US threaten Iran with pre-emptive strike

I don't know if Iran forces people to march (using either state security or just normal social pressure) and I don't know if I should be impressed by the video showing lots of people marching. Iran is a huge country. I just disagree that you need to be a superpower like the USSR to force people to march in solidarity. Iran has enough tight control over segments of its society that if you told me that they were using coercive methods to drum up fake support I wouldn't feel confident arguing otherwise. I certainly don't think the idea that Soleimani assassination has united the disparate elements of Iranian society is a credible one if you know even the smallest amount about those divisions - and I'm also a little confused by people critical of the move using "well now look you've gone and unified the Iranians" as an argument for why. It just seems like a very silly take.

I don't think it's that silly if you know just the tiniest amount about the relations between Iran and Iraq the last, say forty years. And what ISIS thought should be done to Shia muslims.

It's really kinda crazy just how many Iranians has been killed by the US and US-backed allies. It's not really unreasonable for middle / upper class Iranians to be concerned about what would happen if Iran was considered weak.

which bits of iranian society are okay with soleimani being executed by a reaper drone do you reckon, mordy?

xp I should've been clearer that I think the silly bit is that people who were in favor of the JCPOA and bringing Iran into the community of nations, etc, arguing that this was a tactically bad move because it united the Iranians. It's not consistent with their preferred methodological of engagement. It makes sense on one level as a critique of Trump according to his own goals (you say you want to undermine the regime but this will only strengthen it) but it doesn't make sense according to their own goals which don't include fostering unrest and generating a revolution.

I suspect anyone who views Soleimani as a representative of a violent regime that murders protestors, or even more accurately as a symbol of the regime's willingness to spend treasure and blood on foreign adventures in Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, might be less than distraught over his passing. tbc this is a country where internet and communications are still being manipulated by the gov in many places to crackdown on protestors and had to kill 200 people only a few weeks ago to tamp down protests. If you think all those protestors are suddenly pro-Iranian because the guy who represented some of the worst excesses of the regime was killed by the US... I mean maybe! I'm just a little cynical of twitter authorities claiming otherwise based on a funeral procession.

It's a bit tautological, though. Sure, people who think what Soleimani and the rest has been up to in the region is just 'foreign adventures' and 'worst excesses' won't be that sad about his death. But Iranians kinda have a reason to be against Sunni extremism, whether from ISIS or Saudi Arabia, so I'm not really sure that's the main complaint against the regime.

Past protests have been about foreign adventurism and military ambitions as well as economic + political/religious concerns but in fact they are all related. If you're spending money on wars abroad, you're not spending that money on citizens (we know all about this in the US) - moreover, Iran has suffered from sanctions in part because of blowback from support for aggressive anti-Western and anti-Saudi + anti-Israeli proxies. Even fear over Sunni radicalism is not unrelated to questions of religious fundamentalism at home as well - so I think this is a bit more complex than "well we're afraid of ISIS therefore Soleimani is a hero."

Sure, if you think the Iranian regime is to blame for everything, then killing Soleimani was no big deal. I don't think most Iranians feel that way, though. It's also not the truth, btw.

Like, the sanctions was Trump getting mad because he shat himself and wanted to blame Obama. Who in Iran blames the regime for that?

Congratulations, Mr. President, with one reckless move, you have ceded Iraq to Iran, put our soldiers and our allies at greater risk, given ISIS a reprieve, united a divided Iran which will now revive its nuclear weapons program. Well done, Sir.

If in the extremely unlikely event Trump were to read this, I am pretty sure he would only see

Congratulations, Mr. President, blah blah blah. Well done, Sir.

I disagree about the reason for the sanctions. I mean yes there is a psychological component here involving Trump and Obama but there is more going on - in exchange for the JCPOA Obama essentially gave Iran free reign in places like Syria where Soleimani was active and helped keep the Assad regime in power, and Iran continued its sponsorship of groups like Hezbollah and the Houthis despite the nuclear deal. Iranian behavior abroad was supposed to be tackled after the JCPOA but it became clear that the Obama administration basically spent its will + ability to influence Iran on those issues by agreeing to the JCPOA. There is logic to this decision - Obama decided (and at least in part because of Bibi & MBS overselling the threat) that it was worth trading Iran this permissiveness in exchange for stopping the nuclear program which was seen as a greater threat. The irony (or possible flaw in this analysis) is that the problems Iran posed to the region were not nuclear before the deal and continued to not be nuclear after the deal. They were able to wrought all kinds of destruction through more conventional means. From this perspective the purpose of the sanctions was to address these pressing issues by hamstringing the regime's ability to exercise such a free hand.

Come on

Like clearly that's not what Trump thought when he wrote that tweet

+ the idea that Iran should stop doing what the Sauds are doing because of the nuclear deal has never been realistic.

If this is gonna be the Freddie B show, I will ask the usher to throw me out

So, if Trump ordered the drone assassination while Soleimani was visiting Mesopotamia for US-initiated talks to deescalate, and just 50 miles from where Husayn ibn Ali was betrayed and martyred near Karbala in 680, am I wrong to think that this all plays into the martyrdom cult 200 million Shia Muslims fervently believe in?

I mean, if you think such a significant swatch of people is an amorphous blob that all thinks the exact same, sure.

I don't think of Shia as undifferentiated any more than I think that Protestant Christians are. But Iran has been a fairly stalwart ally of Shia groups throughout the Mideast, and I'm not sure I've seen any practicing Shia critics of Iran.

As an interested observer of religion I'm more curious how this will play out historically. I wish I knew more about Shia than the their origin story in the early caliphates, and that there's a whole martyrdom cult with self flagellation sect that reminds me only of Filipino Catholicism among modern Christian sects.

My guess (for the time capsule) is that Soleimani will increasingly be treated as a saint/wali. As stupid as past American foreign policy mistakes in the Mid-east have been, this one has the potential to be irreversible due to its cultural import, and effectively permanent.

I mean, possibly? It’s just I’ve been thinking to myself of fellow citizens I wouldn’t have a problem with Donald Trump reducing to a greasy spot on a whim outside an airport, and I have to tell you, even the worst of us? Not America’s to kill. That’s the principle, not sectarianism.

*i did hesitate over this, but not for very long

"I don't know if Iran forces people to march (using either state security or just normal social pressure) and I don't know if I should be impressed by the video showing lots of people marching. Iran is a huge country."

I don't know and I don't know...not that will stop me, an ilx authority, talking over twitter authorities. Just another day in this internet life I lead.

juty juty juty

We're really doing this, huh? pic.twitter.com/KR5u2Q8wew

— Justin Baragona (@justinbaragona) January 6, 2020

Lol her eyes

I don't know and I don't know...not that will stop me, an ilx authority, talking over twitter authorities. Just another day in this internet life I lead.

The assassination of Soleimani is yet another proof of Trump's complete disregard of all lawful constraints. This open murder of an Iranian high official was an undeniable act of war under any definition of international law. The fact that the United States unilaterally declared the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a "terrorist organization" may give this action some slight color of legality under US law, but according to the constitution treaties which have been ratified by Congress are the supreme law of the land** and the USA is signatory to the United Nations Charter.

**From Article Six:

"...all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land"

I don't know if Iran forces people to march (using either state security or just normal social pressure) and I don't know if I should be impressed by the video showing lots of people marching. Iran is a huge country. I just disagree that you need to be a superpower like the USSR to force people to march in solidarity. Iran has enough tight control over segments of its society that if you told me that they were using coercive methods to drum up fake support I wouldn't feel confident arguing otherwise. I certainly don't think the idea that Soleimani assassination has united the disparate elements of Iranian society is a credible one if you know even the smallest amount about those divisions - and I'm also a little confused by people critical of the move using "well now look you've gone and unified the Iranians" as an argument for why. It just seems like a very silly take.

― Mordy, Monday, January 6, 2020 8:37 AM (three hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

i can remember what US political culture was like in 2002. forms of public and private coercion and genuine sense of unity in the face of threat aren't mutually exclusive at all.

it doesn't make sense according to their own goals which don't include fostering unrest and generating a revolution.

You... don't think people who support JCPOA have transition to a democratic and free Iran as a goal??!?

Lol her eyes

http://www.thebigshadow.com/home/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/IMG_8436-e1458519284393.jpg

If that is their goal it's through a long process of Westernization - not a revolution to depose the ayatollah. A unified Iran should presumably make no difference if you're trying to win them over with kindness + Western cultural products and prosperity etc.

Re Iranian unity and support (or lack thereof) for Soleimani all I'd caution is skepticism about what Western journalists claim online. Iran is a notoriously hard country to report from because of how repressive it is and its crackdowns on free speech and media. Maybe there's a big rally around the flag effect because Soleimani died and he is beloved for defeating ISIS and Iranians care about ISIS over all. Or maybe there will be another outbreak of protests a week from now and everyone will be caught blindslided. Or maybe both. Most of these people claiming one thing or another don't actually know - and like I said I don't either but at least I'm not pretending that I know.

yet another proof of Trump's complete disregard of all lawful constraints.

It barely bears stating, but if Meatloaf is doing these things then he is not constrained, and if there are no legal repercussions then the laws are worthless. So what is there to regard or disregard? The country is being run by impotent incompetents.

