Lion of the Blogosphere

I totally support Trump’s operation to kill Suleimani

Suleimani has long been the man in charge of Iran’s strategy to nurture Shi’ite terrorist and militia groups throughout the Middle East. Because of his actions, the Middle East is a much worse place. Thousands, maybe tens of thousands, have been killed by these terrorist and militia groups.

Even the Trump-hating New York Times can’t say anything good about Suleimani. Their official editorial says:

General Suleimani was indisputably an enemy of the American people, a critical instrument of the Iranian theocracy’s influence across the Middle East and an architect of international terrorism responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Americans and a great many others in the region, from Yemen to Syria. He no doubt had a role in the campaign of provocations by Shiite militias against American forces in Iraq that recently led to the death of an American defense contractor and a retaliatory American airstrike against the militia responsible for the attack.

Instead of a retaliation that kills a bunch of schmuck enlisted men who had no say in any decision making, or even worse, a bunch of civilians, Trump’s retaliation killed the man who was actually responsible. Maybe, now, Ali Khamenei and Hassan Rouhani will worry that they will be next if they continue down Iran’s path of evil.

Of course, Trump is still criticized. When Trump did nothing after Iran captured U.S. Navy boats, shot down a U.S. drone, and launched missiles at Saudi Arabian oil facilities, they said Trump was too weak and was letting Iran get away with everything. Now that he took decisive action against a key leader and decision-maker, they say Trump is taking too much “risk.” Well I say that Trump took the right amount of risk, and I applaud him.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

January 4, 2020 at 8:50 AM

Posted in International

29 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. No money for the wall but always money for missiles.

    I’m glad we’re doing the Saudis bidding. But I really would like us to leave the petrodollar.


    January 4, 2020 at 9:35 AM

    • It’s Congress that has not provided money for the Wall, not Trump. Trump wants to build the Wall.

      And the Saudi thing is bullshit. We’re looking out for our own interests.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      January 4, 2020 at 10:25 AM

    • The Iranian regime sees you as “The Great Satan” (if you’re an American).

      Some European countries have shamelessly permitted the regime to send assassins to kill Iranian refugees that are living in their country, They’re that afraid of Iran.

      Frau Katze

      January 4, 2020 at 12:43 PM

      • They are not afraid of Iran. They are allies of the Iranian Republic because the more nefarious aspects of their activities are run through Iran.

        John Kerry’s daughter, Vanessa, for example, is married to an Iranian national and physician. His best man at the ceremony was the son of Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iran’s Minister of Foreign Affairs — the position comparable to U.S. Sec of State.


        January 4, 2020 at 5:49 PM

      • @map It’s true one can’t say an entire nation is afraid of anything,

        No doubt there are some who for whatever reason are perfectly content to have a few refugees assassinated.

        And maybe this son of Mohammed Javad Zarif does not agree with his father. At least some Khomeini’s grandchildren don’t approve of their grandfather and have said so.

        These things aren’t necessarily genetic but more cultural. Once a regime like this gets established it’s hard to get rid of it. That’s why the USSR lasted so long.

        Frau Katze

        January 4, 2020 at 8:10 PM

    • You should read some of the many memoirs written by people who were forced to flee after 1979. There’s no shortage of them.

      The regime is evil.

      For example, there was a small Communist Party in Iran before 1979, called the Tudeh Party. It was officially modified by outside Communists to permit members to remain Muslims.

      The Tudeh were thrilled that the Shah was on the way out. They fought the old guard in the streets, some were killed. Once Khomeini was securely in power he turned on the Tudeh, putting them in jail or even killing them.

      How bad can you get? Simple. Put some ideology first. Then any disgraceful behaviour becomes acceptable..

      (The same type of thing was featured in the USSR also. But it took longer for the killing to start there. There was still some good intentions at first. Khomeini planned it ahead of time).

      Frau Katze

      January 4, 2020 at 1:01 PM

    • Replace Saudis with another country and you’re getting warmer.


