With the assassination of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani, who was purportedly planning an attack on Americans if you believe pathological liar Donald "Rump" Trump's story, a new and dangerous phase in the simmering, decades-long conflict with Iran has begun. As the Washington Post reports:
"Defenders of Friday’s action say the strike delivered a long-overdue response to Iran’s increasingly malign behavior in the region, which has included support for rocket and missile strikes by pro-Iranian militias targeting U.S. military bases, international shipping and oil installations in the Persian Gulf.
But Iran experts say the killing of Soleimani — a legendary military leader revered by millions of Iranians and once widely regarded as a future political leader of the country’s more than 80 million people — was an escalation of historic magnitude, and one that almost certainly will elicit a commensurate response."Iran can be expected to deploy its assets across the region -- and indeed the globe -- to retaliate how and when it choses. While there may be an immediate response, in the past Iran has taken its time to exact revenge, and it may come in the form of scattered attacks over time.
"Unlike other state sponsors of terrorism, Iran has aggressively supplied proxy groups with equipment and know-how, enabling them independently to carry out sophisticated attacks, including cyber warfare against banks and electrical grids, and precision-guided attacks using upgraded, Iranian-designed missiles and rockets. [snip] While a retaliatory strike on U.S. targets inside Iraq would be a more likely scenario ... an attack on U.S. soil cannot be ruled out, especially if Iran thinks it can avoid having the blame fall on itself." (our emphasis)There's also concern about reckless and impulsive Trump's decision-making process -- such as it is or isn't -- in deciding to go after such an important Iranian leader. There are new reports that many of the experts in the White House were excluded from the decision:
"Why Trump chose this moment to explore an operation against the leader of Iran’s Quds Force, after tolerating Iranian aggression in the Persian Gulf for months, was a matter of debate within his own administration. Officials gave differing and incomplete accounts of the intelligence they said prompted Trump to act. Some said they were stunned by his decision, which could lead to war with one of America’s oldest adversaries in the Middle East." (our emphasis)As one former intelligence official told the Post:
"It’s like hitting a hornets’ nest with a baseball bat,” said Robert Baer, a former CIA case officer in the Middle East and veteran of clandestine operations. “You don’t do it unless you’re ready to go to war with the hornets.”
BONUS: Gen. Soleimani may be dead, but here in the U.S., General Confusion's in charge.
Trump: We committed an act of war to stop a war.— Mieke Eoyang (@MiekeEoyang) January 3, 2020
Pompeo: Americans are safer now, but evacuate Iraq immediately, you're not safe.
Pompeo: We're de-escalating.
Esper: We're sending more troops.
BONUS II: Surprise, surprise --
1. I’ve had a chance to check in with sources, including two US officials who had intelligence briefings after the strike on Suleimani. Here is what I’ve learned. According to them, the evidence suggesting there was to be an imminent attack on American targets is “razor thin”.— Rukmini Callimachi (@rcallimachi) January 4, 2020
