Qassem Soleimani

Qassem Soleimani was an Iranian Major General in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the commander of its Quds Force.

General Soleimani was responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of people: from protestors on the streets of Tehran and Baghdad to innocent men, women, and children caught in the middle of the war in Syria.

His Quds Force supplied EFPs to the insurgency in Iraq, which were the most devastating IEDs U.S. forces faced and directly resulted in over 600 Americans killed and thousands more wounded.

To say that he was a heinous, murdering bastard would be putting it mildly. Even the Iraqis cheered his death.

Iran calls on the U.N. to condemn the U.S. for “unlawful criminal act.”

General Soleimani was responsible for attacks on American forces legally present in a combat zone. They have the right to self-defense, and the U.S. government has a responsibility to defend them. Most recently, Soleimani directed the Iranian-linked Kata’ib Hezbollah militia to attack U.S. bases in Iraq with rockets, which killed an American, and storm the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, a reprehensible action in violation of all International Laws of both Armed Conflict and International Relations.

Of COURSE Iran is crying, “Waaaah!” They were involved. Their Kata’ib Hezbollah militia got WHACKED.



UPDATE: January 9, 2020 – Judge Andrew Napolitano: Trump had no legal right to order killing of Soleimani

Nappy, you arrogant, lying offensive mole. Ever since President Trump passed you over for a spot on his cabinet or on the Supreme Court, you’ve been a gushing well of deceit.

You YOURSELF laid bare the case for your own deceit when you stated: “Can the president kill foreign military personnel and claim the justification of self-defense? The laws of war permit him to do that, but self-defense — actually, defense of the country — only comes into play when the foreign military personnel are physically engaged in killing Americans or are certainly about to do so. That justification only applies — the law here is 600 years old and has been consistently applied — when force is imminent and certain.”

When intelligence strongly ties a commanding general in Iran to attacks against our U.S. Embassy — Sovereign Soil — in Iraq, where Iran has long has aspirations of conquering for their oil, when Intel undeniably confirms his long history of a violent past focused on killing, maiming and wounding U.S. Forces engaged in peace-keeping activities, when Intel spots him en route with forces to greatly increase the attacks against the men and women serving peaceful, country-rebuilding roles in the U.S. State Department…

ALL the conditions you yourself specified ARE MET or EXCEEDED. The United States of America has EVERY RIGHT AND LAWFUL AUTHORITY UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAWS OF WAR to stop attacks against U.S. Embassies and personnel.

FURTHERMORE, you FALSELY claim: ” Can the president legally kill a person not engaged in an act of violence because of what the person might do in the future? In a word: No.”

It’s a FALSE CLAIM because it’s a Straw Man Argument based on the faulty premise that Soleimani was “not engaged in an act of violence.”

WRONG. He was MOST CERTAINLY engaged in acts of violence.

Soleimani ordered the earlier attacks against our embassy and had ordered more attacks. IT DOES NOT MATTER whether he was with his pawns throwing rocks and bottles or setting the place ablaze. The military is comprised integral units. Commanding Generals on a battlefield are fair game, and being right there in Baghdad, Iraq, the Iranian General Soleimani was most certainly indeed engaged in the hostilities.

Regardless, Nappy, your point is moot. He died FULLY within the confines of the international laws of war. He was enroute to attack our Embassy and Embassy personnel in a country NOT HIS OWN and was STOPPED.

Now, Judge, if you’re NOT lying, then you’re most certainly ignorant about the LAW OF ARMED CONFLICT. <<< It’s only 1,236 pages. Start reading. Let me know when the clue bird lands on your shoulder.

Leave a Reply