Midweek in the Mideast

So Iran fired a bunch of missiles yesterday and may not have killed anyone. And they promise not to do it again as long as the U.S. doesn't retaliate further.

Long and the short of it? Clowntime is over. For 40 years, the U.S. and Iran have pretended not to notice too much because they didn't want to escalate things. When Iran's proxies attacked the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, that was too much, so that's why their top general was mailed back in a manila envelope. Trump doesn't care about appearances -- you may have noticed. So if nothing else, we're at the most honest point in U.S./Iran relations since the 1970s.

What happens next? Hard to say. But if you've been braying about war, as the Democrats have, it may not happen. Stay tuned.

2020 starts out with a bang

So you thought you knew how 2020 was gonna go? Try again:

Qassem Soleimani, the head of Iran's elite Quds military force and one of the most powerful figures in the Islamic Republic, was killed Thursday night in an airstrike in Baghdad, the U.S. Defense Department has confirmed. The strike drew a vow of "crushing revenge" from Iran and condemnation from Iraq's government. 

In a statement, the Pentagon said President Trump ordered the "decisive defensive action to protect U.S. personnel," accusing Soleimani of "actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region."

The Defense Department blamed Soleimani for the deaths of hundreds of Americans during the United States' protracted engagement in Iraq and elsewhere in the region. It said he was behind recent attacks on coalition bases in Iraq, including one on December 27 that killed an American defense contractor. 

About the only way Trump could have been more direct would have been to take out the ol' Ayatollah himself. Maybe that's next. Stay tuned.

Trump Went a Tweetin'

And he did ride, uh huh. He's covering a lot of ground this morning:

Did he just threaten Iran? Why yes, yes he did

That's a lot to chew on. Certainly more than I can cover in the limited amount of blogging time I have this morning. But a few thoughts are in order:

• No surprise that Trump would be all over the FISA document dump that took place over the weekend. I'm reasonably certain his most recent Tweet is accurate? So, why put up with the redactions? Trump is the Leader of the Free World. He can order his people to publish the whole thing without the redactions. At some point, he's going to have to, don't you think?
• Of course, if the story of the day was supposed to be the FISA skulduggery, threatening Iran in ALL CAPS steps on the narrative.
• That's a hell of a threat he delivered to Iran. ALL CAPS, even. Is he prepared to back it up? What would that look like? A couple of Tomahawk cruise missiles isn't going to cause Rouhani and the Mullahs (a great band name, by the way) much suffering. Thunderbolts and lightning, very very frightening. To make good on his threat, you'd need regime change in Iran. Do you think the CIA, last seen trying to take out Trump, would be up for another Mossadegh adventure? Or are we talking bunker busters all over Qom? Or something else entirely? Lotta questions here.

Good riddance

The Iran deal is dead, at least for now. And we can only hope the arrogant worldview that brought it about is gone as well. Matthew Continetti:

The worldview Trump opposes privileges therapy and dialogue over realism and hard decisions. It imagines that the Iranian theocracy is a reliable or trustworthy hedge against Sunni power and will liberalize gradually as the arc of justice progresses. These are the ideas that motivated the presidency of Barack Obama. The Iran deal was the signature achievement of Obama's second term, and it is now gone. In truth, though, Obama's legacy was disappearing long before Trump made his announcement. Obama's legacy, like much of his self-presentation, was a mirage, a pleasing and attractive image that, upon closer inspection, loses coherence.

You didn't have to inspect it that closely, actually. There's more:

Because he governed so extensively through executive order and administrative fiat, because he was so contemptuous of criticism and had a "my way or the highway" approach to negotiations with Republicans (though not with Iranians), the longevity of Obama's agenda depended heavily on his party winning a third consecutive term in the White House. As Tom Cotton warned the Iranians years ago, an agreement entered into by a president and not submitted to the Senate as a treaty can be abrogated by the next man who holds the office. Hillary Clinton's failure doomed the Iran deal and the reputations it had established. It was Barack Obama and John Kerry who allowed Donald Trump to exit the deal by rejecting longstanding procedure. Perhaps it was knowledge of this fact that inspired Kerry in his desperate attempt to preserve the agreement.

