Trump Resorts To Reckless Risk Of War Ploy To Distract From Impeachment Trial

"I am gonna start a war with Iran before I face a real Senate trial to remove me!"

"I think we've now ended any hope of keeping Iraq out of Iran's arms. I think we're going to see the Iraqi parliament, possibly as early as today, send all American troops home. Yes, it's good that he's gone but it comes at an extraordinarily high price, which is why the Bush and Obama administrations chose not to do something like this."  - Former CIA specialist Michael Morrell, this morning on CBS.

"However you want to put it  the doomsday clock has now moved another tick toward midnight." -   Journalist Cal Perry last night on MSNBC.

"There is absolutely no reason for anyone in the U.S. to credit anything the president or his administration says about matters of life and death, or war and peace, until it is demonstrably verified."   - Chris Hayes last night on 'All In'

Before the new year even began - with the glittering ball dropping in NYC-  Janice warned that Trump was going to try to distract from attention on the upcoming Senate trial (and the increasing evidence of his crimes) by starting a war with Iran. Well, it looks like that prediction and event is well underway, this after we learned last night Trump ordered an assassination hit on a top Iranian general.  And coincidentally, that order coming soon after a tranche of documents - mainly unredacted emails- was released showing clearly how Trump broke the law (the  Impoundment Control Act of 1974).   That is, holding up money (to Ukraine)  appropriated by congress, to try to achieve a political benefit for himself.  But this is the nature of the turd he is, a walking two bit traitor turd with no honor and not enough gumption to just resign like Nixon did..

Here's basically what we learned:  Trump ordered an air strike that killed powerful Iranian general Qassem Suleimani in Baghdad in the early hours of Friday, in a dramatic escalation of an already bloody struggle between Washington and Tehran for influence across the region.

Suleimani, who ran Iranian military operations in Iraq and Syria, was targeted while being driven from Baghdad airport by local allies from the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU). The deputy head of the PMU, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes, a close Suleimani associate, was also killed in the attack.  (Note: Iran confirmed Suleimani’s death, saying the US would be responsible for the consequences.)

According to a released Pentagon statement:

“General Suleimani was actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region.  This strike was aimed at deterring future Iranian attack plans. The United States will continue to take all necessary action to protect our people and our interests wherever they are around the world.”

Of course, this is classic subterfuge and in any case, a reckless provocation which risks dramatically escalating conflict.  This was pointed out yesterday a.m. on CBS morning show by former CIA specialist Michael Morrell.  (This was after the initial U.S.  strike targeting Iranian militants). Morrell also warned that such an aggressive move - and any more like it (such as the assassinations last night)  risked  Iraq demanding the entire U.S. presence leave.  That may now be coming sooner rather than later.

Minutes before the statement Trump tweeted a U.S. flag without comment. Later, the White House put out a statement saying the strike was a “decisive defensive action” carried out “at the direction of the president”.  Trump himself had the absolute audacity to blab the purpose of the assassination strike was "to stop a war" - right out of the pages of Orwell's '1984'.

So no surprise most of us with sense regard this propaganda blather as just that, or ripe PR  horse manure.  The actual act was a clear 'wag the dog' tactic to deflect attention from his impeachment travails - especially given GOP Senators are beginning to break ranks with Moscow Mitch and demand a proper Senate trial (with documents, witnesses).   In other words it was a decisive defensive action on behalf of Trump.  Because this orange asswipe cares no more about protecting this nation, or defending it, than he cared about defending Ukraine from Russian incursions in the Donbass region.  Opting to withhold critical military aid unless Zelenskiy rolled over and did his bidding on the Bidens. Par for the course actions for a narcissist weasel grifter and confirmed traitor.

 All of which is plain as day to anyone with an IQ over room temperature digits.  It is also self-evident to anyone who has followed Trump's behavior and  the timelines of his decisions for the past three years.

The rogue preemptive action also was a blatant violation of  Principle IV against such aggression under the Nuremberg Laws, e.g.:

"The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law: (a) Crimes against peace: (i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances; (ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i). "

Suleimani was commander of the Quds Force, the elite, external wing the Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which the Trump administration designated as a terror organization in April last year. The Pentagon statement claiming responsibility for the strike accused the Quds Force of being responsible for the deaths of hundreds of U.S. service members and  wounding thousands more.

Many consider Suleimani to have been the second most powerful person in Iran, behind the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamanei, and arguably more powerful than President Hassan Rouhani. Through a mix of security operations and diplomatic coercion, Suleimani has certainly been more responsible than anyone else for projecting Iran’s influence in the region.

The cowardly assassination strike to deflect from Trump's impeachment turmoil  comes at a time when Iraq is already on the brink of an all-out proxy war.  Also,  hours after a two-day siege of the US embassy in Baghdad by a mob of PMF militants and their supporters. The Pentagon accused Suleimani of having masterminded the mob attack, but again with no proof at all.  Why should anyone believe the Pentagon anymore when it's clearly fallen under the control and sway of the most pathologically mendacious liar the planet has ever known? (15, 413 "false or misleading claims in the past 1,033 days", according to The Washington Post's running tally.)