      January 4, 2020 at 5:41 PM

  2. Even Thomas Friedman supports Suleimani’s killing.

    However the left on the ground is outraged by this, at least based on the forums I’ve been to. The Obama administration, over 8 years, has managed to turn the American left into Iranophiles; they view Iran as persecuted by the US and seem totally supportive of any revenge strikes the Iranians pull off against the US.

    Mike Street Station

    January 4, 2020 at 10:50 AM

    • But very cute of him to frame the op-ed in a way that it makes it look like Trump didn’t do anything useful.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      January 4, 2020 at 11:05 AM

    • Wow. When you’ve lost Thomas Friedman…well, I’m a bit surprised.

      Frau Katze

      January 4, 2020 at 12:46 PM

    • I checked the liberal forum I once attended. Here’s the retired history professor who said the Spanish killed the American natives on purpose and totally discounted the glaring evidence of disease susceptibility

      Keep an eye on this one. It could be very, very dangerous.

      1. When military action is taken, it is normally (virtually always) announced by the head of state. This wasn’t. It was announced by John Bolton with Trump quite absent.

      2. John Bolton is mentally ill – and an extremely dangerous man. Some have said he is insane, and I wouldn’t deny it. And there is every probability that he is in charge of the Iran affair.

      3. The light, explosive charges had almost no effect on the tankers in a SAudi anchorage. This makes no sense. Who would launch such a useless attack? Iran? Give us a break. Iran would gain nothing whatever from such an attack. But John Bolton immediately laid down the charge that the attacks were by Iran. And he cannot possibly have known that in the time he had. No. It’s far, far more likely this was set up by the U.S.

      4. China has a big stake in Iran oil. And Russia almost certainly cannot allow the U.S. to have a free run over Iran.

      5. The U.S. has a long and bloody history interfference and murder in Iran. between the war, Britain bled Iran. It set up a dictators – and Iran, for almost sixty years had to supply free oil to the whole British navy. Then, about 1948, Iran managed to set up a democratic government.

      The UK promptly interfered, and called on the U.S; for help. Together they overthrew the elected government and installed a dictatorship again.
      Then the US edged the British out and took over for itself. But the Iranians again overthrew the dictator, and elected a government. Ever since, the U.S. has been pushing for a war on Iran.

      This is a very dangerous situation. And the leading American in it is a highly unstable American politician with a long history of aggression and murder.

      Not sure what item 3 is about.

      The interference charge is true. From Wiki

      The 1953 Iranian coup d’état, known in Iran as the 28 Mordad coup d’état (Persian: کودتای ۲۸ مرداد‎), was the overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in favour of strengthening the monarchical rule of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi on 19 August 1953,[5] orchestrated by the United States (under the name TPAJAX Project[6] or “Operation Ajax”) and the United Kingdom (under the name “Operation Boot”).[7][8][9][10] It was the first covert action of the United States to overthrow a foreign government during peacetime.[11]

      However it’s irrelevant to the Khomeini faction. They had no interest in Mosaddegh, who was not a devout Muslim. Mossddegh, Reza Pahlavi: all that mattered was that Islam must be #1 and neither were inclined that way.

      At one point Pahlavi ruled that women could not wear head coverings in public. Khomeini’s wife didn’t leave the house for over a year.

      Frau Katze

      January 4, 2020 at 2:01 PM

      • “3. The light, explosive charges had almost no effect on the tankers in a SAudi anchorage. This makes no sense. Who would launch such a useless attack? Iran? Give us a break. Iran would gain nothing whatever from such an attack. But John Bolton immediately laid down the charge that the attacks were by Iran. And he cannot possibly have known that in the time he had. No. It’s far, far more likely this was set up by the U.S.”

        I’m sure this history professor, quite savvy about “false flags” used by the US, is a firm believer that Trump is a Russian agent. Leftists are very selective on how they apply their conspiracy theories… they see what they want to see.

        Here’s a clue: if you have a sizable intellectual and political class inside your nation ready to scream “false flag” at any attack against your country, then that activity provides cover for any actual attack against your country.


        January 4, 2020 at 6:17 PM

      • “The interference charge is true. From Wiki”. I suggest some skepticism here. I’ve looked into it before and wasn’t impressed. Sure we had intelligence assets around, and gave a small amount of cash in support of some of them, but “orchestrated the coup” is a stretch.

        There’s probably a Kremlin document out there that brags about orchestrating Trump’s election. In 50 years that’s what Wikipedia may say too.

        January 4, 2020 at 9:01 PM

      • I hope you are not trying to impose your hairstyle on Iranians, as that would be beyond evil.

        My 2¢

        January 4, 2020 at 10:28 PM

      • @Steverino The participants in the coup admitted it, even seemed that they were bragging about it. But the importance of it has been overestimated.

        The Islamic train was gathering steam, and it’s more of a footnote now. The longer the reign of the Ayatollahs goes on, the less important it seems.

        Some Iranians are no doubt offended by foreign interference. More likely that would Iranians living in the West and attuned to political correctness. Especially if their parents got them out in 1979.

        None of the memoir writers seemed very interested. Mossadegh was a strange, eccentric man and some writers said they (or their parents) did not like him.

        Frau Katze

        January 4, 2020 at 11:59 PM

      • @My 2 cents. Hairstyles are a serious business in Iran. Khomeini insisted every strand of women’s hair be covered as he believed that women’s hair gave off rays that somehow affected others. Science wasn’t his strong point, but he was born in a small Iranian town in 1902 so that’s not surprising.

        That view may have relaxed a bit. I’ve not been following the situation recently.

        And men have not been spared either. There are a set of acceptable men’s hair styles that barbers must use. There is to be no green or spiked hair.

        Frau Katze

        January 5, 2020 at 12:07 AM

      • @map. “ I’m sure this history professor, quite savvy about “false flags” used by the US, is a firm believer that Trump is a Russian agent.”

        Absolutely. He’s prone to such beliefs.

        Frau Katze

        January 5, 2020 at 12:10 AM

  3. David Brooks praised the killing of Suleimani while debating Mark Shields on PBS yesterday. As a consummate Trump hater Brooks was however careful not to say anything remotely nice about Trump himself. Btw, I hadn’t seen Shields on tv for years, he looked awful.


    January 4, 2020 at 12:03 PM

  4. Hillary Clinton recently became the chancellor of Queen’s University in Belfast. Will Trump become a chancellor of the University of Baghdad?

    My 2¢

    January 4, 2020 at 12:19 PM

    • That’s good for her.

      Ireland does not have an extradition treaty with the US.


      January 4, 2020 at 6:26 PM

  5. This is another moral victory of Iran. By the way, The State Department Once Rented A Townhouse Seized From Iran To Jeffrey Epstein — Then Sued Him For Subletting It.

    My 2¢

    January 4, 2020 at 12:23 PM

  6. Khomeini and his accomplices were actually planning 1979 this for many years. They were alarmed by the secularism of the 20th century.

    He and other die-hard Muslims were trying to stop it. In the 1940s, there was a program amongst the devout to pick off any well known Iranians who were getting too secular. Khomeini declined to actually be the trigger man but did help with tracking the target to ensure a good time for the assassination.

    Islam will always have people like him.

    Frau Katze

    January 4, 2020 at 1:20 PM

  7. I hope that this moves Iran that much closer back to the days of the Shah and women in Iran wearing bikinis on the beaches of the Persian Gulf.

    Jay Fink

    January 4, 2020 at 1:42 PM

    • Iran is a popular destination for vacations from some European countries. Similar to Cuba for Canadians in this hemisphere.

      My 2¢

      January 4, 2020 at 10:22 PM

  8. Good post.

    Iran will retaliate against a soft target. Either civilians or someone high up in government. The Dems, msm, left, etc will all scream that it’s Trump’s fault. But it was necessary and Trump did the right thing.


    January 4, 2020 at 1:45 PM

  9. Hawk’s fallacy:

    Our enemy did X.
    Therefore, we must retaliate with Y.

    You never question why X happened in the first place, if maybe they’d leave us alone if we left them alone.


    January 4, 2020 at 11:50 PM

  10. “When Trump did nothing after Iran captured U.S. Navy boats…”
    This happened under Obama.

    Kosher Kowboy

    January 5, 2020 at 12:54 PM

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: