The Price For Ignorance …

It is a well-known fact that Donald Trump does not understand the Middle East.  It is an equally well-known fact that diplomacy is not Trump’s strong suit … in fact, I rather doubt the word ‘diplomacy’ is in his vocabulary.  He is a bully who thinks that “might equals right”, and that has not changed simply because he is now in a position where it matters more than ever.

There are a number of people who have dedicated much of their lives studying the Middle East, who understand the dynamics in play, but those people are not in Donald Trump’s administration.  However, those experts have something to say about Trump’s ignorant ‘maximum pressure’ policy toward Iran.

The fight began in May 2018, when Trump pulled the U.S. out of the Iran nuclear deal, leaving our allies scrambling trying to keep the deal intact, for by all accounts the Iranians were upholding their part of the deal.  The tensions intensified last spring, when the U.S. designated Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization and moved to shut off Iran’s ability to export oil. Middle East experts warned that Iran would meet America’s escalation with escalation of its own. The Revolutionary Guard Corps designation was opposed by even some top Trump administration national security officials who said it could incite retaliation by Tehran against American troops and intelligence officers.

These predictions have proved correct. In May, the United States accused Iran of attacking oil tankers in the Persian Gulf. Then, in June, Iran shot down an American drone.

Then last week an Iranian-backed Iraqi militia, Kataib Hezbollah, fired on an Iraqi military base, wounding four American servicemen and killing an American contractor. Trump foolishly responded with force: On Sunday, the U.S. military launched air strikes against the militia’s forces in Iraq and Syria, killing 24 people and wounding 50.

Iran-2On Tuesday, thousands of supporters of Kataib Hezbollah and other pro-Iranian militias stormed the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, shouting “Death to America”, a chant reminiscent of the Iran hostage crisis in 1979, 40 years ago. Outraged by the U.S. attacks, many of Iraq’s top clerics and politicians are now demanding the withdrawal of all American troops.  So, what does Trump do now?  Just what Trump always does when he doesn’t know what else to do, he threatens and bullies.

“Iran will be held fully responsible for lives lost, or damage incurred, at any of our facilities. They will pay a very BIG PRICE! This is not a Warning, it is a Threat.”

He seems to be ignorant of the fact that he does not have the power to force other nations to act according to his will … remember the “Mexico will pay for the wall” statement that he screeched over and over?  How well did that work out?  Former U.S. officials who are experts in Middle Eastern foreign policy are critical of Trump’s “maximum pressure” initiative, saying it is far too heavy on economic sanctions and military deterrence, far too light on serious diplomatic outreach, and not focused enough on the other countries caught in the middle.

“It’s not working because the administration has no idea why it’s applying pressure or what it wants.” — Ilan Goldenberg, a former Pentagon and State Department official

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has reportedly cancelled a trip to the Ukraine in order to closely monitor the situation.  I can imagine he is chewing his fingernails, for he was one of the biggest critics, blaming Hillary Clinton almost exclusively for her handling of the 2012 attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans, including a U.S. ambassador.  Secretary Clinton was absolved of any wrongdoing.

When you play a game without understanding the rules, you will almost inevitably lose.  That is what Donald Trump is doing in the Middle East … the only difference between this and a game of Battleship is that real lives are at stake.  This is likely to end in one of two ways … war or loss of face.  War is unthinkable, but to Trump, loss of face is even worse.  His ego trumps human lives, at least in his mind.

As often happens, Jeff from On the Fence Voters and I were on the same page tonight, and he reminds us that this is an election year, Trump has just been impeached, and Kim Jong-un is rattling his saber once again, all of which adds up to … sigh.  So I would ask you to hop over and take a look at his post, too!

94 thoughts on “The Price For Ignorance …

  1. Even with the recently released Afghan papers the US govt will just never learn. Trump is acting as if he will be POTUS for life. But he has more to lose in the long term given his outside business interest which will all be sitting targets long after he leaves the WH.

    Liked by 2 people

    • from twitter.

      “Here’s how stupid the Democrats’ argument is. Should Obama not have killed Bin Laden because of the possibility that Al Qaeda might get mad about it?”

