The modern age of appeasement is finally ending. I said it was a “Peace For Our Time” Neville Chamberlain moment when I wrote about its beginning with the ill-fated JPOA or “Iran Nuclear Deal” as it’s known in the swamp. I’ve commanded Americans in combat and strongly oppose war, but appeasement is the most risky and dangerous path to take that only leads to more death and destruction as it prolongs existing conflict and sets the conditions to ignite the passionate fires that lead to all out war.
The United States is at war with terrorists, but the country of Iran is at war with us and has been since 1979. I’ve seen much handwringing and pontificating in the days since the United States successfully targeted and destroyed the top terrorist in the world, Iran’s terror Commander Qasem Soleimani, just outside of the Baghdad international airport. However, Genera David Petraeus, former commander of allied forces in Iraq, Afghanistan, and head of the Central Intelligence agency said this about the attack: “It is impossible to overstate the importance of this particular action. It is more significant than the killing of Osama bin Laden or even the death of [Islamic State group leader Abu Bakr] al-Baghdadi,” Petraeus told Foreign Policy in a recent interview. I agree with him and believe the commander in chief, President Trump, made a sound decision to target this evil man, in an operational sense, legally, and ethically under the US Constitution and the international laws of armed conflict.
But not so fast … the leftists, the mainstream media punditry, so-called reporters, every single Democrat Party presidential candidate, and Congressional leaders are defending Iran and Soleimani as a “revered military leader” and a government employee. They’re also saying the US operation was an illegal assassination instead of a legitimate wartime act on a critical enemy target, that it will have vast escalatory consequences, that Congress should have been informed before the attack or even that the President wasn’t authorized to conduct the operation, that the action contradicts the current administration’s policy of intent to get us out of the “forever wars”, and even that the President took the action to start a war with Iran in order to distract from this impeachment by the House of Representatives. I believe the American people will see through these complaints by hyper-partisan actors for what they are and here is a breakdown of each demonstrating why.
First, was the attack authorized and legal without informing Congress? There are two reasons why the answer is yes. One, Congress has had many years to revoke its authorizations to use military force (AUMF) passed in both 2001 after 9/11 and in 2002 authorizing combat operations in Iraq but it has not done so. In April of 2019 the United States designated the IRGC a terrorist organization attacking military targets on terrorist organization is not assassination when it’s the commander who is leading the operations in the field. Second, the Iranian Republican guard corps (IRGC) commander was a terrorist enemy combatant engaged in military operations against US forces and territory. Those operations had already killed one American and wounded several military members. This fact puts the operation into the category of self-defense. The President, as Commander-in-Chief, has zero requirement to tell Congress beforehand of a response to attacks on Americans.
Second, does the action escalate or contradict state US policy to get us “out of Middle East Wars”? First, no, this action is more likely to de-escalate because it was a very powerful response to Iran’s escalation over the previous two years that finally culminated in an American death in Iraq and an attack on the American Embassy there. Americans don’t want war with the nation-state of Iran. We are at war with terrorists and have the right of self-defense when we are attacked and the IRGC commander was actively leading combat operations against American forces and the US territory at the embassy. Iran as a nation state is ruled by the mullahs and the IRGC. The Iranian people who want freedom are not our enemies. I for one support their efforts to free themselves celebrations are occurring in Iran after the successful targeting of general Soleimani the commander of the IRGC. Iraqi citizens are also celebrating the removal of this evil man from their society as he has been responsible for killing innocent protesters by the hundreds in recent weeks in Iraq. Second, as time moves on, we clearly see the action doesn’t contradict current policy as revealed when the Iraqi Parliament passed a non-binding resolution asking us to leave. While no decision has been made, we have seen reports of a DRAFT response letter from the US coalition fighting ISIS in Iraq respecting Iraqi sovereignty, indicating the Trump administration will likely see this as a lever it can use when it is time for us to leave the country.
Finally, the accusation that the President is using the operation to distract from his impeachment is just laughable. The desperation among Democrat Party leaders, especially Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, is obvious. Politicians do a lot of nasty things, let’s be clear, but this silly accusation is as much of a sham as the impeachment itself. The mainstream media is fond of using the phrase “without evidence” when they don’t believe something and that is exactly what this is, an accusation without evidence.