For all the claims we hear about his autocratic ways, Donald Trump isn't a tenth as imperious as his predecessor. And the timing of getting out of this deal is good, too. Iran took the money it received from Obama and used it on the battlefield in Syria. That hasn't worked out so well. There has always been plenty of unrest in the country, too. While no one loved the Shah, life was, in the main, better for a lot of Iranians back then. Consider this image from Tehran University in the early 1970s:

Could just as easily be the U.S.

 These women, assuming they still are alive, would be approaching the age of 70 today. I'm guessing the life they had then would look pretty good now. Watch what happens.

Puzzling

Our government doesn't pay ransom, we are told. If that is true, why would the government be issuing this warning?

The State Department issued a warning on Monday urging U.S. citizens to avoid traveling to Iran, which has made the detention of Americans a priority.

The latest travel advisory, which emphasizes Iran’s desire to capture U.S. citizens, comes on the heels of a growing scandal over the Obama administration’s decision to pay Iran $400 million in cash on the same day that it freed several U.S. hostages.

No, that can't be right. We don't pay ransom, remember?

The payment has been cast by lawmakers and others as a ransom payment and prompted concern among U.S. officials that Iran is making arresting Americans a priority.

The travel warning is meant to “highlight the risk of arrest and detention of U.S. citizens, particularly dual national Iranian-Americans,” according to a State Department announcement on Monday. “Foreigners, in particular dual nationals of Iran and Western countries including the United States, continue to be detained or prevented from leaving Iran.”

“U.S. citizens traveling to Iran should very carefully weigh the risks of travel and consider postponing their travel,” the warning adds. “U.S. citizens residing in Iran should closely follow media reports, monitor local conditions, and evaluate the risks of remaining in the country.”

Why would there be any risk? We don't pay ransom.

The Obama administration expressed particular concern about commercial airlines doing business with Iran. This warning comes as American companies such as Boeing continue to pursue million-dollar business deals with the Islamic Republic.

“The U.S. government is concerned about the risks to civil aircraft operating into, out of, within, or over Iran due to hazards from military activity associated with the conflicts in Iraq and Syria,” the warning states. “The FAA has advised U.S. civil aviation to exercise caution when flying into, out of, within, or over the airspace over Iran.”

The warning emphasizes that “the U.S. government’s ability to assist U.S. citizens in Iran in the event of an emergency is extremely limited.”

It's not surprising. You try to get a pallet o' euros going some time.

For the record

Yes, the Obama administration does pay ransom:

The State Department admitted Thursday that the United States handed over $400 million in cash to Iran only after Tehran released four American hostages — two weeks after President Obama insisted the payment was not a “ransom.”

State Department spokesman John Kirby was asked at a press briefing: “In basic English, you’re saying you wouldn’t give them $400 million in cash until the prisoners were released, correct?”

“That’s correct,” he replied.

You might recall this, from the Leader of the Free World:

I have been scolded recently for using the term "Leader of the Free World" in a derisive manner. One longtime commenter told me he would no longer read this feature because of my lack of respect for the President of the United States. I would argue the Commander in Chief gets about as much respect in this feature as he deserves.

Our new friends

A reminder of how they roll in Iran:

BERLIN -- Iran’s regime executed a gay adolescent in July - the first confirmed execution of someone convicted as a juvenile in the Islamic Republic in 2016 - Amnesty International reported this week.

Hassan Afshar, 19, was hanged in Arak Prison in Iran's Markazi Province on July 18, after he was convicted of  "forced male-to-male anal intercourse" (‘lavat-e be onf’) in early 2015, the NGO said in a statement Tuesday. 

Maybe we can give 'em another Pallet o' Euros to make them reconsider their behavior.

Ransom Notes

You can tell how much a story concerns a presidential administration by considering how shrill the denunciations of the story are. My social media feeds are telling me in no uncertain terms that I cannot, must not, dammit you'd better not believe the Pallet o' Euros the Iranians received last year was ransom money. Dammit, it's not. What the hell is wrong with you for even thinking such a thing?

Writing for the Orange County Register, Carl Cannon offers a few reminders:

Regarding the ransom angle, Obama simply re-asserted the official U.S. position that the American government does not make such payments; he chastised his critics for not acknowledging that the Iran deal “is working,” without amplifying on why he believes that’s true; and he concluded by saying that the only new bit of information in the Journal piece was the form of payment.

“It is not at all clear to me why it is that cash, as opposed to a check or a wire transfer, has made this into a new story,” he said. “The reason that we had to give them cash is precisely because we are so strict in maintaining sanctions, and we do not have a banking relationship with Iran, that we couldn’t send them a check, and we could not wire the money.”

“This wasn’t some nefarious deal,” he added.

That's the line. Dammit, you'd better believe it. Back to Cannon:

These answers are so thin they should undermine, rather than bolster, confidence in the Iran deal. For starters, the administration didn’t “announce” the $400 million payment in January: White House press secretary Josh Earnest confirmed it when it was reported elsewhere.

Second, where would anyone get the idea that it was a ransom payment for hostages? How about from the Iranians themselves. Gen. Mohammad Reza Naghdi was quoted on Iranian state media as crowing, “Taking this much money back was in return for the release of the American spies.”

Finally, the $400 million being delivered in cash (mostly Swiss francs and Euros, apparently) is not a minor detail. It’s an alarming disclosure. The president’s explanation seems absurd. How does sending a cargo plane full of cash comply with existing sanctions while bank transfers do not? As far as not having “a banking relationship with Iran,” what does that even mean? Is the president really claiming that no bank in the world would have facilitated a legal transfer of funds – even if Obama had asked them directly?

You don't get to ask those questions. There's more, a lot more, at the link, including a gentle reminder about how Uncle Sam and other local agencies view large cash transactions. A taste:

Take the Burmese refugee – an American citizen for 10 years – who manages a touring Christian rock band, raising money for a Burmese orphanage. He was stopped for a taillight violation by Oklahoma sheriff’s deputies, who sent him on his way after relieving him of the $53,000 he’d raised for charity. Could be drug money, they said.

There's a lesson here -- put yer money on a pallet and convert it to Euros.

Oh, good

Lovely:

Iran has successfully test-fired a new precision-guided, long-range missile, state-run media reported on Sunday.

The Emad (Pillar) surface-to-surface missile, designed and built by Iranian experts, is the country's first long-range missile that can be precision-guided until it reaches its target, said Brig. Gen. Hossein Dehqan, Iran's defense minister.

"To follow our defense programs, we don't ask permission from anyone," he said, according to state-run news agency IRNA.

The new rocket is "capable of scrutinizing the targets and destroying them completely," IRNA reported.

The Emad would be Tehran's first precision-guided missile with the range to reach its enemy, Israel.

Remember, that nuclear deal with Iran is a great idea.

Also submitted without further comment

Last week, Major General Salehi, the commander of Iran’s army, proclaimed this:

“We will annihilate Israel for sure.”

“We are glad that we are in the forefront of executing the Supreme Leader’s order to destroy Israel.”

And as for the Supreme Leader himself, a few days after the nuclear deal was announced, he released his latest book.

Here it is.

It’s a 400-page screed detailing his plan to destroy the State of Israel.

Last month, Khamenei once again made his genocidal intentions clear before Iran’s top clerical body, the Assembly of Experts.

He spoke about Israel, home to over six million Jews. He pledged, “there will be no Israel in 25 years.”

Seventy years after the murder of six million Jews, Iran’s rulers promise to destroy my country.

