Contradictions?

Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D, MN) condemns our sanctions against Iran—sanctions against that nation’s government, various members of that government, and against that government’s oil sales and other business’ international activities.

calling them “crippling” and asserting they would “starve the Iranian people.”

Of course, the crippling nature of the sanctions is the point of them: to convince the men of the Iranian government to change their ways, to in President Donald Trump’s words, stop trying to kill Americans, stop trying to kill our friends and allies, and to stop trying to get nuclear weapons. If sanctions were not crippling, they’d have no effect. Omar knows this.

And, no, the sanctions won’t starve the Iranian people. Iran produces most of its own food, and food trade is not sanctioned. Omar knows this.

And this:

First he canceled our best shot at avoiding armed conflict—the Iran nuclear deal.

The Iran nuclear deal, on the contrary, transferred $150 billion in lifted sanctions and unfrozen assets to the Iranian government, and it transferred billions of dollars—$400 million of it in cold cash in the dead of night—to the Iranian government—money which went directly to funding Iran’s terrorism-by-proxy efforts throughout the Middle East.  The Iran nuclear deal, further to the point, had no hope of avoiding armed conflict—it actually guaranteed it. This “deal” codified Iran’s “right” to have nuclear weapons after a very few years’ delay, and Iran, true to its word, would have used them to destroy Israel. Omar knows this.

Omar also actively supports the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement, which designed to destroy the Israeli economy and to starve that nation into submission. Which submission would bring about Israel’s extinction at the hands of enemies sworn to effect that destruction: Hamas and Hesbollah, Iranian terrorist satraps, and Iran itself, which wants to wipe Israel from the map—a major aspect of Iran’s drive for nuclear weapons.  Omar knows this.

Omar also claimed

Since he [Trump] got into office, the president of the United States has been goading Iran into war….

Because objecting to Iran’s terrorist activities throughout the Middle East and in western Europe is goading Iran.

Because objecting to Iran’s attacks on oil tankers in the Arabian Gulf is goading Iran. Because objecting to Iran’s shoot-down of a drone in international airspace is goading.

Because objecting to Iran’s seizure of a US Navy small craft that, with engine failure had drifted a small way into Iranian water, and humiliating the sailors on board is goading Iran.

Because objecting to Iran having its Popular Mobilization Forces militia in Iraq assault and vandalize our embassy in Baghdad is goading.

Omar knows better.

And this:

Sanctions are economic warfare[.]

Of course they are. Would she prefer a shooting war?

No, not contradictive at all.  This is the face of the Progressive-Democratic Party.

A Shootdown

Iran shot down a Ukrainian civilian airliner as it departed a Tehran airport, with the loss of all aboard.  The shootdown occurred shortly (a few hours) after Iran had launched some missiles at Iraqi facilities on which were based a number of American soldiers.

Stipulate the shootdown was accidental.

It also was an example of monumental incompetence: ill- to nonexistent discipline on the part of the antiaircraft missile crew and breathtaking lack of situation awareness by every single individual in the crew’s chain of command from the operational commander all the way to the top in the Iranian military establishment.

Consider.

Iran, expecting a kinetic response (to coin a phrase) to the missile launches it’s about to execute, put its air defense units on alert. That would include the units defending that Tehran airport: Iran would cavalierly attack civilian airports, so of course everyone else would.

One of those alerted units detected an aircraft climbing and flying away from the airport-as-target, assumed it was hostile, and fired on it.  Never mind that no ordnance had been expended against that target, no damage had been inflicted on that target.  That’s the ill-discipline.

Meanwhile, not one unit, not one sensor, in the entire Iranian military establishment had detected any inbound hostile aircraft in any direction.  Our, and our allied nations’, aircraft are capable of remarkable stealth, but they’re not invisible, not proof against detection.  From that total lack of detection of a single inbound hostile aircraft, there was no reason to believe that the Ukrainian airliner might, by any stretch of imagination, be hostile.  Yet no one in the firing unit’s chain of command, not a single officer at any level of the command hierarchy from the junior officer in charge of the firing unit on up, thought about that.  The loss of control over the unit was the command hierarchy’s own lack of discipline.  The lack of understanding of the situation and of the likelihood of the aircraft’s hostility is that utter absence of situation awareness.

That’s incompetence.

Further to this:

He [Brig. Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard’s Aerospace Force] said missile-system operators were told to fire at U.S. or other enemy warplanes without seeking permission from senior commanders.

The missile system operator in this case was a junior officer at the missile site that fired on the airliner. This degree of decentralization (which by itself is normal in wartime, such as the war Iran is prosecuting against the US) puts a premium on the juniors being able to think for themselves and on their having SA. The decentralization is not indicative of loss of control or ill-discipline. The lack of information being pushed down to junior levels to facilitate their SA and the lack of training in the use of coordination facilities is illustrative of ill-discipline.

Further to that SA–both the junior officer’s and that of the officers in his chain of command–are things like the airliner’s IFF/SIF signals, electronic signals that identify the aircraft to air tracking systems including anti-aircraft missile sites, and coordination with civil air traffic control, another of those air tracking systems–neither of which seems to have been used by the Iranians or to have been effected by the Iranians.

That obvious lack illustrates the incompetence.

The US Army’s anti-aircraft missile site operators have some aphorisms, things like “if it flies, it dies,” and “shoot ’em all down, and let God sort ’em out.” For us it’s black humor; for Iran, it’s just black.

Some Predictions

Because the air is fresh out on the end of a limb.

The Wall Street Journal asked a question regarding Iran’s next moves following the successful killing of its head terrorist, Qasim Soleimani:

What do you think are Iran’s next steps?

My predictions—among other things, Iran will do these:

  • hook up with the Taliban
  • strike Saudi oil fields
  • take speedboat shots at our fleet in the Arabian Gulf
  • mine the Strait of Hormuz
  • sink some oil tankers rather than just put minor holes in them, including British and French tankers—not necessarily in the Arabian Gulf
  • hit some Kurdish bases in northeastern Iraq

Preemptive Update: I wrote the above Tuesday morning; I’m writing this Wednesday morning. My predictions already are outdated. In the realization, Iran struck at two Iraqi facilities on which Americans are based–one in Irbil and the other at Ain al-Asad (will the Iraqi government take official notice of this Iranian assault on Iraqi sovereignty?).The air is fresh as the limb falls, too.

Separately:

Of the 15 Iranian missiles fired, 10 missed Ain al-Asad, one missed Irbil, and four failed.  Some are saying the misses were deliberate, but that’s a terrible OR/reliability rate….

Honorable Military Service

Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate and town mayor Pete Buttigieg has been making a big deal about his heroic service during his five-month tour in Afghanistan.

Greg Kelly and Katie Horgan, both ex-Marines with actual combat duty, had some thoughts about that in their Wall Street Journal op-ed.  So do I.  Kelly and Horgan noted,

He [Buttigieg] entered the military through a little-used shortcut: direct commission in the reserves.

Not even a 90-day wonder—a pomeranian prince.

Especially this:

Mr Buttigieg spent some five months in Afghanistan, where he writes that he remained less busy than he’d been at City Hall, with “more time for reflection and reading than I was used to back home.” He writes that he would take “a laptop and a cigar up to the roof at midnight to pick up a Wi-Fi signal and patch via Skype into a staff meeting at home.”

It’s a mark of the quality of Buttigieg’s “service” that he had less work to do even than that of being a small-town mayor.

Honorable officers, when they’re short of tasks, go looking for more things to do to advance the mission, they don’t head up to the roof top to moonlight on Skype or hide out somewhere recreationally reading.

Oh, and Bob Dole felt no need to lean on his military service, much less his actual wounds, in order to campaign for office. Neither did Phil Hart or Daniel Inouye.  But the unscathed rooftop pomeranian prince does.

A Retreat

In the aftermath of killing Qasim Soleimani, the Iranian government is trying to create the impression of subsequent American retreat from the Middle East.

Certainly Iran’s leaders already are working to create that impression. Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, citing the angry reaction to the Soleimani killing within Iran and Iraq, tweeted Monday that the “end of malign US presence in West Asia has begun.”

Iran’s government isn’t the only one trying to manufacture the impression.  See Gerald Seib’s characterization of Soleimani in his piece at the link:

Iran’s top military leader, Maj Gen Qassem Soleimani

and

the surprise attack that killed an Iranian leader

No, Sir. Soleimani was Iran’s top terrorist leader; the attack killed an Iranian terrorist leader. That he also was a high leader in the Iranian government means only that the Iranian government is terrorist in its bent and action.

Seib’s gentling description of a powerful and prolific terrorist, of a piece with the press’ characterizations of al-Baghdadi as an “ascetic religious scholar” and the recent attackers of our Baghdad embassy as “mourners,” is symptomatic of the NLMSM’s expanding manufacture of a US in full retreat.

It’s shameful.