January 3, 2020

"But in Iran, many saw him as a larger-than-life hero.... Anecdotes about his asceticism and quiet charisma joined to create an image of a warrior-philosopher...."

From "Qassim Suleimani, Master of Iran’s Intrigue, Built a Shiite Axis of Power in Mideast/The commander helped direct wars in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen, and he became the face of Iran’s efforts to build a regional bloc of Shiite power" (the obituary in the NYT).

Also, in 2018, after Trump warned the President of Iran not to threaten the U.S., Suleiman responded with another threat: “It is beneath the dignity of our president to respond to you... I, as a soldier, respond to you. We are near you, where you can’t even imagine. We are ready. We are the man of this arena.”

The obituary ends:
“He was so big that he achieved his dream of being martyred by America,” wrote a reformist politician and former vice president, Mohammad Ali Abtahi.

General Suleimani had received the country’s highest military honor, the Order of Zolfaghar.... Ayatollah Khamenei pinned the medal on General Suleimani’s chest last February... said: “The Islamic Republic needs him for many more years. But I hope that in the end, he dies as a martyr.”

103 comments:

Ken B said...

Who booed the attempt to kill Rommel before D-Day? Not even the most deranged FDR hater, not even the loudest isolationist.

Brent said...

Call him whatever you desire. The only word that fits is Dead. Ding dong the Mass Murderer is dead. And every Democrat apologist for him -- make no mistake, they cannot credibly say he was bad but it was wrong that he died -- is a hater of Americans.

AlbertAnonymous said...

Your wish is granted. MAGA!

MadisonMan said...

How slanted against Trump is the obit? It seems like it is. I can't help but go back to Narayanan's great comment earlier: When is the movie coming out starring Geo. Clooney as Suleimani?

Ace Sullivan said...

I remember when I first found an Order of Zolfaghar in Zelda back in the day.

Lucid-Ideas said...

We're dropping bombs on the wrong people. WAPO and NYT are easy to find. These people are writing obituaries for a dude who - had Obama killed him with his 'he was a mass-murder of muslims' (which he was) - they'd be cheering him on while saying Qassem who?

The MSM are a 5th column that needs to be dealt with, preferably after re-election next year.

Destroy them.

Oso Negro said...

The New York Times. Always there for the enemies of the United States of America.

Kevin said...

General Patton: [addressing the troops] I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor, dumb bastard die for his country.

Yancey Ward said...

I wonder how long the Stanley McCrystal essay remains findable with a simple web search? It is an inconvient thing this morning for narrative builders on the Left.

BADuBois said...

“He was so big that he achieved his dream of being martyred by America,” wrote a reformist politician and former vice president, Mohammad Ali Abtahi.

*Sniff*

Sorry, I'm so choked up I can barely write. So sweet that Orange Man Bad helped fulfill this honored leader's wishes!

Yancey Ward said...

Well, if the drone strike gave Suliemani what he wanted, then the Iranians have nothing to complain about.

tcrosse said...

It sounds like an occupational hazard.

Yancey Ward said...

Something that hasn't gotten a lot of notice about this strike- it happened in Iraq, not Iran.

narciso said...

that's this guy,


Mohammad Ali Abtahi was arrested on June 16, 2009 during the aftermath of the 2009 presidential elections and subsequent protests.[3] He reportedly made a videotaped confession following his arrest,[4] in which he stated that the opposition's claims of a stolen election were false, and that opposition leaders had conspired in advance to misrepresent the vote.[5] According to the statement, former presidents, Mohammad Khatami and Rafsanjani had taken an oath not to abandon each other in their support for former prime minister Mir-Hossein Mousavi as they prepared to stage a Velvet Revolution in order to avenge their defeat in 2005 Iranian presidential election.[6] According to human rights groups, similar confessions by Iranian political prisoners are almost always obtained under duress.[5]

William said...

He was a handsome man and, among all the Iranian leaders, he had the most neatly trimmed beard. We will not see his like anytime soon....If he was such a brilliant tactician and charismatic leader isn't it a good thing that he's gone? His mission in life was to kill Americans, and his replacement will probably have less skills.

Nathan Mates said...

"Ayatollah Khamenei pinned the medal on General Suleimani’s chest last February... said: “The Islamic Republic needs him for many more years. But I hope that in the end, he dies as a martyr.”"

Translation: the #1 leader hopes that the #2 leader dies in battle so that he doesn't launch a coup some day.

Iman said...

After murdering hundreds if not thousands of Americans, this is the first time Iran has been held to account. It's a learning moment for Iran, we shall soon see if they understand the significance.

Ken B said...

Yancey
They don’t notice because to notice undercuts the “OMG HE HAS STARTED WWIII!” hype. It is noticed and ignored.

tcrosse said...

He was big. It's the Democrats that got small.

RobinGoodfellow said...

“He was so big that he achieved his dream of being martyred by America,”

It is my dream that all who dream of being martyred by America achieve their dreams.

Nonapod said...

I never heard of him until yesterday, but the more I learn of him the more glad I am he's dead.

Almaron Dickinson said...


Suleimani can now commiserate with Admiral Yamamoto about how the Americans got both of them in the end.

Swede said...

See?

Now everybody is happy.

Bob Boyd said...

"What's that whistling sound?" - last words of St. Suleimani the Humble.

Michael K said...

Yancey Ward said...
Something that hasn't gotten a lot of notice about this strike- it happened in Iraq, not Iran.


Somebody was pontificating about him not being "in a war zone." What do you call Iraq ?

Earnest Prole said...

If you're up for a schadenboner to match election night, have a look at this twitter exchange between Khamenei and Trump and then read the comments.

Rick said...

But I hope that in the end, he dies as a martyr.

I love an ending with everyone getting what they want.

Freeman Hunt said...

What the hell, NYT.

Ray - SoCal said...

An Iraq is in the middle of a Power Struggle between Iranian Backed Politicians and everyone else. The Iranian backed also seem to be corrupt. And the people are very frustrated with corruption, and have been demonstrating against corruption and Iranian Influence.

The killing did 10 things:

1. Put Iraq on on notice, either protect US soldiers, or we will take action.

2. Put Iraq on notice, we will not be targets in your country. We are willing to leave again. Trump has been saying he wants to stop the endless wars, and he would be very happy to withdraw US forces from Iraq, at the request of the Iraqi Government. He is just looking for an excuse.

3. Put Iran on notice, a US Death will be retaliated against.

4. Sent a message to other countries / groups, Trump is not a paper tiger that is full of hot air. Mexico Government, Drug Smugglers / Narcos in Mexico, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Hezbollah in Lebanon, China, Russia, etc. I would have thought the annihilation of that Russian Military Group would have done that, but this dealt with the issue of indirect pressure.

5. Sent a message to the Iraqi Government, taking the side of Iran may have consequences. As welling as statements supporting the Iraqi people.

6. Actions against US Embassies will be retaliated against. 1979 Iran, Cairo, and Benghazi's Embassy / Consulates were not retaliated against, and this will not be repeated under Trump. Deterrence is being re-established.

7. Sent the message to Iran, the US is not afraid of your threats.

8. Sent a message to Iran, actions by Iranian Proxies are your responsibility.

9. Showed the hypocrisy of the US Press.

10. Showed the weakness of the Democratic Presidential Candidates, compared to Trump.

Bonus:

It puts the Monkey on Iran on what the next move will be...


Yancey Ward said...
Something that hasn't gotten a lot of notice about this strike- it happened in Iraq, not Iran.

Freeman Hunt said...

This is Trump derangement syndrome. Writing a love letter to a guy like this because Trump had him killed. No way this would be the obit if Hillary had had him taken out.

Ambrose said...

"We are the man in the arena" - he actually quoted TR to Trump. I had missed that one.

Iman said...

If the syphillitic old grey lady isn’t praising Stalin or ignoring the Nazi murder of 6,000,000 plus people, she’s revering an Iranian mass murderer

Browndog said...

I wonder how many times libs "updated" his Wikipedia page today. I bet he's a real Saint by now.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

No bastard ever won a war by getting martyred for his country. He won it by making some other poor dumb bastard get martyred for his country.

Openidname said...

So I guess "ascetic" has become the NYT's go-to euphemism for terrorist.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

That'll teach me to read comments before making my own.

Kevin beat me to it by a mile.

Dave Begley said...

"What's that whistling sound?" - last words of St. Suleimani the Humble.

Good one, Bob Boyd!

Putting that one and Ray's on Facebook.

Iman said...

Gosh, it would take a heart of stone not to feel this man's pain...

https://twitter.com/davereaboi/status/1213116976782102530

holdfast said...

He may have been big in life, but in death he was just a bunch of small chunks of lightly BBQ'd meat and a red spray.

chuck said...

“The Islamic Republic needs him for many more years. But I hope that in the end, he dies as a martyr.”"

Straight out of Scott Adams' dating tips. People always tell you what they want.

n.n said...

Et tu, NYT?

Leland said...

No way this would be the obit if Hillary had had him taken out.

Indeed.

robother said...

The Ayatollah neglected to tell him that the Order of Zalfaghar medal contained a martyrdom chip.

Howard said...

The grease stains words should be chiseled on his gravestone

Chris Lopes said...

Trump is the same ass clown today that he was yesterday. That doesn't take away from the fact that a "revered military leader" responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Americans (by his own admission) is no longer among the living, and that's a good thing. That Trump ordered it done doesn't make it any less so.

Drago said...

Chris Lopes: "Trump is the same ass clown today that he was yesterday."

Trump is accomplishing what every FakeCon GOPe-er you adore claimed to want. Heritage Foundation analyzed the Trump Presidency and declared it more conservative than Reagan.

And you hate him for it. Don't you? Go ahead loser. Admit it.

And when Trump defeats your next democrat candidate savior I hope you can find a way to get over your terrible grief.

Michael K said...

Arsalan IR


@arsalanabd
Jan 1
More
We don't have "Boomers" in IRI.


Best comment on that thread. What do you call a Hellfire missile? OK, it was the Iraqi airport.

Michael K said...

And when Trump defeats your next democrat candidate savior I hope you can find a way to get over your terrible grief.

I hope you don't, ass clown.

JPS said...

"He was so big that he achieved his dream of being martyred by America"

Reminds me of Inglourious Basterds:

"Donny! We got a German here who wants to dah fer 'is country. Oh-blige him."

Bilwick said...

Was Suleiman another "austere religious scholar"?

FullMoon said...

Some unknown spy pinpointed the location. Probably not Christopher Steele.

Agree or disagree with the decision, the precision is certainly impressive.

JPS said...

Ken B:

"Who booed the attempt to kill Rommel before D-Day? Not even the most deranged FDR hater, not even the loudest isolationist."

Actually, like Almaron Dickinson above, I was thinking of the shooting down of Admiral Yamamoto's plane.

Yamamoto was as personally honorable an enemy as we have ever fought. Unlike Soleimani, he argued privately against every step his country took toward war with us - to the point where the militarists considered assassinating him.

Nonetheless, he was one hell of an able leader, in the service of our enemy - a regime that, unlike him personally, was straight-up evil. I regret that we had to kill him. But of course we killed him when we had the chance, and of course we should have. With Soleimani, regrets don't much enter into it for me.

Drago said...

JPS: "Nonetheless, he was one hell of an able leader, in the service of our enemy - a regime that, unlike him personally, was straight-up evil. I regret that we had to kill him. But of course we killed him when we had the chance,..."

I believe Nimitz once said that Yamamoto was personally worth about 3 Carrier Strike Groups, or something close to that.

Big Mike said...

Holy martyrdom? Here's what General Patton had to say about that.

narayanan said...

who was it said : One can apply a prodigious intellect in the service of prosaic things — formulating a war plan

Trump is genius or who is the Ashkenazim behind him?

Darrell said...

The Democrats and their Media and LlR tampons can fellate him when they get to Hell. It might be required even.

Iman said...

Trump’s laying it out right now...

J Melcher said...

Another thing I hate about modern mainstream journalists: They never follow up with clever interesting people who have proven track records. They are worse than sportscasters. At least once in a while somebody asks Troy Aikman or Terry Bradshaw about Blake Bortles.... but when real important things happen, we get questions to Joe Biden?

What does retired general Jim "Mad Dog" Mattis think? What does Nikki Haley think? What does Condi Rice think? What does Colin Powell think? What does David Patraeus think? For two decades this phase of the "War on Terror" has dragged on and these people were pushing chess pieces against Soleimani. Why didn't they strike? If this is the first opportunity, would they have advised such a strike? Who do they expect to come up from the bench and start calling plays, now?

Are all such experts suddenly dead, or deaf, or disappeared?

JPS said...

Drago, 1:58:

I think I remember reading that. Sounds about right.

J Melcher, 2:20:

Interesting point. Our host was kind enough to link to a fascinating piece by General McChrystal, specifically describing how he had the chance to kill the man and held his fire. I'd love for someone to follow up with him. No doubt someone will.

Iman said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MikeR said...

Missed opportunity. Any more Iranian military leaders that really secretly want to be martyrs? We can help.

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

Times/Iran?

https://twitter.com/HeshmatAlavi/status/1021491283167268864

minnesota farm guy said...

This was a brilliant stroke by Trump. We get attacked and respond with some restraint. We get attacked at the embassy and Trump lowers the hammer and wipes out a charismatic, extremely effective terrorist military leader with no, I repeat, no collateral damage. The Yamamoto parallel is almost perfect. Also think of what the loss of Stonewall Jackson (by his own pickets) meant to the Confederacy. I see this as a similar loss to the Iranians. There are only so many commanders who have the combination of smarts, organizational skills, daring, and charisma to accomplish the things Suleiman - or Jackson- did. No one is irreplaceable, but these come very close.

That we had the intelligence, the decision making process, the military assets on hand and the firmness of command to carry out this attack says a lot about what the Iranians risk if they continue to escalate. The BS from the Democrats is aggravating, but it underscores once again their lack of understanding of what it takes to survive dealing with Islamic fanatics and how little they really care about the safety and well being of Americans.

narayanan said...

"Ayatollah Khamenei pinned the medal on General Suleimani’s chest last February... said: “The Islamic Republic needs him for many more years. But I hope that in the end, he dies as a martyr.”"
______________+++++++++++++++++++

when somebody dies a martyr it means even his death can be used for PR.

E.g Sen. John McCain dies a MARTYR

Qwinn said...

One thing we can be sure of. If violence actually decreases over the next few years in the countries where Soiledremains was waging war by proxy, "that would've happened anyway" and will probably be linked to some Obama policy. Hell, if the mullahs are overthrown tomorrow, the media will give Obama credit.

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

per our comment earlier

NYT Floated Soleimani Assassination Scenario in Baghdad Hours Before Strike
per zerohedge

Drago said...

Qwinn: "One thing we can be sure of. If violence actually decreases over the next few years in the countries where Soiledremains was waging war by proxy, "that would've happened anyway" and will probably be linked to some Obama policy."

LLR-lefty Chuck is already hard at work on delivering just those talking points to help his hero Slow Joe Biden.

William said...

The Germans used to produce a lot of assholes and, unlike the Iranians and Iraqis, they were really good at tactics and logistics. Think of what a threat to the world these people would be if they had more skills when it came to world conquest.....This guy was supposed to be their Napoleon or whatever. The fact that he's dead indicates that he wasn't as fully aware of the battleground space as good general should be. Still, I can see a downside to his death. A dumber Soleiman might initiate some kind of action that will trigger Armageddon.....My first reaction is that this is a good thing, but there's always those damned unintended consequences. I predict that the future will happen.

Ken B said...

JPS
Yamamoto is another good analogy.

Michael K said...

I was just looking at TV which I rarely do and see some speculation that sounds informed that the Suleimani plan was another 1979-style kidnapping of US diplomats. Maybe the invasion of last week was a reconnaissance.

Quaestor said...

I believe Nimitz once said that Yamamoto was personally worth about 3 Carrier Strike Groups, or something close to that.

If he did it was in early 1942, otherwise, it reveals just how sketchy knowledge of the enemy in wartime can be.

After Midway, Yamamoto was a spent force. In 1941 Yamamoto essentially hijacked the authority and strategic planning role of the IJN's general staff (Gunreibu) by blackmail. He intimidated his nominal superior, Admiral Nagano, into submission on the matter of his preemptive attack on Pearl Harbor by threatening to resign his command of the Combined Fleet and take his whole staff with him. From that point to the summer of 1942, the effective strategic, as well as operational command of the Imperial Navy, passed into the hands of one man. Consequently, the entire responsibility for the debâcle at Midway fell on Yamamoto, Nagano and the Gunreibu having nothing to do with its conception, planning, or execution.

From the autumn of 1942 until his death Yamamoto was a figurehead commander only who spent much of his time giving pep talks and presiding at decoration ceremonies. The First Mobile Fleet having been effectively destroyed, he had nothing with which to fight in the Central Pacific, and his subordinate, Nobutake Kondō, operated effectively as an independent commander under the reinvigorated General Staff. It was during one of Yamamoto's morale-boosting inspection tours that he fell to the guns of American P-38 Lightnings.

Howard said...

Q: really like your historical summaries.

Quaestor said...

You think you are dealing with someone stupid.

No.

No. No. No.

You misunderstand me.

I'm certain i am dealing with someone stupid.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The last MoFo we iced in the ME - the NYT called him an "Islamic Scholar"

narciso said...

death comes with the territory, like general hamedani, nearly five years in Syria, mccrystal who didn't defend his honor, nor press the necessity of the mission, was strategically incorrect, you would think he would have learned when they lost track of zarquawi,

Drago said...

Q: "Consequently, the entire responsibility for the debâcle at Midway fell on Yamamoto, Nagano and the Gunreibu having nothing to do with its conception, planning, or execution."

That's absurd. Nagumo was in tactical command of his forces at Midway and the decisions he and staff made once the battle was joined proved decisive...and not in a good way.

Unknown said...

Does the NYT just print obituaries of terrorists sent to them by the terrorists without reading them? Or do they agree with them? Either way, it is a bad look.

MAJMike said...

William said...
He was a handsome man and, among all the Iranian leaders, he had the most neatly trimmed beard. We will not see his like anytime soon....If he was such a brilliant tactician and charismatic leader isn't it a good thing that he's gone? His mission in life was to kill Americans, and his replacement will probably have less skills.
1/3/20, 12:23 PM

He also had a razor-sharp crease in his battle dress uniform.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Freeman Hunt nails it

+
alternate universe filled with hypocrisy and no principles

"President Hillary Clinton Orders Drone Strike on Terror Mastermind, World Rejoices."

chickelit said...

I like this approach much better than sanctions: make the Iranian leaders suffer, not the people.

chickelit said...

MadisonMan said...How slanted against Trump is the obit? It seems like it is. I can't help but go back to Narayanan's great comment earlier: When is the movie coming out starring Geo. Clooney as Suleimani?

That notion is funny not just because of the good-looking beard thing but also the swooning reaction of Hollywood women to both men.

h said...

"Who booed the attempt to kill Rommel before D-Day? Not even the most deranged FDR hater" I don't disagree with this. But it is clear to me that we no longer have a common definition of the national interest, as it pertains to war. There is not a consensus -- there may not even be a majority, but if there is, it is a slim majority -- that we have a national interest in fighting Iran as a sponsor of terrorism. So while I am personally of the belief that we have such a national interest, I am reluctant to believe that we should enter into a war to fight for that interest. I know that, superficially, sounds crazy. But the 2006 mid term election convinced me that we cannot commit troops to an effort that does not have the overwhelming support of the country as a whole. Otherwise we send our young people into action for a cause that the country does not deeply and truly support. So the WWII cause was one that had this overwhelming support. But the 2002-2006 Iraq effort did not have that support (as the 2006 election convinced me). So where I am today with Iraq is: most people don't care; I don't object to drone strikes or air strikes that don't endanger any US troops; but I don't support any ground action that endangers US troops. And you can't change my mind by telling me that it is in the national interest (where I am already convinced, or close); you can only change my mind by convincing me that the action has overwhelming support of the US electorate -- including democrats.

Narr said...

I'm still puzzling over the US victory in Vietnam too.

Q, can you name a book or two that argue the thesis? Accounts of operational and tactical brilliance, and statistical games that are like body-counts once-removed, I have seen.

I know a lot-- a lot-- of VN veterans to whom US victory would be news; what do you know that they don't?

Narr
A colleague used to sport his beloved "Southeast Asian Wargames/1964-1975/Second Place" cap on occasion

Richard Fagin said...

So the Times et al. publishing obituaries that state Suleimani's accomplishments, such as they were, and his military acumen in a complimentary way are somehow acceptable in polite American company, yet President Trump acknowledging Robert E. Lee's accomplishments as a military officer is somehow proof of the President's white supremacist urges? I'd say I was surprised, but remember one of the "60 Minutes" crew said for the record he'd withhold information about an impending ambush on American forces because he's a journalist and that's a higher calling.

These people are not fellow countrymen with whom we may disagree. They are traitors by the Constitutional definition of the crime.

Iman said...

As a non-veteran, I hope and pray that the people that are paid to know what they're doing (DoD/Pentagon/Armed Forces), KNOW what they're doing. This sonuva bitch was an evil man and ultimately got what he deserved.

anti-de Sitter space said...

“A colleague used to sport his beloved "Southeast Asian Wargames/1964-1975/Second Place" cap on occasion”

Is it a victory that I’ll be in Hanoi this year? The beginning of April.

I’ve never been to Vietnam. Going for F1.

anti-de Sitter space said...

“His message is not "we'll go to war", but "mess with the U.S. at your own risk."”

Actually, his message is “Get nukes ASAP if you want a deterrent re US.”

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Heh

J Melcher said...

I still want to know what the other experts think, but:

https://www.pri.org/stories/2020-01-03/gen-petraeus-qasem-soleimani-s-killing-its-impossible-overstate-significance

walter said...

From J's link:
General Petraeus, did you ever interact directly or indirectly with him?

Indirectly. He sent a message to me through the president of Iraq in late March of 2008, during the battle of Basra, when we were supporting the Iraqi army forces that were battling the Shia militias in Basra that were supported, of course, by Qasem Soleimani and the Quds Force. He sent a message through the president that said, "General Petraeus, you should know that I, Qasem Soleimani, control the policy of Iran for Iraq, and also for Syria, Lebanon, Gaza and Afghanistan."

And the implication of that was, "If you want to deal with Iran to resolve this situation in Basra, you should deal with me, not with the Iranian diplomats." And his power only grew from that point in time. By the way, I did not — I actually told the president to tell Qasem Soleimani to pound sand.
<
Two short questions for what's next, Gen. Petraeus — US remaining in Iraq, and war with Iran. What's your best guess?

Well, I think one of the questions is, "What will the diplomatic ramifications of this be?" And again, there have been celebrations in some places in Iraq at the loss of Qasem Soleimani. So, again, there's no tears being shed in certain parts of the country. And one has to ask what happens in the wake of the killing of the individual who had a veto, virtually, over the leadership of Iraq.

Seeing Red said...

This attack came hours after the spokesperson of the Kata'ib Hezbollah militia threatened that "they are waiting orders to target American bases in Iraq".#Iraq #Iran #USA #IRGC

BTW Iran could reach Florida a few years ago. They signed an agreement with Chavez.

Narr said...

a-dSs: I don't know, let us know how the Vietnamese view it and then tell us!

Narr
What is F1, please?

Narayanan said...

walter said...
From J's link to questions for what's next, Gen. Petraeus

____&&&&&++++
I'm not getting the sense that Gen. Petraeus or interviewer is intelligent!

Soleimani reaches him through president of Iraq.

Did he pass on the message up his CoC?
Did he "out" Soleimani to the negotiating diplomats

Gospace said...

You don't kill for victory and then "impose" democracy? Really? You said that?

The post WWII Japan occupation ended April 1952 and we did just that.

The allied occupation of West Germany also ended in 1952 and we did just that.

Of course, both those nation's were nation's with a national government before the war. Iraq, indeed, most of the Middle East, are still tribal or clannish with the trappings of national identify. Occupation a lot longer than 7 years would be required. That and eliminating Islam, which is hostile to democracy.

Iran is fighting a religious war against us. Reality 101. They last generations. Ask Europe about it.

walter said...

I don't know, Narayanan
But I thought those bits suggest his removal may have more impact..maybe allowing a different approach.

Bunkypotatohead said...

90% of all news is someone you never heard of dying.

chickelit said...

Actually, his message is “Get nukes ASAP if you want a deterrent re US.”

The way Iran is going about getting nukes guarantees them just one bomb. Seriously, enriching uranium? Who does that? We got exactly one bomb out of enriching uranium.* Personally, I've always thought that Iran wanted to enrich uranium because they saw how depleted uranium worked in "conventional" warfare -- tanks, DU shells, etc.
_________________
*One might argue that one is enough, but MAD says otherwise. The Iranians are and always have been chumps. I had one as a calculus TA at UW-Madison in the '80's. What an arrogant asshole, he. They have pride issues.

donald said...

Gospace nails it. This is a religious war to the last living being. You are either the purist of all Muslims or eventually you have to die.

So blow it all up and get the fuck out.

Josephbleau said...

After the war we got lots of bombs by enriching uranium, even plutonium and enriched uranium alloy bombs. Anti aircraft nuclear rockets were gun type uranium bombs.

Narayanan said...

Blogger Gospace said...
You don't kill for victory and then "impose" democracy? Really? You said that?

The post WWII Japan occupation ended April 1952 and we did just that.

The allied occupation of West Germany also ended in 1952 and we did just that.
_______&&&&&&&++++++++
It would have worked if Iraq had been divided up into three or more.

phantommut said...

He got an obituary in the NYT? How many seats in Congress does the Times want Democrats to lose?

Bilwick said...

It sounds like he was an austere religious scholar.

Nichevo said...

anti-de Sitter space said...
“His message is not "we'll go to war", but "mess with the U.S. at your own risk."”

Actually, his message is “Get nukes ASAP if you want a deterrent re US.”


So what you're saying is, it's a good idea we are bringing matters with Iran to a head before they get them.