“Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, austere religious scholar at helm of Islamic State, dies at 48,” is how the Washington Post infamously summed up the killing of the head of ISIS.
If Baghdadi was “austere”, the word-of-the-day for Qasem Soleimani was “revered”.
“Airstrike at Baghdad airport kills Iran’s most revered military leader,” the Washington Post headlined the execution of Baghdadi’s Shiite opposite number.
CNN and CBS joined Al Jazeera in describing Soleimani as “revered”.
Soleimani was not especially revered in Iran whose cities throb with protests against the theocracy of terror. The ordinary Iranian has the same view of Soleimani as the ordinary Russian did of Beria.
It’s not in Tehran, but in the Iowa caucuses where the terror mastermind is truly revered.
Senator Elizabeth Warren had tweeted a criticism of President Trump’s decision while acknowledging, “Soleimani was a murderer, responsible for the deaths of thousands, including hundreds of Americans.”
Soon, Warren had come under attack for calling the mass murderer a “murderer”.
And so she changed her tune, and criticized President Trump for having carried out a “targeted attack on a government official, a high-ranking official for the government of Iran.”
There are plenty of Iranians with the courage to speak out against Soleimani, despite the threat of death or imprisonment, but very few Democrats have the courage to even call him a “murderer”.
More Iranians than Democrats cheered the death of Soleimani and celebrated President Trump.
Why did Soleimani believe that he could coordinate an attack on the American embassy in Baghdad, and fly in to meet with the terror leader behind the attack, without having to worry about the United States?
An annex of the Iran Deal had assured the Islamic terror state that sanctions would eventually be lifted on the terror boss.
“Gen. Qassem Soleimani taken off sanctions list,” the terror state’s Fars News Agency had crowed.
Israel had reportedly wanted to take out Soleimani, but was warned not to act by the Obama administration.
In 2020, Soleimani was still behaving as if nothing had changed. He assumed that the same protection extended by the former tenant of the White House still immunized him. That was his mistake.
In 2018, Israel reportedly got the green light to take out Soleimani. It is likely that Soleimani became a lot more careful when visiting Syria. But there was no way that the Israelis would get to him in Baghdad. And he assumed that the United States might authorize taking him out, but wouldn’t do it themselves.
He was wrong.
After his role in the murder of countless Americans, he had only one thing keeping a drone away. And that was the Democrats and their media who had protected the “revered” terrorist from justice.
Even after death, the Democrats have gone on fighting for Soleimani.
“The Administration has conducted tonight’s strikes in Iraq targeting high-level Iranian military officials and killing Iranian Quds Force Commander Qasem Soleimani without an Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) against Iran. Further, this action was taken without the consultation of the Congress,” House Speaker Pelosi complained.
There was no mention in her press release of the American lives taken by Soleimani.
The Democrats are hiding behind procedures, demanding notifications and votes on another AUMF. As if Congress needs to vote before the military gets authorization to take out the two masterminds of an attack on our embassy. The authorization it didn’t get when our consulate in Benghazi was under fire.
The AUMF provides for the use of force in Iraq against terrorists. Soleimani was (WAS) a terrorist by any definition of the word.
That’s funny. I would think the President would be the second most powerful person in Iran. Does truth not have even a secluded corner in the liberal mind?
Democrats love to make much of how Trump has somehow damaged trust in the US by tearing up a terrible deal that got no Congressional approval, was riddled with secret, terrible clauses and which even the Iranians never signed. However, when we got a renown supporter of international terrorism to pay his penalties, renounce terrorism, get rid of his WMD’s and provide intelligence on terrorist activities, the f**king Democrats had him murdered just so corrupt liars like Hillary could cash in on the chaos. Now, who would trust us after THAT?
Now, defending terrorists might impress terrorist countries but one wonders what our allies think. No doubt China, Russia, Iran and N. Korea think it’s worthwhile to wait and see if they get more naïve, incompetent, anti-American leadership as they all enjoyed in 2009 through 2016 and this makes progress with them difficult, if not impossible. Ginning up fears of a Third World War hurts the stock market. Democrats are doing what they can to damage Trump’s accomplishment, but the cost of that is showing they always and reliably side with our enemies against what is best for the American people.
@Deplorable Me: We need to wait for congress to approve like the rapid articles of impeachment to the senate when they said it was for national security.
@kitt: Yeah, well, once again we see how high a priority they put on national security.