Unless you have been for the last week in a coma, one of the World’s greatest terrorists died in a U.S. missile strike at Baghdad Airport. Iranian General Qasem Soleimani — that’s right, an Iranian General who was in Iraq — was the target of that missile strike. Who was this guy, and why did the U.S. take him out?
Follow this Bullet-point explanation:
- President Trump ordered the attack on Major General Qassem Soleimani, a master terrorist and the head of the Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), on January 2nd. He was killed along with seven others as he arrived at the Baghdad Airport. Here are key facts about this man, who was responsible for the deaths of untold numbers of people around the world.
Soleimani was the most potent Iranian general. While other generals may have outranked him, as Commander of the Quds Forces, he answered only to Iran’s Supreme Leader. His authority was outside the usual military chain of command in Iran, and he was given carte blanche authority for the export of terror around the world as he coordinated and directed the numerous Iranian militias and proxies worldwide. - The Quds Forces were responsible for assassinations, terrorism, and unconventional warfare that Iran exports and executes globally, including places like Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen. He was the benefactor of Hamas and Hezbollah. Soleimani participated in assassinations and assassination attempts in the U.S., Germany, India, and Argentina.
- He was also linked to the deaths of over 600 U.S. service members in Iraq, as he supplied enhanced Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) to the insurgency there. Thousands of U.S. troops were wounded and maimed by these weapons. The IRGC was responsible for 17 percent of all U.S. casualties in Iraq between 2003 and 2011.
- We are in a War on Terror since September 11, 2001. Iran is the leading state-sponsor of terrorism, and the Quds Forces have been declared a terror organization. In war, a general officer of an enemy force is a legitimate military target. This was not an assassination. It was the killing of an enemy soldier in a war.
- According to Secretary of State Pompeo, Soleimani died not killed because of his past deeds, but because the U.S. learned of planned attacks by Soleimani on U.S. personnel and others. The attacks were imminent.
- Because of this, President Trump was not required to notify Congress in advance. Under his Article Two powers in the U.S. Constitution, and following the War Powers Act, the president can take military action if a threat against the United States is imminent.
- The attacks on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad were not mere demonstrations. They were coordinated attacks on the U.S. compound and its personnel directed by Soleimani and his Quds Forces, in coordination with Kataib Hezbollah in Iraq.
- Soleimani was also responsible for the deaths of hundreds of demonstrators in Iran as they protested against government corruption and a failing economy in Iran.
- Over the last several weeks, hundreds of Iraqi demonstrators died as they protested against Iranian influence in their own country and government corruption in Iraq. The use of live ammunition against these demonstrations in Iraq can also be traced back to Soleimani.
Reaction
The events of the last several days are a reminder that there are evil people and terrorist forces who seek to do us harm. When they chant “Death to America” and “Death to Israel,” they genuinely mean it.
As with the death of Osama bin Laden, one would expect the entire American government to applaud the elimination of the world’s most vicious and most potent general who was personally responsible for the deaths of at least 600 Americans plus involved in the extermination of hundreds of thousands in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East. Democrats and Republicans alike in the aftermath of bin Laden’s death congratulated President Obama and those 23 military heroes who sneaked into that Pakistani compound to get Osama bin Laden.
Republicans applaud President Trump’s actions to eliminate Soleimani. Democrats: not so much. Their venomous responses and continued attacks on President Trump just escalated in the wake of Soleimani’s death.
Here are just a few:
- Sen.Tom Udall (D-NM) claimed that Trump is “bringing our nation to the brink of an illegal war with Iran with no congressional approval.”
- Sen. Tom Carver (D-DE) noted that the Trump administration has “chosen rash provocation over any coherent strategy” and expressed fear that this most recent activity may be more of the same.
- Rep. Andy Levin (D-MI) noted that he has “serious concerns about this President’s execution of a potential act of war without authorization of Congress.”
- Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) “Trump’s apparent assassination of Soleimani is a massive, deliberate, and dangerous escalation of conflict with Iran. The President just put the lives of every person in the region – U.S. service members and civilians – at immediate risk. We need de-escalation now.”
- Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) “Trump Admin owes a full explanation of airstrike reports—all the facts—to Congress&the American people. The present authorizations for the use of military force in no way cover starting a possible new war. This step could bring the most consequential military confrontation in decades.”
- Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) “Soleimani was a murderer, responsible for the deaths of thousands, including hundreds of Americans. But this reckless move escalates the situation with Iran and increases the likelihood of more deaths and new Middle East conflict. Our priority must be to avoid another costly war.”
- Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) “When I voted against the war in Iraq in 2002, I feared it would lead to greater destabilization of the region. That fear, unfortunately, turned out to be true. The U.S. has lost approximately 4,500 brave troops, tens of thousands have been wounded, and we’ve spent trillions.”
- Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) “So what if Trump wants war, knows this leads to war and needs the distraction? The real question is, will those with congressional authority step in and stop him? I know I will.”
- Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) “American leaders’ highest priority is to protect American lives and interests. But we cannot put the lives of American service members, diplomats, and others further at risk by engaging in provocative and disproportionate actions.”
I know of not a single Democrat who has verbalized any support for the elimination of Soleimani. But, of course, the Democrat-News Media were quick to demonize President Trump for the attack, even to the point of memorializing Soleimani!
Breaking news: Airstrike at Baghdad airport kills Iran’s most revered military leader, Qasem Soleimani, Iraqi state television reports https://t.co/NbZW4DaWvD
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) January 3, 2020
In addition to that quick tweet from The Post, the television leftist shows all abandoned their “normal” Trump-bashing and have gone all-in on Soleimani. I honestly did not know there were so many military and intelligence experts regarding administrative responsibilities for the notification of Congress before such covert actions are taken! Dozens of “military and legal experts” flood news shows on CNN, MSNBC, even the big three, ABC, NBC, and CBS, urging every American to run to their storm shelters to make sure they’re fully stocked for the imminent Armageddon that Soleimani’s death triggered.
Examples?
Those are just a few. In the last few days, such allegations against the President have escalated dramatically.
The Legality
No President has the unilateral authority to start a war. The War Powers Act details steps mandated for the U.S. to enter into a war. However, since 2001 and the World Trade Center attacks, things in the world of Intelligence and Terror have changed.
Regarding this specific action by President Trump, the Pentagon said Gen. Qassem Soleimani was “actively developing” plans to kill American diplomats and service members when he died. “That would appear to place the action within the legal authority of the president, as commander in chief, to use force in defense of the nation under Article II of the Constitution,” said Bobby Chesney, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law who specializes in national security issues.
“If the facts are as the Defense Department said, then the president relatively clearly has Article II authority to act in self-defense of American lives,” Chesney said.
“That justification would apply even if Soleimani hadn’t already launched an attack under the established doctrine of ‘anticipatory’ self-defense,” according to Jeff Addicot, a retired Army officer and expert in national security law at St. Mary’s University School of Law in San Antonio. “Legally, there’s no issue,” Addicot said. “Politically, however, it’s going to be debated, whether it’s the correct response. In my opinion, it’s the appropriate response, but it’s certainly legal.”
Summary
I’m said today — said that our country is so divided and so political. However, history shows us that American citizens have since the first Americans came ashore have had different ideas about government, rules and laws, and the way our country should operate. They with much debate created a template with which the majority agreed to use as the basic structure of living in America.
But things were different then. Early Americans while disagreeing, found ways to work through those differences, discuss, argue, and sometimes even come to blows or duels. But there was one common goal: to reach agreement so as to adhere to the articles of the U.S. Constitution, even when some of those articles were not appreciated by some of those settlers. It was called (and still is) “The Rule of Law.”
I’m disappointed that those from one political party have simply drawn a red line between their party and the party on the other side and said, “It’s our way or the highway.” And that is happening on every issue.
I see no end in sight.
What is causing all this? It boils down to two things: power and control. A large group of bureaucrats have sold their souls to the objective of snatching all the power of government that can be snatched, and with that power, instigate control over every aspect of the government of the United States.
What other explanation for what’s happening is there?
I’ll end with this:
“Tonight, I call upon all of us to set aside our differences, to seek out common ground and to summon the unity we need to deliver for the people. This, in fact, is our new American moment. There has never been a better time to start living the American dream.”
“So tonight I am extending an open hand to work with members of both parties, Democrats and Republicans, to protect our citizens, of every background, color, religion and creed.”
Those words came from Donald Trump’s first State of the Union Address. He’s a Republican reaching out to Democrats for unity. Every president reaches to those in the opposition for unity. They each know (and most have adopted that as their policy) that this country — a Democratic Representative Republic — MUST have agreement between those with opposing views of government to maintain its fundament status. Thankfully, our leaders have always ultimately worked through differences to reach a consensus.
It’s critical that we do on this issue, too. Instead of pointing fingers and name-calling, there needs to be an emphasis by all that at the end of the day, we are ALL Americans and we are “One Nation under God.”
It needs to remain what it is today.