Meanwhile, it's clear to all except the most intellectually-challenged that Trump is even prepared to start a war with Iran to take the heat off his political tribulations. This is how far gone, how massively deranged he is.  We know, for example, the U.S. has deployed 750 airborne troops to Kuwait as a rapid reaction force available for use in Iraq, and officials has said up to 3,000 could be sent in the coming days. The defense secretary, Mark Esper  (the same guy who once told interviewer Margaret Brennan the Kurds were "on their own" after the U.S. left them in the lurch)  said on Thursday that more militia attacks were expected and the U.S. reserved the right to take preemptive action to stop them.

Translation: Esper and fellow Pentagon toadies reserved the right to use whatever flim flam and pretexts - even if they meant war-  to protect traitor Trump in his distraction ploys..

Esper - recreating his cowardly stance with the Kurds - said:

“There are some indications out there that they may be planning additional attacks. If we get word of attacks, we will take pre-emptive action as well to protect American forces, protect American lives."

What Esper really means is that he will take preemptive action to protect Trump at any cost, if it means keeping Americans' weary eyes off a future impeachment trial. 

Another aspect Esper doesn't grasp - but Senator Chris Murphy surely  does-  as Murphy said on Twitter:

"One reason we don’t generally assassinate foreign political officials is the belief that such action will get more, not less, Americans killed."  

Also, not mentioned, is that we refrain from assassinating foreign officials  because we don't wish to have other nations assassinating our officials!

One last thing: As Andrea Mitchell noted last night, "Iran is not Iraq and there is no Saddam Hussein" -  or a weak military to subdue.  In other words, whatever conflict Trump gets us into - to try and salvage his orange hide - won't be a cakewalk like Iraq was alleged to be for Bush II.

See also:

Donald Trump | Iran

Trump’s Illegal, Impeachable Act of War

And:

Iran

Soleimani's Assassination: The Mafia Would Have Been Proud

And:

Donald Trump

Not Déjà Vu; Just Piles of Crap All over Again

And:

Iran | Iraq

The Assassination of Gen. Qasem Soleimani

And:

Iran

The Folks Who Lied about Iraq and Afghanistan Are Lying about Iran. We Must Stop a New War.

And:

Donald Trump | Iran

Drum Major Trump Marches Us Into the Folly of War

Is Netanyahu A Paranoid Warmonger? Yes, Which Is Why He Needs To Be Ignored

Let us accept as a proposition that in the world we inhabit the laws and exercise of principles may never match ideals. Look no further than the ACA or "Obamacare" which ideally would have been in the form of a single payer system. But the version finally on offer is the best that could be attained given the political climate.   In a similar vein "waging peace" often requires nuanced steps and trade-offs, especially with a nation like Iran - which let us admit is not a palsied military pretender like Iraq (when we invaded in 2003).  Thus, the step-by- step current negotiations are more likely to have success than a precipitous response.

But the  latter is what we got from Benjamin Netanyahu two days ago in the Israeili warmonger's hysterical performance on Capitol Hill. Again, with fire-breathing rhetoric, "Bibi" blasted any deal apart from total Iranian nuclear disarmament and - effectively -  demanded the only alternative had to be war. Which is total insanity, and ought to be sufficient to see this moron taking a one way hike out of the leadership of his Likud party- hopefully in the wake of the Israeli election.

The Financial Times, in an article by Philip Stephens yesterday  ('The Answer for Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu Is War Against Iran')  highlighted the total awkward impropriety of it all, in the form of traducing Obama with the Republicans. Of course, the Repugs would lap it up as they're always looking for wars as a means to ramp up deficits to decrease social spending. Call it their trademark. So we expected Boehner and his merry band of bellicose Teepees to certainly grovel and slaver as Netanyahu tried to give his best imitation of Winston Churchill. But most ''Murican historical numbnuts today forget Churchill gave his address at a time when the world faced a real threat in the Nazi Third Reich. As Stephens noted, it was bellicose hyperbole "indulged in by John Boehner" but on the good side (ibid.):

"At least he left out the crude diagram of the Iranian bomb he waved aloft at the UN in 2012."

What is most puzzling is how this unhinged Irsraeli jackass - who more and more resembles the 'boy who cried 'Wolf!' -  has any creds left  when the EU and most European states "shut him out" (according to Stephens) long ago. His rants became so predictable and the over the top rhetoric so absurd that they basically tuned him out. But not the warmongering Neocons in the U.S.

And as far as trying to upstage Obama, all that really happened is that it backfired in the minds of most sensible citizens. Because no matter the excuse, no one one- ups the President in terms of attending a speech that he never sanctioned, but which a troll Reepo congress did - just to get back at him for his executive orders on immigration.