Must be frustrating to want to provide a full throated defense of the Iranian regime and have to satisfy yourself with nitpicking my posts.
― Mordy, Monday, 6 January 2020 bookmarkflaglink

Beats doing this bullshit hybrid of armchair psychology and middle Eastern expertise just because you can't shout fake news @ a footage of crowds. Any day, friend.

I imagine a US President threatening to destroy Iranian cultural sites isn't too popular with Iranians, no matter what their opinion of Soleimani or the current regime. But then again, I don't know either.

A unified Iran should presumably make no difference if you're trying to win them over with kindness + Western cultural products and prosperity etc.

It would presumably make a big difference if Iran were unified in a spirit of enmity to the United States!

I am certainly in agreement with you that we don't have a clear sense of what's going on. Just saying, I don't think there's anything hypocritical about Iran Deal supporters worrying that Trump is locking in anti-Americanism and pro-regimism among young Iranians who might otherwise be the vanguard of reform.

http://english.almanar.com.lb/framework/includes/uploads/2020/01/manar-06173380015783324011.jpg

I imagine a US President threatening to destroy Iranian cultural sites isn't too popular with Iranians, no matter what their opinion of Soleimani or the current regime. But then again, I don't know either.

― Frozen Mug (Tom D.), Monday, January 6, 2020 11:03 AM (two minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

yeah it would fully piss off lots of iranians who live abroad and hate the regime

What was that other Trump quote? About how Iran had never won a war? That'd warm the cockles of anti-regime Iranians, for sure.

Some of those cultural sites

I'd like to visit Isfahan in a free Iran pic.twitter.com/jIA2ntwBQ1

— David Frum (@davidfrum) January 4, 2020

i need to look this up again, but i think the iraqis killed alongside soleimani were some of the shia militia leaders responsible for retaking mosul from ISIS. the past several weeks had seen iraqis protesting -- and getting killed by! -- their own government and the influence of iran for the rotten state of life, and now that dynamic has completely changed

xp you could have picked a better person to link from lol

I know who I linked it from

seems bad!

پاسخ کاربران ایرانی به انتشار تصویر پرچم آمریکا توسط ترامپ. pic.twitter.com/fWU2jVkSxL

— روزنامه ایران (@IranNewspaper) January 6, 2020

About how Iran had never won a war?

Idle curiosity with be the death of my free time:

Iraqi Civil War (2014–2017), Syrian Civil War (2011–present), Iraq War (2003–2011), Dhofar Rebellion (1963–1976), Iran-Azerbaijan Crisis (1945–1946), Persian invasion of Georgia (1795), Nadir Shah's invasion of India (1738–1739), Afsharid–Ottoman War of 1730, Russo-Persian War of 1651, Mughal–Safavid War of 1649, Mughal–Safavid War of 1622, Ottoman–Safavid War of 1603, Persian-Uzbek Wars (1502–1510), Campaigns of Timur (1380–1402), Byzantine–Seljuq wars (1048–1308), Second Perso-Turkic War (588–589), First Perso-Turkic War (588–589), Ethiopian–Persian Wars (570–578), Seleucid–Parthian Wars (238 BC–129 BC), Battle of Pelusium (343 BC), Revolt of the Satraps (372–362 BC), Corinthian War (395–387 BC), Peloponnesian War (431–404 BC), Conquest of Egypt (525 BC), Conquest of Babylonia (540–539 BC), Conquest of Lydia (547 BC).

They punch about their weight class.

Well do I remember that Ken Burns documentary about the 4th century Battle of Pelusium

To answer my question (mostly to myself) above:

Juan Cole:

What Trump did was give the pious Shiites of Iran and Iraq a martyr, and folk artists are already depicting Soleimani at Karbala

ZenPundit:
The martyr Soleimani embraced by Imam Hussein
https://zenpundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Soleimani-embraced-by-Imam-Husein-731x1024.jpg

i think for the iranians there is only one adequate answer to the murder but i doubt they will be able to give it.

Claims that the funeral crowds in #Iran are forced into the streets betray a basic lack of understanding of Iran. I lived in Iran for 3 yrs, and I did see the state occasionally corral ppl into rallies, but not on this level. That’s impossible. The grief/anger is real

— Sune Engel Rasmussen (@SuneEngel) January 6, 2020

a Persian friend of mine told me today that lots of people he knows who have been protesting or totally opposed to the Iranian regime have also been outraged by the killing of Soleimani, even with Soleimani's record of shutting down protests

in short, Soleimani was a man of contrasts

in short, Iran is not, like so many others, a synthetic nation cobbled together by colonialist powers, but a proud people with a long history and complex culture, and when they are attacked, they unite.

Not to mention mocked and goaded by possibly the biggest moron to lead a nation since some inbred Hapsburg from back in the day.

Iranians, please don't assassinate Trump until he is out of office and disgraced. Then be discrete. The last thing we need is a moron martyr cult.