      Like

      • The difference is that Usama bin Laden was he leader of a relatively small terrorist group that actually terrorized the Middle East far more than the Western nations. Soleimani was a leader, 2nd in command, of the nation of Iran, much-loved by his own people and very powerful. Don’t believe everything you read on Twitter, Scott.

        Liked by 1 person

          • He didn’t kill anybody, though he is indirectly responsible for the death of U.S. people. However … consider this, Scott … the Iranians have NO love for the people of our nation, and in some ways, rightfully so. How many Iranians & Syrians has the U.S. killed? Thing is that the situation in the Middle East is not black and white, but is extremely complex, and I don’t know any layperson in this country that understands it. But, that said, it was not our place to assassinate the leader of another nation. Usama bin Laden was a different story altogether … he was truly a terrorist, not belonging to any government, and the move was widely applauded. It is rather like the difference of somebody killing a drug lord in this country, which would be applauded, vs killing Mike Pence.

            Liked by 1 person

            • you raise a good point. I have always said that we didn’t need to be over there, these regime change wars cost millions and kill thousands and it quite a complicated situation for sure.

              Would 9-11 happened had we not gone over there in 1990? who knows?

              I need a drink now. lol.

              Liked by 2 people

              • I will share my wine with you, my friend! Actually, the provocation for 9/11 was that we were attempting to impose our western culture, our “wicked” ways on them. And, if you know anything about the religion of Islam, you can begin to understand just a little bit. They have stringent rules about women’s dress, behaviour for women and between the sexes, and the west, particularly the U.S., was bringing in new ideas that threatened those norms. At least, that was part of it. Another part was American arrogance, believing we had the right to tell other cultures to live, and particularly to attempt to convert them to Christianity. I think we brought some of it on ourselves, though the horrific acts on 9/11 were not deserved.

                Liked by 1 person

                • The Democrats literally ran a candidate who chortled “we came, we saw, he died” about Qaddafi and cheered a president who engaged in a wide-ranging drone war, and now we’re hearing the media and Democrats lament Trump as an assassin for killing Soleimani?

                  Liked by 1 person

                  • Hello Scott. Hillary was wrong to have said that. But again there is a huge difference. Hillary did not order the Killing of Qaddafi, the US military did not carry it out. The U.S. did not assassinate him. His own people killed him. Had the Iranians killed Qasem Soleimani this issue would be moot. This is about the actions of a U.S. president, the U.S. military and the targeted assignation of a foreign leader. Do you understand why the U.S. treats prisoners of war well? It is because we don’t want to give our enemies a reason to justify their mistreatment of our people who are captured. If our government OK’s this assassination we are in effect saying it is also correct for other countries to assassinate our leaders. Is that something you are OK with? As of right now any country who takes out one of our leaders, our generals, our politicians can say they were doing as we did. Hugs

                    Liked by 1 person

                  • Two wrongs don’t make a right, do they? What’s in the past is over and done, but that doesn’t give the current regime the right to keep being asses just because somebody else did it. And Scott … just for the record, I am neither a democrat nor a republican, but an independent with a very liberal, almost socialist ideology. The democrats vs republicans divide in this nation is going to kill us all before long … we really all need to tone down a bit. Hugs!

                    Like

          • Hello Scott. The thing to remember is perspective. For the U.S. point of view this guy was responsible for actions the US government did not like. Our government is now trying to rebrand him as a terrorist. Remember he was a general of a sovereign nation, one that we oppose. From their point of view he was a hero and our generals and military leaders are the terrorist and criminals. Interesting thing is this general worked with the US to fight ISIS. The problem people in the US tend to have is we see the world only through our countries perspective. The rest of the world doesn’t always agree with us and they have their own perspective on issues. Hugs

            Liked by 1 person

    • You are right … our government does not learn lessons, the only thing it learns from its mistakes is how to cheat better. The theory is that Trump DOES believe he will be president for live, that he can re-write the rules. This is what I find most frightening, for so far he has been able to do just that. At this point, I hope all his businesses go down the tubes. And welcome!

      Liked by 1 person

      • Here’s a question I wonder if any of you have considered over the last few days.