Stephens also observed that Israel's own security and political establishment - including former generals and other officials- has been critical of the speech and believes its only effect is "a clear and present danger to Israel".  A take with which I agree.

While most rational people in the world of realpolitik understand that the only chance to curb Iran is the one now being followed by Obama, the irrational warmongers in Israel and the U.S. demand all out attacks a la Netanyahu. It seems two major conflicts in the last 14 years  aren't enough - they want the whole enchilada. Worse, they're prepared to even invoke the holocaust and in newspaper and mail ads - such as the one I got from AIPAC three days ago. But the hysterical rhetoric used is not designed to encourage thinking people of good will to side with them and so I tore up the AIPAC flyers and hurled them into the dustbin.

I've been a vocal and frequent critic of holocaust deniers and the Nazis (and neo-Nazis) but that doesn't mean I'm going to jump on a pro-war with Iran bandwagon when diplomacy is the only way we'll get a decent resolution.

Perhaps the most insightful and rational take on Iran was offered three years ago by U.S. intelligence specialist, Paul Pillar, in an essay in The Washington Monthly:

"More than three decades of history show that the Islamic Republic's rulers, like most rulers elsewhere, are overwhelmingly concerned with preserving their regime and their power....in this life and not some future one."

Israel, before it mounts its bombs to attack Iran might want to process that. They also might wish to look again at Principle VI under the Nuremberg laws, passed after the Nazis were brought to heel. Principle VI clearly states:

"The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law: (a) Crimes against peace: (i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances; (ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i). "

The U.S. itself would commit total folly getting involved in another mid-East hornet's nest, given how it's already fucked up Iraq to a far-thee-well, destabilizing its secular government to the point the crazies like ISIS could enter and wreak havoc.  Leading to State Dept. spokesperson Marie Harf's observation (for which she's been pilloried by the Right):

"We cannot kill our way out of this war" 

Referring to the current conflict with ISIS.  Well, we certainly cannot if that means once more committing tens of thousands of ground troops - especially after we beheld how that worked out before. I mean, look,  as Einstein put it: "insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result."  So if we do follow Bibi's prescription for war, we have to be insane.

And yes, this is contrary to pseudo-Indy columnist Kathleen Parker's recent jibes: "It sounded silly" and  "it needed 12 pages of context to sound rational". In truth, it only needed a memory of recent history of how we totally fouled up Iraq by removing Saddam and ended up with over 4400 dead and  $4 trillion in debt - when all the medical costs are toted up. 

Do we want to go through all that shit again? 

As for making war on Iran, any nut or warmonger that entertains that fantasy needs to see the movie 'Threads' which concerns a U.S. and NATO strike force  invasion of Iran in response to a perceived Russian threat. Though the initial trigger may differ it is possible the rest may well materialize.

From the initial strikes on a nuke reactor at Isfahan, to the accidental sinking of the Russian ship Kirov in the Straits of Hormuz, to the deliberate exchange of two tactical nuclear weapons (with radiation blowing over Pakistan) and the escalation to a full scale nuclear war - with 3,000 megatons exchange (210 megatons on the UK alone) this movie will keep you on the edge of your seat and your ears tuned to the Siren sounds of would-be warmongers..

It should also give you nightmares and motivate you to scream down all the jingoist twits in this country with a boner to pick a fight. One might also include the Israelis in this as well, since any attacks by them could easily escalate and generate unintended consequences.

The last segment of the film - following the timeline after the missile exchange and when nuclear winter occurs, discloses there are some prices that are simply too much to pay. Most graphic are the scenes of the sorry victims of radiation sickness in Sheffield, UK and the final scene when a young woman that manages to survive gives birth to an infant with a frog-like face, scales and small scaled horns. As she screams in horror at her mutant, grunting offspring, the film pans to black and the credits roll.

DO we really want this future? Then by all means let's take Netanyahu's solution to the Iran nuclear problem! If not, we'd best ignore him and relegate him to the ranks of other crackpots in the past - like Barry Goldwater, and Gen. Curtis Lemay - the guy who demanded we nuclear bomb Russia after WWII, after they helped us to prevail.

Warmongering, paranoid crackpots will always be around. But that doesn't mean we have to pay them any serious attention.

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/marjorie-cohn/61233/netanyahu-censored-voices-and-the-false-narrative-of-self-defense

And:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/robert-parry/61228/congress-cheers-netanyahus-hatred-of-iran

And:

http://www.salon.com/2015/03/05/americas_war_fever_is_rising_how_fear_bloodlust_are_bringing_americans_together/

http://www.salon.com/2015/03/06/lets_all_pity_netanyahu_and_the_gop_israel_iran_irrational_thinking_and_thomas_friedmans_usual_muddled_nonsense/