Murder my people.

And the response from this body, the response from nearly every one of the governments represented here has been absolutely nothing!

Utter silence!

Deafening silence.

Perhaps you can now understand why Israel is not joining you in celebrating this deal.

Heckuva a deal, there

Peace in our time, baby:

Israel will not survive the next 25 years, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Wednesday, making a series of threatening remarks published online.
In a quote posted to Twitter by Khamenei’s official account, Khamenei addresses Israel, saying, “You will not see next 25 years,” and adds that the Jewish state will be hounded until it is destroyed.

The quote comes against a backdrop of a photograph showing the Iranian leader walking on an Israeli flag painted on a sidewalk.

“After negotiations, in Zionist regime they said they had no more concern about Iran for next 25 years; I’d say: Firstly, you will not see next 25 years; God willing, there will be nothing as Zionist regime by next 25 years. Secondly, until then, struggling, heroic and jihadi morale will leave no moment of serenity for Zionists,” the quote from Iran’s top leader reads in broken English.

Here's the image:

Don't think this is Faux Pelini

A great deal. Nice job, everyone.

Great Moments in Investigations

Los Angeles, 1969:

Investigator:  Mr. Manson, we need to ask you a few questions concerning the activities of some of your associates.

Manson: We're running a social outreach program here.

Investigator: Are you sure about that? We noticed a little trouble up at Sharon Tate's residence and...

Manson: I've investigated this and there is no evidence of wrongdoing.

Investigator: Okay. Sorry to have troubled you.

A movie set, circa 1976:

Stormtrooper: Let me see your identification.

Ben Obi-Wan Kenobi: [with a small wave of his hand] You don't need to see his identification.

Stormtrooper: We don't need to see his identification.

Ben Obi-Wan Kenobi: These aren't the droids you're looking for.

Stormtrooper: These aren't the droids we're looking for.

Ben Obi-Wan Kenobi: He can go about his business.

Stormtrooper: You can go about your business.

Ben Obi-Wan Kenobi: Move along.

Stormtrooper: Move along... move along.

Geneva, Switzerland, 2015:

Iran will be allowed to use its own inspectors to investigate a site it has been accused of using to develop nuclear arms, operating under a secret agreement with the U.N. agency that normally carries out such work, according to a document seen by The Associated Press.

IAEA official: Let me see what's happening at Parchin.

Obi-Wan Khameini [with a small wave of his hand] You don't need to see what's happening at Parchin.

IAEA official: We don't need to see what's happening at Parchin.

A blast from the borscht belt

You don't hear much from Jackie Mason any more -- if I remember correctly, he got in trouble about 20 years ago for insulting David Dinkins -- but he's still around. And he's still got a fastball when he wants to use it. He makes a valuable point here:

Mason put his comic chops to use in analyzing the inspection of Iran's nuclear facilities as it is laid out in the deal. “Instant” inspections will only take place 24 days after requested, giving time – he charged – to clean up the site to be inspected.

"First Obama said we can inspect them any time, any place, whenever we please. Now it turns out ‘whenever we please’ except when they don’t allow it.  If they don’t want it it’s up to them. So then we have to wait 28 days [sic] to inspect, as if to say for the 28 days we can trust them completely, because they’ll do nothing. They’ll just hold the bomb in front of us waiting for us to come so they can show it to us. That’s how stupid this negotiation is to us," he said.

"Do you know that in the restaurants of New York, they have an inspection system. You can surprise any restaurant without notice that you can walk in and inspect them… So we are protected in this city from a bad tuna fish.  We’re not protected from a bomb but we’re protected from a bad quality of a tuna fish," Mason joked.

Maybe if we can't get inspections, we could use Yelp.

Now he's just trolling

Subtle:

Feel the love

The full image, in case you weren't clear:

The ears tell the story

John Kerry will be coming over to wax the Ayatollah's car later on.

Submitted without further comment

An advertisement from the 1970s: