Update no.939

Update from the Sunland

No.939

6.1.20 – 12.1.20

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

            To all,

            After authorizing the drone missile strike on Suleimani, killing him and four others [938], the BIC just could not leave well enough alone.  He tweeted the following day:

Iran is talking very boldly about targeting certain USA assets as revenge for our ridding the world of their terrorist leader who had just killed an American, & badly wounded many others, not to mention all of the people he had killed over his lifetime, including recently....

2:52 PM - 4 Jan 2020

 . . . deuxième partie . . . 

....hundreds of Iranian protesters. He was already attacking our Embassy, and preparing for additional hits in other locations. Iran has been nothing but problems for many years. Let this serve as a WARNING that if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets, we have.....

2:52 PM - 4 Jan 2020

 . . . troisième partie . . . 

....targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!

2:52 PM - 4 Jan 2020

I am not and have not been a fan of Twitter as a means of diplomacy.  As the reader recognizes, I have been an outspoken critic of the BIC for his blatant and inappropriate use of the medium in serious situations.  In this instance, I was with the president until the third part.  Further, even the third part was still above the acceptable threshold until the BIC’s “Iranian culture” reference.  What is worse, he used various public statements to double down on his statement.  Cultural sites are the domain of the Iranian people and in many respects world history.  This is another graphic example of how the BIC squanders whatever support he garners from independents like me and manages to take it to the gutter.  This man simply has no class whatsoever.  Taken on the whole, the BIC is a sorry man to represent We, the People.  I hope and pray saner, more rational minds can dissuade and prevent him from doing something so stupid, foolish and criminal.

            More than a few of the BIC’s loyal supporters have chastised me repeatedly over the last three years to not “pay attention to what he says.  Look at what he does.”  If it was only one person saying this, it might be understandable. However, it is not!  We hear politicians and sycophant talking heads say precisely the same thing.  So, even the BIC’s loyalists want the rest of us to not listen to him, not pay attention to what he says and writes.  Then, in moments like the Suleimani assassination [938], they all want us to believe what he tells us simply because he told us.  We are supposed to accept his explanation just because he said it.  Does anyone else see the extraordinary dichotomy, if not outright hypocrisy, in this reasoning?

            Wednesday was a very busy day.

            Between 01:45 and 02:15 Iraq local time [C], the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) fired 17 Qiam-1 ballistic missiles toward Ayn al-Asad airbase, An Bar, Iraq, and five Fateh-313 short-range missiles at Erbil, Iraq.  The IRGC immediately claimed responsibility and the end of their retributive actions for the Suleimani assassination [938]. Of particular note, the Iranians reportedly notified the Iraqis prior to the attack, fully expecting, if not directing, the Iraqis to alert the Americans in country of the pending attack.  Four of the missiles failed to reach their targets.  Of those that did reach their intended targets, none of them injured anyone, and they did minimal damage.  Given the precision of the IRGC missile attack on the Saudi oil fields [14.9.2019], I doubt the supposition that 22 missiles missed.  In fact, quite the contrary, the available evidence tells me the Iranians sought a public demonstration without injury or significant damage . . . to avoid escalation.

            Then, just three hours later, Ukrainian International Airlines Flight 752 (PS752), suffered an in-flight fire and break-up, two minutes after takeoff from Tehran International Airport [06:12:47 Iran local time [C + ½]].  The final ADS-B transmission occurred at 06:14:45 Iran local time [02:14 [Z]; 22:14 [R] EST, 7.1.2020], less than two minutes after departure, climbing at 275 knots and nearly 8,000 feet ASL (roughly 4,000 feet above ground level).  The external information does not look good, but we need to see the aircraft data, e.g., FDR/CVR data, fuselage skin damage, et al.  The size of the debris field suggests an in-flight breakup.  Unvalidated video from various external sources appears to show a missile impact, serious in-flight fire, and ground impact.  Since the crash, the IRI confessed in part to mistakenly shooting down the aircraft.  They appear to have used a Russian-made SA-15 surface-to-air missile system for the engagement.  If true, it does not speak well of the IRGC command & control process.  The IRI admission sparked public protests against the government.

