go wrong either, just ask the Spartans.

Actually, it's a pretty useful restraint on executive power given the great cost that comes with armed conflict, given that soldiers are very expensive indeed to equip, to train and to deploy. And that's just the immediate financial burden, the diplomatic and political cost as well as the moral dangers that come with violent conflict are something that you preferably take a good, long time examining to see if there's perhaps another, less violent way to gain the same benefit at a lower cost instead.

look, i know you guys don't like Trump, you cant help it. But think for a damn minute about what the head of Iran's Terrorist command was probably doing in Iraq, especially since he was meeting with a group of Iraqi terrorists who had already killed an american contractor and then assaulted the US embassy because of the reprisal airstrikes. IT WASNT GOING TO BE ANYTHING NICE! thinking otherwise is just deluding yourselves. Furthermore, senior officials have ALWAYS been legitimate targets, the main reason we like to take them alive is that it tends to kill the enemy's desire to fight faster.

Frankly, assassinating him was one thing. Dangerous since he had the direct backing of Iran, but it's one of those things that can be handled in backroom diplomatic dealings.

Gloating about it though... well. That's a good way to invite escalation. Especially when you do it in public, or on international television.

Isn't going after cultural sites illegal? Would that include museums, or mosques or what?

Not exactly. Cultural sites are protected (including religious structures) because those are likely areas for civilians to seek shelter during combat, but only so long as there are no legitimate military targets there. Bombing a religious structure is illegal, but bombing it when there's active military personnel gathered there is legal, and I think that's true even if they're there for a religious service.

Because, you know, those are enemy combatants. And those are valid targets. It'd be a different things if those are all wounded enemy combatants and or otherwise hors de combat.