24 thoughts on “Soleimani Assassination: Sowing the Wind, Reaping the Whirlwind – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. I plan to visit this article in a few weeks to see if you were on the money or way off. Time will tell, but I admire your bold predictions, even if I think you’re wrong. Respectfully,

  2. Indeed this assassination was extremely stupid but is it something new in US “foreign” policy? Demanding that Trump should have been given by Congress and opposition the permission to this assassination is a bit “strange” demand. USA tried and planed to murder Castro over 600 times by all US regimes during the past century’s last decades. From Wikipedia

    The Church Committee stated that it substantiated eight attempts by the CIA to assassinate Fidel Castro in 1960–1965.[2]:71 Fabián Escalante, a retired chief of Cuba’s counterintelligence, who had been tasked with protecting Castro, estimated the number of assassination schemes or actual attempts by the Central Intelligence Agency to be 638, a project code-named Executive Action, and split them among U.S. administrations as follows:[14][15]

    Dwight D. Eisenhower (1959–1961): 38
    John F. Kennedy (1961–1963): 42
    Lyndon B. Johnson (1963–1969): 72
    Richard Nixon (1969–1974): 184
    Jimmy Carter (1977–1981): 64
    Ronald Reagan (1981–1989): 197
    George H. W. Bush (1989–1993): 16
    Bill Clinton (1993–2001): 21

    Did US political and parliamentary system officially approve all this “Castro” attempts or the numerous other successful assassinations around the world?

    Lets hope that when USA is kicked out of Iraq and Afghanistan by their own governments is enough “punishment” for this act. Anyway the oil prices have risen fast so a major war is a real possibility and now civil planes seem increasingly to avoid now Iraqi, Jordanian and Syrian airspace (Flightradar app). Airtrafic controllers are the first to “see” where the conflicts appear.

  3. “Trump thinks like Bibi. Whenever the Israeli PM faces a crisis or an election, he starts a war..”

    You can say the same thing about Iran, who facing an internal crisis where the regime had to slaughter 1,500 Iranian civilian protestors, sought a crisis over in Iraq as a diversion, and ordered missiles fired at an American base in Northern Iraq.

    “Sowing the Wind, Reaping the Whirlwind”.

    You can say the same thing about Iran, who ordered her proxies in Iraq to kill and maim hundreds of American troops, and attempt an assassination of a Saudi diplomat in Washington, D.C., not to mention just now attacking the American Embassy in Baghdad.



    1. @ Ben:

      You can say the same thing about Iran, who facing an internal crisis where the regime had to slaughter 1,500 Iranian civilian protestors, sought a crisis over in Iraq as a diversion

      Nonsense, Iran has been a dominant force in Iran for years, if not decades. It created the crisis in Iraq because it is playing a game of the chicken with the U.S. Your attempts to divert attention to nonsensical scenarios is ridiculous.

      Who supported the Shah? Who trained SAVAK in torture techniques used to abuse those seeking freedom? Who overthrew Mousedegh in 1953? We did. So don’t talk to me about Iranian provocations. We’ve done more to provoke Iran than you can ever imagine.

      Do not comment in this thread again.

  4. Well, if we can all make our predictions here, so will I.
    The assassination will not trigger a regional war.
    Iran is a highly rational actor and has its eye on the strategic ball.
    Which is to maintain its influence in the area via proxies, and survive as a regime.
    Thus it will continue doing what it has done until now– acts of guerrilla asymmetrical warfare,
    It has no interest (or ability) in taking on the US in frontal conflict.
    So Iran will do what it does best– terrorist attacks against American/Jewish/Israeli/Western soft spots, and pinpoint attacks against these interests. It knows well how far it can go in these attacks.

  5. Iran will surely respond, but it also has no interest in an all-out war, so I would bet on a more measured response (that will not include firing rockets onto Tel-Aviv or Jerusalem, for instance).

    Whether this was a wise and beneficial move or a foolish and disastrous one is debatable at this point, and only time will tell. But there’s nothing morally wrong about it. This guy was a mass-murderer involved in every murderous campaign in Iran and the Arab world; he was just recently responsible for attacks against the US; and according to US officials, he was planning imminent additional attacks (they could be lying of course, but the claim itself is entirely believable).

    1. @ Eli:

      Whether this was a wise and beneficial move or a foolish and disastrous one is debatable at this point

      Nope, not debatable at all. Not even close.

      there’s nothing morally wrong about it.

      Of course there is. IF there’s nothing morally wrong with it then you’ll have no objection to Iran assassinating Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot. If you’re fine with that, then I’m fine with offing Soleimani.

      This guy was a mass-murderer

      Your PM is a mass murderer. Most U.S. presidents of the past two decades have been mass murderers. Were they assassinated for their crimes?

  6. @SimoHurtta: all US presidents have claimed the authority to order assassinations with Congressional approval, and trying to kill Castro is one example of that, so your larger point stands. But the numbers are ludicrous. The Nixon administration tried or “schemed” to kill Castro 184 times, i.e. a new “scheme” or attempt every 11 days? Yeah, Mr. Escalante’s estimates do not seem particularly credible.

  7. From somewhere in the Twitterverse:

    If you voted for Trump, strap up your boot laces, grab the gun you love so much, kiss the heterosexual spouse you pretend to enjoy, wave goodbye to the white kids you believe are an endangered species and get your ass on the front lines.

    All the snowflakes

  8. You credit Iran with suicidal impulses she almost certainly doesn’t have.

    We’re pretty terrifying. Pretty definitely in the wrong, but also pretty terrifying.

    But while we may not have to worry about what Iraq will do, there may be a God.

    And if so, we have sinned, and we may be in trouble. This is not just about the balance of power; it’s also about good and evil.

    It’s wrong to start an unjust war. Surely that’s obvious.

  9. Sounds like you are saying that the strongest kid in class should submit to a weaker bully who is harassing many of the kids b/c he will get a tantrum.
    For some reason you accept Iran’s hostilities and the many people who died b/c of Soleimani. There is no way for you to tell if his death will reduce this number or not and it is not a small number.
    But at least you haven’t made the argument it was immoral to eliminate him.

    1. @ Ariel Shaked: “the strongest kid in the class should submit to the Bully”

      I suggest you recall the wisdom of Pirkey Avot: “Who is strong? He who controls his own impulses.” In other words, only a weak person lashes out at his/her enemies without thought to the repurcussions of his actions.

      “you haven’t made the argument it was immoral to eliminate him”

      Actually, I’ve made the argument it was the height of hypocrisy to do so, unless we’re prepared to execute every national leader who’s ever engaged in mass murder.

  10. [comment deleted, commenter banned: my comment rules, which you clearly did not read despite being warned to do so before publishing your first comment, make clear that using more than one comment handle is forbidden. Not only have you invented two comment handles, you’ve used Arab names as the handles and you clearly aren’t Arab or Muslim. You’re a fake and a fraud. Hence banned.]

  11. you deploy the bigotry of low expectations Richard. You expect more from your own than you do of Muslims.

    That is why I hate liberals. You would be surprised if you knew just how effectively I fight you liberals. You ally with Islamists .

    1. You would be surprised if you knew just how effectively I fight you liberals.

      Yeah, you’re so “effective” (and fake) that you invented two separate comment handles, both of which are fake Arab names you’ve assumed. And that’s why you’re now banned.

  12. @Richard: other than the Tu quoque charge, you haven’t pointed to a reason why killing this guy was inherently wrong from a moral standpoint. (BTW, Gadi Eisenkot has been a civilian for about a year now.)

    As for my comment to SimoHurtta, I myself recognized that his larger point stands, but there’s no need to add nonsense claims to it. Facts matter.

    1. @ Eli: Assuming the international laws of war which prohibit such assassinations ate considered a “moral standpoint,” that’s one awfully big problem for you. Not to mention that the killing of this one man will lead directly to the deaths of thousands of others. Despite the fact that this doesn’t technically count as a moral reason, it does conserve lives and that is a moral standpoint. Not to mention that a good number of those lost lives will be Israeli. I presume saving Israeli lives counts for you as a moral standpoint?

      other than the Tu quoque

      “Other than??” Really? The utter hypocrisy of Trump and Netanyahu ranting against Iran is an unassailable, compelling moral argument. I don’t need any others, but there are more anyway.

      Facts matter.

      They do indeed. And you don’t have any.

  13. You should consider another Jewish idiom “He Who is Compassionate to the Cruel Will Ultimately Become Cruel to the Compassionate”.

    1. @ Ariel Shaked:

      He Who is Compassionate to the Cruel

      I don’t believe that cruelty is ever a successful strategy. But that doesn’t stop Israel and Trump from making it their go-to approach in pursuing their interests. And I certainly refuse to acknowledge the cruelty of assassinating the leading military figure in the Middle East will in the end prove compassionate to anyone regardless of how you define those terms.

  14. “I don’t believe that cruelty is ever a successful strategy”, well this is why you should pay attention to what our wise elders had to say.

    You write about the lives that might get lost b/c of his death but you neglect to write about the thousands of lives lost while he was alive and the future lives he would have destroyed.

    ‘Caring’ about Israeli lives when the man had direct responsibility for the thousands of rockets aimed at israel from both Gaza and Lebanon is hypocritical. Do you really think people don’t see right through it?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link