            The following day, Thursday, the 9^th, the House of Representatives passed Concurrent Resolution 83 [H.Con.Res.83 - Directing the President pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution to terminate the use of United States Armed Forces to engage in hostilities in or against Iran] with three Republicans and eight Democrats crossing party lines [House: 224-194-0-13(4)].  It is not yet known whether the Senate Majority Leader will even allow debate or a vote on the resolution.  Nonetheless, the House has gone on the record.  Congress passed the War Powers Act of 1973 (AKA War Powers Resolution) [PL 93-148; 87 Stat. 555; 50 U.S.C 1541] [344] over President Nixon’s veto on 7.11.1973.  The House invoked 87 Stat. 555 §5(c), which states: “at any time that United States Armed Forces are engaged in hostilities outside the territory of the United States, its possessions and territories without a declaration of war or specific statutory authorization, such forces shall be removed by the President if the Congress so directs by concurrent resolution.”  What is implied in the resolution is the existing Authorizations of the Use of Military Force (AUMF) do not apply to military action against the IRI, and if the president seeks military action, he should seek a declaration of war or a specific AUMF for the IRI.  Of course, the BIC declares this nonsense action in the House does not apply to him, since he alone is omnipotent and without constraint; he can do whatever he wants.  We shall see if the Senate Majority Leader agrees with the BIC.

            Comments and contributions from Update no.938:

Comment to the Blog:

“Anyone in the spy community would see Suleimani as a worthy target even though that's a war crime.  I won't argue that.  Due process is utterly irrelevant in this context. The central issues are methodology and the motivation that drives it.  Any given spy agency could find a way to take Suleimani out that would leave plenty of doubt about whether he'd died by violence and/or who'd done it.  Those plans would not have served the Chump's motivation to distract from his impeachment.  This does.  On top of that, I've already encountered a troll comment that the Chump couldn't be impeached in wartime. I suspect a swift removal possibly might prevent a war.  Even if not, the Constitution is silent on that one.  Also, the Chump probably doesn't realize that Iran has a far stronger military than Vietnam or the other postwar targets.

“Maybe it's time to let go of our feelings about 9-11.

“Meanwhile back at the ranch, Democratic Presidential candidate Andrew Yang has been denied a place on the Ohio primary ballot due to poor paperwork.  (No other candidate has had this issue.)  I wasn't voting for high net worth individuals anyhow, but I think people in the IT industry ought to be able to handle formats.  I was a Secretarial Science major back in the day, so maybe that influences my opinion.”

My response to the Blog:

            Suleimani . . . war crime . . . I’m a long way from that point.  Yes, I am seriously conflicted.  However, on the BIC’s side of the ledger, Suleimani has fomented violence against the U.S., our allies, and anyone the IRI saw as an obstacle to their hegemonic vision for decades.  He has operated with impunity . . . until now.  One side of my thinking knows the choice of action and method were intended to send a clear message—a message long overdue, I must say.  However, as I stated in Update no.938, the timing is just too damn coincidental, and the BIC is too bloody untrustworthy for my comfort.  Worse, his rationale is “trust me” and that makes my suspicions worse.  Yeah, I fear that is or at least may be the BIC’s motivation—a war is needed to assure his re-election.  We cannot trust this president.  Slick Willy did the same, i.e., lobbed cruise missiles around the countryside when he was in political trouble.

            My counsel to the BIC is exactly the same as my counsel was with Bush 43.  If you are going to take us to war, you had damn well better mobilize the nation for war, not try to fight a war on the cheap like Bush 43 did.  I blame Bush 43 (and Rumsfeld) directly for the mess in the Levant and in the larger Middle East; he failed to mobilize properly to win the peace; now we have ISIL.

            I have not let go of Pearl Harbor.  I can hardly let go of 9/11.

            I had not heard that news about Yang & the Ohio primary.  I have not heard from Yang on this matter.  Not in the running for Ohio is quite likely and eliminating reality.  Is there no recovery?

 . . . Round two:

“The ‘war crime’ statement wasn't my opinion.  I believe it came from a United Nations source.  Nevertheless, I wouldn't argue about the action of taking Suleimani out.  I doubt that's unusual.  The brazen "look at me" approach is the issue.  We agree on the Chump's reason for that approach, but he treats the rest of the world as if international law doesn't apply to him.  He's very direct about that in a military setting.  That cannot end well.

“I agree that Clinton, Obama and Bush 43 did a poor job of making peace.  That goes back to before 9-11.  Indeed, Reagan's election was influenced by the Iran-Contra affair, another type of military maneuver for domestic political purposes.  You may hold onto old pain as long as it benefits you, but it makes you a lesser person.  Also, I'll note that it's not just the Chump who waves the bloody shirt.  The technique got its name after the Civil War and is often used to control the fearful.

“Andrew Yang is attempting to start a write-in campaign here in Ohio, and for all I know there may be a way to appeal his ballot placement.  He claims to have triple the necessary number of signatures.  I just want Mr. Yang and the other very wealthy candidates to go away.”

. . . my response to round two:

            I’m not sure why a UN source is more reliable; but hey, that’s just a “no never mind” assertion.  Well, the Suleimani action is different for two primary reasons: 1.) we are not in a properly declared war with the IRI.  Further, I do believe the existing AUMF laws do not apply to the IRI.  2.) Suleimani was a uniformed, high-level member of the IRI government (a sovereign nation).  [Other targets of drone strikes were stateless individuals operating with terrorist intent.]  The BIC’s action to assassinate Suleimani is dreadfully close to the line of criminal conduct for the two reasons noted above.  In essence, the BIC acted as prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner without due process of law.

            We also bear witness to the first action by Congress to reign in the president’s authority with the passage of the H.Con.Res 83 by the House.  I was not a fan or supporter of the War Powers Act of 1973 [PL 93-148; 87 Stat. 555] because I thought it would unnecessarily hobble future presidents, but I understand two consecutive presidents had abused the trust placed in them [I could argue for a third, but I do believe JFK was already questioning the basis for Vietnam support when he was assassinated].  The BIC has sacrificed whatever credibility and trustworthiness that he held at inauguration, and, we are left with the reality that we cannot trust a single thing he says, and thus does.  I am grateful Suleimani is gone, but I truly regret the lack of respect for the law.

            One last related comment on this topic, the BIC’s action with respect to Navy SEAL Chief Petty Officer Edward R. Gallagher, USN, is yet another example of the BIC’s disrespect for the law.  The BIC erroneously interprets the trust placed in the Office of the President as his personal anointment as a monarch or dictator—an omnipotent position.

            Whoa dawgy!  I do believe you misspoke.  The Iran-Contra Affair was initiated and carried out well after Reagan became POTUS.  I think you may have intended to cite the Iranian Hostage Crisis as justification for his election.  If so, I would agree in part.  However, Carter’s performance was a big contributor from my perspective; there were many reasons to be dissatisfied.

            Perhaps remembering the past does make me a lessor person.  I do not believe so.  But hey, I respect your opinion.

            Out of curiosity, since I do not have ready access to Ohio state news, what was the reason the state disqualified Yang for the primary ballot?

 . . . Round three:

“A UN source stating the assassination was a war crime is a bit more credible than the source of the crime stating that it was not.  My point in that part, as stated, was not to argue the morality/ethics of killing the general but to address the methodology.  Such an act would typically be done covertly.  Perhaps the homicide wouldn't be detectable as such.  Certainly, the agency behind it would remain undetected if possible.  Spies do that for practical reasons. However, this assassination's purpose was not to serve the USA's national interest.  It was to serve Chump's ego and distract from the impeachment.  Hence, explosions, worldwide reporting, huge amounts of noise.

“The Chump's glorification of CPO Gallagher merely demonstrates the Chump's sickness.

“Note from Wikipedia on the timing of Iran-Contra:

However, as documented by a congressional investigation, the first Reagan-sponsored secret arms sales to Iran began in 1981 before any of the American hostages had been taken in Lebanon. This fact ruled out the "arms for hostages" explanation by which the Reagan administration sought to excuse its behavior.

“However, I'll note that factors beyond the evening news played into Carter's loss in 1980.  I'll study that one another time and bring it up when appropriate.

“I have not yet found out the specific clerical errors on Mr. Yang's petitions.  I suspect it has something to do with that being a three-part document that failed to receive some very specific handling, but I don't know that.

“Remembering the past is not the same as carrying and acting on hurt feelings of long ago.  The defense industrial complex wants to act on those feelings (for a nice profit).”

 . . . my response to round three:

            I agree with your assessment of the Suleimani assassination.

            I suppose your statement depends upon the definition of sickness.  Taking the more expansive perspective to include mental and emotional aberrations, I would agree.  Nonetheless, I lump his conduct under the broader disrespect for the law, i.e., the law does not apply to him, because as the monarch for life, by sovereign immunity, he can do no wrong.

            There is much to study in the Carter administration.

            If you ever do find the reason for Yang’s exclusion, please do let me know.  If I was prone to conspiracy theories, I might think it is more Republican vote tampering and voter suppression, but like the BIC persistently says after he’s made his accusations, “But, I won’t say that.”

            The last one point is not a productive line of debate.  ‘Nuf said.

Another contribution:

“Murder?  What about our Americans SOL just recently murdered and many more not so recently ?  Were we to wait for a court of law to try SOL (like that would happen) for those murders while he continued to go on his killing rampage ? I realize you have agreed the assassination needed to be done  .... I say EVEN if the bogus impeachment proceedings are happening.. those bogus proceedings are too constrictive on our President, which obviously are the intentions of the Democrats to attempt to keep our President from doing his work.  The Dems need to shut up and start doing something productive for a change.

“Will have to say it was good to see you actually use the word PRESIDENT rather than BIC in your beginning comments.  Am sure it was difficult for you 😁 Now if we can just get you off the “Liar, Liar” soapbox .. please list me 5 things the President has lied about? You are always talking about FACT .. give me five FACTS proving he has lied ? I anxiously await your factual instances ... Don’t reply with the typical left response of “ oh there’s too many to cite “. If there are SO many lies please name me just FIVE .

“I see you published to your blog world that you are “truly sorry you have lost me as a friend, but the choice was not (yours)”.  I have not written you and Jeanne off, I just find it hard being around you knowing the hate you have for the President .. I certainly have not written Jeanne off at all .. so if she has defriended me that is HER decision not mine. she just echoes whatever you believe but at least she never blogs or even talk to me about it .. but your gullibility and belief in all the wrong people and in the terrible media funded by crooked sources just saddens me. I just do not fall for it .. I don’t immediately believe everything presented by the CNNs or the Comeys of our country... there is little fact in anything they present. You speak of ulterior motives .. well they have them and it’s not to benefit our country.  And now today Schiff wants to investigate the SOL assassination ... why don’t they investigate the murders SOL committed against OUR people ?  How can ANYONE support a Democrat??? They are USELESS !!!“

My reply:

            Was there something confusing or ambiguous in my words in Update no.938?  Perhaps you should read my words again.  I did not accuse the BIC of murder; I said some will argue that point.  I think I laid out the concerns about the BIC’s decision and choice of methods.  There are aspects of this event that bother me, but I also explicitly stated that there are laudable elements as well.  The Suleimani action has been long overdue.  But, I do not gain a lot of comfort in coincidental anomalies.

            You have more than a few times to ask me to list stuff, and you have yet to rebut any of my factual offerings.  I am beginning to feel that you are asking me to “list” things as a make-work exercise.  I have enough writing projects to occupy my time.  However, I continue to devote time to the Update forum because I think the potential of these exchanges are important.  So, rather than five, I will offer one (for now) using last week’s Update alone.  The BIC stated, “Iran never won a war,”  The statement is devoid of any understanding of history, and is outright false.  It is intended to mislead readers and demean a sovereign nation.  His penchant for false statements goes back long before he was duly elected to be our chief employee.  I can only conclude that is just who he is.

            You have apparently bought and ingested the BIC’s vaunted snake-oil and truly believe you are cured.  I am simply standing in the audience and stating, “The emperor has no clothes.”  I do not question your choice and belief that he is dressed in ermine and satin with a glorious crown.

            You continue to persist in your accusations that I “hate . . . the President.”  That is also a patently false statement and an inappropriate accusation, quite akin to the BIC’s penchant for falsehood.  Allow me to emphatically state for the public record, I do NOT hate the president.  The man who currently holds the office has far too many unadmirable traits that I have tried to illuminate since long before he was duly elected; I have seen his kind too many times in my life, and I have born witness to the destruction those traits wrought on those around him.  I see much to condemn in his conduct as our chief employee, but I do NOT hate him.  He is who he is; and when he publicly says the things he does, he sacrifices whatever credibility he had (which is not much).  I tried to give him credit for the Suleimani action, but we cannot and should not ignore the potential negative aspects.

            Out of curiosity, do you include FoxNews, Judicial Watch, Rush Limbaugh, Alex Jones, Tom Filton, et al, in your “terrible media funded by crooked sources” in your condemnation?  Or, are they the only sainted and pure ones among the media?

            My apologies: I do not know what you mean by “SOL”?

[NOTE: No response received as of 12.January.2020.]

            My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)