        Knowing Trumps nonexistent relationship with the concept of truth, and knowing the history of lies that we’ve been fed over the decades about the middle east, (wmd’s come to mind) are we really certain that this general has been killed? Is this maybe just another excuse our government is using to further involve us in the middle East, an area where we’ve had no business being to begin with?

        Where’s the body?

        Why believe Trump on this when you don’t believe him on the Wall or draining the swamp or anything else?

        What do you say?

        Liked by 1 person

        • Well, Scott, I don’t believe a word that comes out of Trump’s mouth, but Soleimani’s death has been verified by numerous sources, so yes, I firmly believe he is dead. No conspiracy theory here.

          Like

        • Hello Scott. General Qasem Soleimani was assassinated by a missile fired from a drone. There is no body to recover. However it makes no sense for the Iranians to assist the U.S. in a hoax concerning one of the most beloved people. Hugs

          Liked by 1 person

    • what do you say to this analysis?

      He has a good question some 7 or 8 minutes in about what’s the difference between taking out their top guy and drone killing some innocent civilians in the desert that NPR or bloomberg didn’t tell you about? Killing is killing and war is still war no matter how many casualties there are so what’s the difference?

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUoF760z9VE &feature=em-uploademail

      Liked by 1 person

      • Not sure of your point, as it’s hard to figure out your views, but yes war is war and killing is killing and innocent people die..always and I personally don’t think this is a good thing, but in extreme cases necessary. But I don’t think this was one of those cases.

        I also don’t get your point about NPR and Bloomberg not telling us about innocent civilians in the desert. We all know there are innocent people in the desert, which pay the price for rich men’s wars, usually over power and control and especially in this case, oil.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Hello Scott. I believe the difference is in our own presidential executive orders and international laws. While often violated the standard is you do not target or assassinate ranking members of foreign governments with out a declaration of war. Even then History has shown a restraint for hitting the leaders of countries. That is why tRump and his minions are trying so hard to brand general Qasem Soleimani as simply a terrorist. Hugs

        Liked by 1 person

            • Hello sklawlor. I think both sides are playing the same game here. Get the other side to think it is over and then strike when their guard is down. The reason I say this is in the information we have. The US had 14,000 troops in that area and just this last week we sent 10,000 more. That is a lot of military in one week. They include 3,500 paratroopers who were told to leave all electronics behind including phones, tablets, and gaming devices. The reason given was the DOD did not want any leaks as to where these people were going and what they would be doing. These troops specialty is dropping behind enemy lines to fuck up as much stuff as they can before or at the start of a war. On the Iranian side, they announced they had 13 scenarios to use. They made sure to send a very measured response as expected making sure they killed no one. They deliberately killed no one, and even bragged how measured and appropriate their response would be. Their missile technology is very good, if they had wanted to do more they could have. The other things they are really good at is patience and long term planning, oh and also cyber warfare hacking. They have lots of sleeper cells and surrogates all over the world and especially in that area that they can call on at any time. Some of these surrogates have already announced they plan to avenge the death of the Iranian General. So when everyone thinks it is over the shit will hit the fan. Things will get bad for a while. They will hit us with cyber warfare attacks and guerrilla warfare. The US will hit them with infrastructure fights and try to take out their surrogates. IMO Hugs

              Liked by 1 person

    • ‘Tis true that he could do all of the above, and likely would try. Given that Congress has been ineffective at putting the brakes on him so far, it is definitely a concern, and I’ve said for some time now that if he can, he will postpone the 2020 election. ‘Twould make things so much easier if 20 republicans would find their cojones and remove him from office!

      Liked by 2 people

  2. Gen Qasem Soleimani, Iran’s most powerful military commander (that Scottie mentioned above) is dead from the US Air Strike… I think we are about to see full scale war, and a cut off of the flow of oil out of the middle East. On top of all the other crisis points the world is facing, Trump has managed to move the doomsday clock again. If you thought the Cold War was a nail biter, the one is going to have you gnawing your knuckles.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Hello colettebytes. I share your fears, but I think full outright war is not going to happen right away, well unless tRump gets his way. I think you will see a bunch of proxie actions. Groups working for and funded by Iran and their allies attacking US people, Israel, any country seeming to agree with the US action. The US doing the same to their supporters. Notice that no country has released a statement in favor of the US action. Terrorism is going to go up. Here in the US we have not seen any foreign terrorism in years, instead it has all been domestic terrorism. We can expect that to change. Which is what the bigoted haters in the tRump administration wants, more terrorism by brown people, by Muslims.

      By the way anyone who thinks this was a sudden action is mistaken. Yes the Iranian General was taunting tRump on Instagram, but think of this. tRump pulled the US troops off the boarder with Syria and Turkey on a phone call with no problem claiming he was with drawing troops. He did not, he simply moved them to protect the Syrian oil fields possibility on Putin’s orders. But then why since May of this year did the US send over 14,000 military troops to that area? Just the other day 200 hundred paratroopers under the idea they were needed to protect the embassy? Paratroopers don’t do that, marines do. We also learned that over a hundred marines were dispatched to guard the embassy in Iraq. The numbers do not add up and the timing really is suspect. 14,000 since May, plus 200 paratroopers who’s skill is jumping out of planes behind enemy lines, hundreds of Marines to protect embassies. Sure seems like a build up to me. But with all this I think they will wait to kick it off closer to the election so tRump can claim he has to stay in office to protect the US or simply try to nullify the election if it goes against him. After all a bad war doesn’t help him, a good war in the making does. Hugs

      Liked by 3 people

    • There is no doubt that many lives, many of them innocent men, women, and children, will be lost in the coming weeks and months. Trump’s move was foolish and born of ignorance. If he isn’t removed from the presidency and soon, the U.S. will lose all the way around … we will lose our allies, the respect of any, and lives. F**k Trump … somebody needs to put him down … for good.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Is trump perfect, absolutely not, does he say and tweet stupid shit? Absolutely but the left doesn’t want to find anything good at all, except his execution which they would all stand in line to do personally if they could. Speaking of 40 years ago when they chanted “Death to America” because of the whole Shaw of Iran mess and I’m going from memory here but weren’t we the ones who overthrew the Shaw and wasn’t that under President carter who was a democrat?

      Seems a bit hypocritical that you guys are blasting a lunatic who is trying to beat lunatics at their own game and we all know that the only reason Obama withdrew troops from the region in 2012 was because it was part of his reelection strategy.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Sigh. Scott … the dynamics of the Middle East are complex … I have studied the region for years and still don’t fully understand it. Trump understands far less than I do, and yet now he has made a move that will cost tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of lives, many of them innocents. WHY? Because he has an ego that has convinced him that he is all-knowing and has the ‘best’ solutions to any problem. He has put the world at risk, just as I have long feared he would do, and this is only the beginning.

        Now exactly what, Scott, is “the left” that you keep criticizing? Define for me ‘the left’, if you will. If you mean liberals who want people taken care of, who fight for the rights of the poor and disabled, then I suppose I fall into the category, for I have always fought for humanitarian values. But, I am not a registered democrat, rather am an independent who has voted for republicans on occasion. So, I’m a bit disturbed when you demonize ‘the left’ without defining exactly what or who you mean. I know you are a good man, my friend, but I think sometimes you criticize unfairly. And no, we didn’t overthrow the Shah … the Iranians themselves did that. Hugs.

        Liked by 2 people

      • No, the US didn’t overthrow the Shah. We put him in that position, and he came and lived in the US when he left Iran. He wasn’t an effective leader and was overthrown by people stronger than he was. Please don’t say “everyone” would wait in line to execute Trump. I am one of many who don’t want anyone like him killed. I’m against that kind of violence. He’s a man with an aging brain who needs to be voted out of office. He’s a weak leader who has alienated our allies and praised our enemies. He doesn’t listen to his advisors and can’t accept criticism. Now he may be starting a war with Iran by making a wrong decision without properly consulting allies and all of the Congressmen he should have. —- Suzanne

        Liked by 2 people

    • You’d be right to have a terrible feeling about this. He has ensured that Iran will retaliate in spades, and if there isn’t a war, I will be shocked. This is one of the things I have feared about Trump’s presidency all along. People laughed at me … I think they aren’t laughing today. Sigh.

      Liked by 3 people

  3. On the basis of today he clearly is looking for a conflict. It’s the go to playbook just before an election. Pick a fight, cause a crisis and create an enemy. Here it was easy for Johnson, anyone opposing Brexit became the enemy, brexit was his war.

    To many the US is acting increasingly as a Rogue State.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Yes, it is the textbook ploy … but it sickens and disgusts me, for potentially hundreds of thousands of lives stand to be lost, most of them innocents. The U.S. … we have created chaos where once there was relative peace. We have endangered the entire globe. We are led by a madman with no moral compass, no conscience, no compassion. What could possibly go wrong, eh?

      Liked by 2 people

  4. “the Trump administration has thus far underreacted to naked Iranian aggression. Iran’s recklessly provocative actions
    have only grown bolder, and it was inevitable that the U.S. would one day have to respond in kind. Iran can continue to escalate the situation more than
    it already has, but it will do so with a new understanding that the costs for its behavior are steep. If that amounts to a check on Iranian actions, Iran
    will be deterred. And the Middle East will be safer for it.”
    https://www.commentarymagazine.com/foreign-policy/middle-east/iran/soleimani-deserved-his-fate/

    Like

      • notice how the left always says that magazines they don’t agree with are always far right publications. It’s easier to take such a simplistic viewpoint rather than to attempt to oppose such articles with actual argumentation and fact.

        Let’s all just demonize those we don’t agree with as far right or extremist. That’s so much easier.

        If this was a left leaning publication, the direction of said publication wouldn’t even be called into question.

        I am so over the hypocrisy of the left and their echo chambers at this point.

        Liked by 1 person

              • well I’m not right wing but more towards the libertarian side of things.

                I’m not going to break it down issue by issue for that would require too much typing.

                We all get emotional and our bias seems to show itself more prevalently under those conditions because emotionalism is the very opposite of logic and rationality and as I always say, the truth of an issue is neither on the left nor the right but somewhere in the middle.

                With people becoming more and more polarized and the voices of both extremes getting louder and louder so that they may feel that they are being heard, it’s no wonder that truth seems to be that much more elusive to those who wish to seek it out.

                I care not for republican or democrat, just that people be honest and from our president, to congress to the media, this very virtue is almost nonexistent.

                Liked by 1 person

                • That’s because it is not about governance anymore, but power, or the appearance of it. People desire to be in control, and if they think they have that control, even when they don’t, they want to hand onto what they think they have. But truly, most have have no control over anything. The rich are getting richer, and everyone else is getting poorer. This is good for no one. It is bound to end in tragedy.

                  Liked by 3 people

                • Hello Scott. On the idea that the truth of an issue is neither on the left nor the right but somewhere in the middle, I totally disagree. There are many issues where it is very clear there is a right and a wrong. There is the correct way and the wrong way. I do not believe in the “they are all the same” idea. There are many issues I am not in the middle on, such as child abuse, or terrorism, or even vaccinations. To me saying both sides are valid says that a person has either not looked deeply into the issue or can not careless about it. No matter the issue that is in dispute there is only two sides, you agree or disagree and you present your case as to why. To try to fudge a middle means you are not sure of your own ideas or thoughts on the subject. Hugs

                  Liked by 2 people

        • notice how the left always says that magazines they don’t agree with are always far right publications.

          I don’t know that “the left always says …”.

          In this case, it is a far right magazine.

          I don’t trust far right magazines. And I don’t trust far left magazine. In either case, there’s a strong possibility that they are presenting ideology rather than facts.

          Liked by 2 people

        • Hello Scott. Let me explain why this is so different and explosive. I have been reading up on it all day and posting it on my own blog. Lets start with understanding this guy the US government killed Qasem Soleimani was not just an Iranian General, he is described as their most beloved after the supreme ruler. He was loved and admired not just in Iran but in all Muslim countries and surrounding areas. He even helped the US in Iraq giving us very valuable targets until Bush made his stupid axis of evil comment. Yes he was a friend of the US until the US turned on his country. He was the Patton or Douglas MacArthur of their people. We just assassinated him. Think for a second if that had been Colin Powell and a country had done that, what would we have done?

          This is not about imminent attacks on US targets. If we knew of them we could have stopped or taken steps to neutralized the threat. If we knew about the attacks we could have prevented them. If we are announcing we knew about his plans for future attacks we are exposing to the Iranian government we have spy assets among them or we are outing our own intelligence methods. Plus if the plans are so dangerous that we needed to strike now as the US government claims , then who ever comes next will adapt and use them. The plans were already made, killing the architect wont change that. Nothing about this passes the smell test Scott. There is more if you dig into this which I assure you I have spend most of today doing. It really is not what the tRump administration is trying to sell. Hugs

          Liked by 3 people

    • Hello Scott. You mention Iran’s aggression. Again lets look at it with out U.S. arrogance. The U.S. has long held that other countries out side of our hemisphere can not interfere in what we want to accomplish. We think of this as our areas of influence, our area to control. Well Iran is a large and well developed country ( who with out US sanctions would be very wealthy also ) who feels the same way in their sphere of influence, their area. They see the U.S. as interfering in something we don’t have rights to do. Iran sees the U.S. as an aggressive power trying to force our views on an area of the world that doesn’t want it. For far too long the U.S. has felt and pushed the idea we can do what ever we want in the world and everyone has to accept it. Well the rest of the world is really tired of that attitude as you can imagine. Be well. Hugs

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Thank you Jill for the pingback! He couldn’t possibly stay in the Iran Nuclear deal. Why? The black guy did it! It’s so simplistic, but you and I both know it’s true. His jealousy towards Obama is so pathetic, and unfortunately, dangerous. The deal was working. They were in compliance. Didn’t matter to him. And now? What a mess….

    Liked by 3 people

    • My pleasure! I couldn’t very well re-blog yours on top of this one, so I decided to just combine them! Yep, his sole reasoning in ditching the Iran nuclear agreement was because it had Obama’s name on it. It is simplistic and juvenile, at best. And now today, we see where he has led us in regards to Iran … likely into a war. A mess, indeed.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Hello Jill. Please do not forget he kept bragging he could get a better deal. Obama was weak, but the tRump Dear Leader could have a spanking new deal the Iranians would beg for, where they would worship tRump and send tribute to the amazing orange one. Win win, right? Except for those poor kids who will have to die for this stunt, but they were only poor kids anyway. Hugs

        Liked by 1 person

        • Yeah, and yet … he didn’t even make any effort to “get a better deal” … same as with ACA (Obamacare) … he wanted to get rid of it because it was associated with Obama, and he promised a “much better” plan, yet he never bothered to try to make that “much better” plan. Sigh. He’s a #$%&-ing idiot!

          Liked by 1 person

      • Whereas I will not be upset by the death of another Middle East player with blood on his hands nor would I be shocked that someone shot a missile at someone else. The fact is Trump again has played The Stupid Card and turned Qasem Soleimani into ‘a noble martyr’ and not someone who is complicit in the deaths and misery of thousands.

        Liked by 1 person

  6. Jill, pulling out of the Iran deal was counter to what Sec. of Defense James Mattis and the six co-signers of the deal recommended. No deal is perfect. This one was not. But, it created avenues of dialogue and commerce. And, with a median age of 35, it could have changed the paradigm in the future with Iran,

    None of that matters. The president knows better – he is a legend in his own mind. It will make him look tough. I call that false bravado. Now, we have a mess.

    In fairness to Trump, the US has tended to misunderstand the middle east. This agreement helped, though, because dealing with a country is better than fighting with one. Keith

    Liked by 3 people

    • You are quite right when you say that no deal is perfect, but the Iran nuclear deal was working … they had passed inspection numerous times, and Trump had absolutely no legitimate reason for pulling out … his only motivation was to undo what President Obama had done. Indeed we are in a mess, as there WILL be retaliation for the killing of Qasem Soleimani. Trump has no idea what he is doing. Sigh.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. Hello Jill. I keep trying to point out something you mentioned but tRump and mainstream media over look and that is the militia that is blamed for the death of the US contractor is controlled by Iraq. It is in their laws that they control the militias. Yes Iraq and a lot of their people have come under the influence of Iran due to the US actions, but it was an Iraqi militia not an Iranian one. tRump and the US are trying to put the entire blame on Iran. Why? The Iraqis are the ones who stormed the US embassy as you mention, but again tRump blames Iran. Why. This is like if people in the US blockaded or protested an embassy in a US state and that country blamed Canada for it. Now as you say the Iraqi government backed by the anger of the Iraqi people want the US out. Actually they have for several years now, but the US has basically refused to leave. It is all done with nice diplomatic words and aid packages and such, but the truth is the US refuses to leave and Iraq can not force us to do so. Instead of liberating the country we are trying to occupy it, and this time the reason is clear, the US oil companies interests in the oil there. This all stems from two things, tRump hatred and desire to destroy anything Obama gets credit for, and the over whelming desire of far right conservatives to over throw the government of Iran. tRump’s people convinced him wrongly that Iran would fold right away if he put sanctions on them. History shows that was never going to happen. The tighter they make the sanctions, the more they hurt the people, the more power and authority the hardliners in the government get. The moderates were starting to make big changes in Iran, but that is all undone now. Iran is an Islamic religious dictatorship masquerading as a democracy. As long as religion is in charge you can not change the government through threats of economic hardship. To do what the far right wants, an over throw of the government, it would take a full out military assault, which would be a losing war and a horrible dragged out affair for the US. As tRump can not admit a mistake, as the far right hates Islam, this will only get worse until another person becomes president. I Hope Iran doesn’t get so sick of this crap it is taking that it provokes tRump into another military strike, but I wouldn’t blame them. They are the ones being bullied. Hugs

    Liked by 3 people

    • Your assessment is very astute, Scottie … in fact, more enlightening than many of the news articles I have read, and I agree, finding very little that I would argue with. I might only add that Trump’s sanctions against Iran hurt only the people, the average Joe … or Mohammed … who is only trying, like most of us, to keep the home fires burning and put food on the table for his family. He may anger the leadership with his sanctions, but they will still eat well tonight, whereas thousands of people are going to bed hungry in Iran, thanks to the Oaf in the Oval.

      That said … as I mentioned, the danger that is Trump is in his ignorance, his lack of understanding the politics of the region, his lack of compassion for humanity. I wish I could say that I see a good outcome here, but … I’m struggling to find one. Hugs!

      Liked by 1 person

      • Hello Jill, I got up at 3 AM to the news the US killed a top Iranian General , who is described as beloved. We attacked another Iraqi military base. No way Iran can let that pass. Would we if they killed a top US general? This is the escalation we all feared. Iran has no choice but respond, then tRump will also respond, and there we go, a new war front to play with our new weapons and an excuse to buy more so the defense industry can rake in even more profits. Well the forever wars were winding down so we needed to start a new one. Hey they just increased the defense budget something like 150 billion. The last three years of massive build up in military spending seem to imply they were planning to use the military as soon as they had an excuse. Hugs

        Liked by 2 people

        • I got the breaking news as I was working on my a.m. post, and almost immediately on the heels of the news, got a text from my young Iraqi friend saying that (in his view) Trump had finally done something right. I was horrified! Yes, we all feared this, and now … there will be more innocent lives lost. All because people in this country are too ignorant to see what a jerk they have sent to the Oval Office. I hope they are all happy when they are paying $6 for a gallon of gas. Sigh. What a mess we’ve made of it, my friend. Hugs!

          Liked by 1 person

  8. The World’s #1 Bully (See, I can give Trump credit when it is due!) is also the World’s #1 Wimp. Yes, he is capable of starting a war, but he is not capable of winning it. Were anyone to drop a bomb on the White House, he would just disappear from view, lol.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Quite so … starting a war is easy, winning it – not so much. However, he wouldn’t care if he won it or not, for it would likely be like the Vietnam War … drag on forever and he would be long gone by the time it was finished. If, that is, nukes didn’t come into play and obliterate half the life on this planet. But, what he would never do would be allow himself to be seen as weak, as backing down, as losing face. That is what is frightening, that his ego is such that life on earth means less than feeding his ego. The definition of a megalomaniac.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s