One Missile Strike Versus Many—176 to 1

I Don’t Crave War

I wrote most of this blog post on Wednesday, however, I held up posting it until now to avoid making a knee-jerk defense of President Trump’s approval of launching a missile at Iran.

 

Unlike many political analysts and pundits, I am, nor ever have been, bias.  My sole ambition for posting and writing a political journal is to provide, to the best of my ability, enlightenment and wisdom to the citizens of our Republic, and to be a voice of defense and support for our country.

 

The displeasure and strong conflict some have with President Trump’s ordered missile strike that killed Iranian Commander Qassem Soleimani is a legitimate concern that should weigh evenly on the minds of all US citizens.

 

Beyond this, any confusion is understandable, even as it is equally plausible.

 

Since his campaign, and into his White House occupancy, President Trump has railed against Iran, citing the previous president’s weakness toward a country that outmaneuvered our statesmen nearly at every turn, sometimes appearing as a choreographed political dance staged by our very own country’s elected officials.

 

The ongoing political tango between the US and Iran flew in the face of our country’s military leaders, many who have no love for a country that spews so much anti-US hate and explosiveness.

 

In fact, during the Iraq-Iran War, the US not only furnished arms and logistics to Ba’athist Iraq in their war against Iran, after declassified CIA reports estimated Iran suffered more than 50,000 casualties from Iraq’s use of several chemical weapons, the US remained silent.

 

The deep hatred felt by previous administrations has continued throughout the years following the Iraq-Iran War, and is reinforced in the hearts of many US citizens, who have witnessed with their own eyes the burning US flags amidst the “Death to America!” chants emanating from innumerous Iranian mobs through the years.

 

In the grand scheme of things I don’t crave war.  I think my sentiments are repeated in the minds of other supporters of the president.

 

Likewise, President Trump is not a supporter of war; he’s never been referred to by anyone as a warmonger.  Given President Trump’s strong antiwar stance throughout his short political career, I don’t, for one second, believe the military strike was to simply distract the attention of the American public from the impeachment hearings taking place in DC.  Giving the dangerous elements and possible consequences of the military strike, as well as given the certainty that the US Senate will favor his position against all accusations contained within the articles of impeachment, it would not be a good, nor necessary, move.

 

What was the president thinking?

 

The question most often posed by many in the subsequent days after the US military strike is: “What is the president’s objective in approving the missile strike?”

 

This is a question that can only answered by the president’s war council, and I don’t foresee any leaks coming from them, any time soon.

 

Out of the blue, Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, announced that intelligence agencies had identified an undefined Iranian threat.

 

It was the announcement of Pompeo and the president regarding an imminent Iranian danger that caused me to stop and rethink my support or defense of the president’s reasoning.

 

Is there reason to believe that the intelligence agencies, who had operated so poorly in their reporting prior to the Iraq invasion, are now to be trusted?

 

The answer is yes.

 

I have always maintained that it was not the intelligence agencies that got the Iraq situation wrong.  While they may have not been as accurate as they should have been, it was President Bush who slanted and distorted the information that deceived the American people.

 

Iranian anti-US rhetoric and hostile behavior has precedence.

 

The 1979 Iran hostage crisis—a political impasse between the US and Ira, severely obstructed the lives of 52 American diplomats and citizens—lasted for 444 days from November 4, 1979, to January 20, 1981.

 

I completely believe that Iran is not above conducting such an unforgiveable act today.

 

Suffice to say, strength, in the form of President Reagan, put an end to the hostage situation in 1979.

 

Some things never change.  It is strength and force that Iran understands and respects today.

The Soleimani missile strike displayed US strength and force, loud and clear.

 

176 More Victims of Iranian Hatred and Incompetence

 

After repeated denials, Iran admitted to downing the Ukrainian plane.  They conveniently claim that it was a terrible mistake.

 

Pardon me, if I don’t buy their lies.

 

Whether it was hatred or incompetence that cost 176 innocent people to be murdered by a murderous regime that has murdered millions, I care not.

 

The 176 victims—a drop in the bucket to the countless massacred by Iran—their loved ones, or the world, should care not either.

 

In the back of our minds should be the chilling vision of an Iranian country—on the verge of attaining nuclear weaponry status—saturated with a deep-seated hatred aimed directly at us, and all we stand for.

 

War with Iran is detestable.  An Iranian Government having possession of nuclear weapons, and serviceable launch capability, is far more abhorrent.

 

No rational mind will dispute the fact that Soleimani was a terrorist in military uniform.

 

Likewise, no rational mind wants a war.

 

But if strength and force are all Iran understands, we better not wait until they have a bigger button to push, and a deadlier missile to fire, before we take action.

 

Photos: Adam Birkett, Maciej Ruminkiewicz, Science in HD

http://baltazarbolado.com

 

On twitter: https://twitter.com/baltazar_bolado

 

Author of: http://baltazarbolado.com/book/publius-liberatas-aut-mors/

http://baltazarbolado.com/book/paint-black/

 

Next post: