Another Big Lie About Israel Just Spread Like Wildfire
NRA Scores Big Win at the Supreme Court
EXCLUSIVE OFFER: 60% Off VIP Membership. Today Only!
Jill Biden Did Not Just Say That About Donald Trump
New Video of Scottie Scheffler's Arrest Makes the Louisville Police Look Ridiculous
CNN Admits Something We've All Known About the Trump Hush Money Trial
This Is the 'Ultimate Nightmare Scenario' in Taiwan
Racist Joe Biden and the Black Vote
Here's What McDonald's President Had to Say to US Consumers in 'Rare' Open...
'Based': Fetterman Praised for What He Did During Yeshiva University's Commencement
North Korea Sends Balloons With 'Gifts of Sincerity' Across Border. There Was a...
Dem Lawmaker Proposes 'Solution' if Alito, Thomas Won't Voluntarily Recuse Themselves
Timing of Democrats Calling for Minnesota State Senator to Resign Is Suspicious
Democrat Mayor Says Her City's Gang Registry Should Be Abolished
End Biden's Disastrous Floating 'Humanitarian Pier' Experiment Off Gaza's Coast. Now.
Tipsheet

Analysis: Soleimani's Killing Was Justified, and Too Much of the Reaction Is Fixated on Trump

AP Photo/Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader, File

When the news broke last night that Iranian general and top terrorist mastermind Qassem Soleimani had been killed in a US strike, my initial reactions -- beyond waiting for confirmation -- were satisfaction and trepidation.  Satisfaction, because an evil man who was responsible for many thousands of deaths (including those of at least 600 American soldiers) has been erased from the planet.  Iran is the top state sponsor of terrorism, and Soleimani was their most senior terror exporter.  His despicable crimes have been punished and the patriots whose lives he stole have been avenged.  This is justice.  Trepidation, because Soleimani was a towering figure within Iran and among its proxies, and his death will elicit an angry, unpredictable, and perhaps desperate response.  They want revenge.

Advertisement

His killing is unlike the elimination of a non-state terrorist organization's leader, a reality that has both positive and negative implications.  On the upside of the ledger, his decapitation represents a very serious blow to Iran's malevolent regional and global designs, as Soleimani will not be replaced easily.  He was seen as an indispensable figure within the regime's power structure.  On the downside, Iran's capacity to strike back in various capacities will likely be greater and more sophisticated than the ad hoc retaliations of a terrorist group.  It's rational to fear where a series of escalations could lead, even if one approves of the righteous decision (preceded by lots of recent context and previous escalations) to take Soleimani out.  The strike that targeted him was not, it must be said, an "assassination," as many on the Left are framing it:

Advertisement


I am also struggling to swallow hand-wringing like this from members of the Obama foreign policy team:


This is the same Ben Rhodes who boasted of his "echo chamber" machinations to mislead Americans on Iran policy, and who pushed a fatally flawed nuclear deal with Tehran that was publicly opposed by a strong bipartisan majority of Congress.  The previous administration did not care one bit about Congressional assertions of power or unity/clarity on Iran; it imposed its unpopular accord unilaterally, bypassing the legislature.  It is fair, however, to ask tough and serious questions about what comes next -- and US preparedness for the uncertain yet inevitable blowback.  Many are pointing to a flashback clip in which candidate Trump's ignorance on Soleimani and the group he led was laid bare.  Fine, but he's Commander in Chief now, surrounded by top military and foreign policy experts.  And he'd reportedly resisted substantial reprisals against Iranian aggression for years.  The latest attacks against US personnel inside Iraq, including an Iran-backed siege of our embassy, changed the calculus.

Advertisement

Perusing many of the early American social media reactions to Soleimani's death was a dispiriting experience because a large percentage of the 'takes' fixated on Trump, one way or another.  Some pro-Trump partisans made it largely about the president's toughness and courage compared to his predecessor.  Political points.  Some anti-Trump partisans have tried to spin the justified killing of a top terrorist and slaughterer of Americans into a reckless act that will bring about World War III.  Yes, the American leader's decisive role in this strike is undeniable and crucial.  And yes, there are legitimate concerns about what the complex aftermath will look like.  But some events are larger and more significant than our endless, petty domestic partisan feuds.  This is one of them.  I'll leave you with this:

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement