See, that's the thing with laws:
They need to be interpreted.


And for a very long time, what the public thinks the laws say and how politicians and administrations actually interpreted them started to drift apart...

Bit harsh, he knows them very well. He loves "I got you, Babe".

Skripal, Litvinenko and...and cases don't seem to have caused much outrage. I do wonder though, does Putin actually have to sign for this shit? Trumpolino is not alone in this global mess, not excusable but somehow people seem to overlook other nefarious characters.

Your theory is that the people who planned the killing knew when he would be in Baghdad, how he would travel from the airport and at what time but did not know why he was there? Seems unlikely.

State-sanctioned assassinations are not new for the US, but they were generally reserved for those associated with and in non-states or failed-states and - in the view of the US military/gov - tied to terrorism. Bin Laden is a good example of this.

Iran and its leaders are different. It has the same population as Germany and is a relatively wealthy, well-armed, and stable republic (~40 years) for the region. The stakes are higher. There's a reason the US doesn't assassinate North Korean and Russian Generals - even though they've been responsible for similar terrible actions. There's a reason Putin murders Russian expatriates he considers traitors but shies away from foreign government officials.

I get the reductionist impulse - "assassinations are assassinations, no difference" - but by focusing only on that you're missing the critical norm-busting aspect of the Soleimani assassination. And how this type of assassination raises the stakes and is much more likely to spark significantly larger and more deadly conflicts.

Maybe because he has other unorthodox ways of messing up with said foreign governments? He's obviously way more subtle, I have to give you that.

Top 10 military forces (by personnel) as of 2019. Iran is not far from the world's 6th largest military force, with the US in 3rd place. Not the typical asymetrical fight anyone wants to get into. Link.

I would be extremely surprised - even shocked - if there was any paperwork for that.
Putin is way, way too smart for such a rookie-blunder.


There's probably at least two layers of apparatchiks between those decisions and his front-office while Trump probably overruled a handful of Pentagon-generals and Senior State Department advisors (if there are any left).


I don't deny the seriousness of the action.


I just hate the hysteria when people have been warning about something like this for years or even decades.


It's not a new thing.

It's not a "reductionist impulse" on my part, it is a deep, principle conception of mine. And I don't hold this view only since the Soleimani case ..... or even Bin Laden. As you said <<State-sanctioned assassinations are not new for the US>> and for others.

Should Trump be killed by a third party drone one day, I hope I won't have a short "Swiss selber Schuld" moment, meaning not only Trump but entire America who let's their "leaders" get away with such things while claiming they are a western democracy.

In the political environment where assassination has become a tool I'm not missing the critical norm-busting aspect of the Soleimani assassination. And as this is the Trump-thread (and I've said my piece), I agree the Soleimani case is the thing to discuss here now and not the principle of taking lives.

I am tempted to think that Trump had this "I wanna do this too, I wanna do this too" fit (I can literally see him clapping his fat little handes) and the "let's take the attention off the domestic political mess" (as someone mentioned) was more likely his advisors's thoughts behind it all. *

* LOL, right, if there are any left. Didn't think of that possibility.

__________________
It's all a matter or perspective.
So move your butt and look at it from the other side

So would I, it wasn't a very serious question. But you actually did touch a nerve here - how ironic that Putin has learned to package his deeds in a more or less "palatable" consensus/way, while Trump is doing everything he can to undermine the very people whom he should actually be working with. And he's creating a domino effect.

Meanwhile in the real world, Soleimani's funeral

Trump's done a great job in uniting Iran!

All those factions which were at each others throats and now they're collectively gunning for the US and its allies.

Almost as much as Trump's inauguration crowd.

Trump: "Soleimani's funeral drew a HUGE crowd, the biggest ever, the best crowd in history. It was sooooooooo much bigger than Bin Laden's crowd. Obama killed the wrong guy."

Terrorist get-together, they should have droned that as well!

Tom

Usually the Iranians are so loving towards the Americans, and now Trump has gone and ruined it.

Foreign Policy is for people with patience.


That's not what we can expect from the current POTUS it seems.

Usually the Americans are so loving towards the Iranians, and now Trump has gone and ruined it.

Looks like Javad Zarif and Trump will meet in Davos.
How about a man against man fight?

Well, there are still a few cool headed people in the government;
From the official Twitter-channel of «House Foreign Affairs Committee» :

<< This Media Post will serve as a reminder that war powers reside in the Congress under the United States Constitution. And that you should read the War Powers Act. And that you’re not a dictator. https://t.co/VTroMegWv0
— House Foreign Affairs Committee (@HouseForeign) January 5, 2020>>

There exists a coherent, neoconservative Warhawk ideology that justifies this type of hyperaggressive military posture. It is wrong, cruel, and dangerous. But as Trump and others () routinely demonstrate, that's rarely the motivation at work. More often than not, it's simply bellicose jingoism.