Killing of Qassem Suleimani


We are all familiar with a similar (though different) split - there are parallels with the history of Christianity in Europe. A religious division, initially based on philosophical differences, becomes a cultural identity which is used for political control... the various reformation, counter-reformation and other issues throughout Europe. Or even more recently the political issues in Northern Ireland. Another analogy could be the post independence politics in Ireland - a division into "sects" that became about power and control.

So think of Iran as the home of Shia Islam with a majority in Iraq and Lebanon. Sunni Islam is essentially the rest of the Islamic world with Saudi Arabia being the spiritual home. But layered on top of that is the political tug of war for influence between Iran and Saudi in the region. So Saudi's have long used / funded proxies to spread Sunni Islam (and therefore Saudi influence) e.g. ISIS / Al-Queda. Iraq has used counter-measures (such as Quds force in Iraq) to try to counter it - for the same reason and also to try to link a corridor between Iran / Iraq and Lebanon to create a "safe space" from a Shia point of view (the "Shia Crescent"). For years Iraq was governed by a Sunni tribe in a non-religious state but was always majority Shia. And so was always a convenient buffer. Getting rid of Hussein took the lid off this conflict.

That's what Soleimani was about - the US was probably incidental for him. If they were in the way, he'd hit them (especially in Iraq), if they weren't (more recently) he was more focussed on wiping out ISIS
 
I take your point that we used to go to war over the precise nature of relationships within the Blessed Trinity. But we kinda left that behind a few centuries ago (except for Norn Iron of course). Seems the only half civilised folk in the whole neighbourhood are the Jews.
 
Iran has admitted responsibility for the shooting down of Ukrainian passenger jet. Thankfully, when faced with apparently overwhelmingly evidence, they have not sought to obfuscate or prolong their initial denials.
They claim it was unintentional. I cant see it being anything other than unintentional.
 
As you say, and as joe sod immediately identified, "overwhelming evidence". The odds of a single passenger flight resulting in a fatal accident are 1 in 19.6 million. The odds of this arising from an accidental fireball incident (as per videos) would be even remoter still.
It was intentional of course, but it was hopefully also a case of mistaken identity*, as per the American downing of an Iranian airliner in 1988. Point is they downed it intentionally and they knew from word go what they had done. If they couldn't fool joe sod how did they hope to fool the World's aviation experts.

* All the same it seems a bit coincidental that the nationals most affected are Canadians. Unlikely that there would have been a similar plane load of US citizens. Maybe some nutters in the operation went for the next best thing. They are talking about prosecutions after all.
 
Last edited:

Its pretty obvious they would have kept up the denial strategy if they thought they could get away with it.
It was only the sheer weight of evidence that forced them to own up.
At least they are still amenable to that.
 
The mistaken identity is plausible. Possibly identified as a US spy plane or stealth bomber aiming to target missile launch sites?
A lot will depend on the type of missile used to down the jet. The initial reports were that Iran launched 'surface to surface' missiles, which I figure, in my limited knowledge of weaponry, would not be suitable for airborne and mobile targets.
Trudeau has however mentioned 'surface to air' which would support the intentional targeting.
I would subscribe to the mistaken identity theory in that case. The reporting around the whole missile attack indicates that the Iranians were intent on doing something to satisfy an enraged population, but intent on minimising damage so as not to escalate the situation.
Intentionally taking out a passenger jet comprising of UK, Canadian and Ukrainian civilians would not help in that regard.
 
odyssey06 said:
Its pretty obvious they would have kept up the denial strategy if they thought they could get away with it.
Click to expand...

I don't think it would be obvious at all. An investigation like this presumably could take months? In which the affair can be somewhat diluted. If they wanted to keep denying they could.
There were however Iranian civilians on board too. To lie to the international community is one thing, to lie to their own people is another.
The people of Iran must be hurting now. First they suffered the shock of having their revered General Solemani assassinated by the US. Then in response, they take out the lives of innocent civilians of their own country and of others with whom they have no quarrel.
 
I definitely don't suggest that this had sanction from on high- they are not that stupid. But feelings were running extremely high (50 killed in stampede).

If there had been a plane carrying a lot of US citizens the temptation for some rogue nutter in a senior position in the Surface to Air defences to get revenge would have been high, and I think the suspicion would be huge if the victims were Americans rather than Canadians. But maybe Canadians were the next best thing available - coincidental to me. As I say, why is there talk of prosecutions if they simply made a mistake at a time of great tension.
 
Last edited:
Duke of Marmalade said:
If there had been a plane carrying a lot of US citizens the temptation for some nutter in command of the Surface to Air defences to get revenge would have been high.
Click to expand...

Nah, don't buy the "lone nutter" theory. These are military personnel, they follow orders. They still have the death penalty in Iran? Taking out a passenger jet of US civilians would definitely escalate the situation. The reports of the missile attack on the bases all suggest that this was intended more as face-saving exercise than it was to exact revenge.
I don't know about you, but I suspect the use of this type of weaponry is subject to a chain of command. As such

Duke of Marmalade said:
As I say, why is there talk of prosecutions if they simply made a mistake at a time of great tension.
Click to expand...

? Because innocent civilians were killed as a result of wreckless actions.
Basically somebody made a call that the plane was hostile - they would have needed evidence of this, they simply cannot rely on a hunch. So whatever information they had, mostly probably inclusive, they interpreted one way and made a decision that the plane was hostile and as such ordered the attack.
Given the nature of the events, quick decisive actions are mostly par the course.
In this case, a wrong decision with tragic consequences, but still liable to prosecution.
 
Duke of Marmalade said:
Wolfie you are surely not that nigh eve. What the Iranian authorities tell to their own people would probably have embarrassed even Comical Ali.
Click to expand...

But that is to assume the Iranian person are somewhat naive themselves.
I don't think so, quite a clever bunch as it stands.
So Iranians passenger jet, carrying Iranian passengers is shot down at a time when Iranian government announces missile attack on the US.
And you think the Iranian people would swallow a bogus narrative in this circumstance? I dont.
And the last thing any government wants at a time of war (or anytime for that matter) is for its population to turn against it.
The Iranian people are sophisticated and intelligent people, they are hurting at the moment.
 

If the international community - not just the US - hadnt produced the evidence which gets to the ears of their people they would have stonewalled.
Lying to their own people is second nature to regimes like this.
How many civilians died in the recent anti government protests?
 
odyssey06 said:
How many civilians died in the recent anti government protests?
Click to expand...

Ok, we are in danger of conflating and comparing all previous actions, relating to any amount of different situations, with one another, to conclude what the most likely action would be if something else had happened one way or another way.

I totally accept the Iranian administration can and does and has lied to its people. I accept ALL State authorities, over time, have at some point lied, and will lie again, to its people.

Specifically with regard to, the shooting down of the jet, I do think in the face of the overwhelming evidence coupled with the fact that Iranian civilians on board, that the option to perpetuate the denials was greatly diminished on account of not wanting to stir up more anti-government protests at a time when there appears to be a groundswell of unity in the country.

Thats simply an opinion.
 
Can you imagine the uproar if the US "accidentally" shot down a plane full of innocent people?

I haven't seen any photos yet of Khomeini weeping & crying for the victims of the plane they shot down.

It points to an incredible useless military if this was an accident.
 

It has happened before, ironically enough I think the US shot down an Iranian airliner in the 80s?
And there was uproar, deservedly so.
Some combination of a glitch in their missile system and over zealous commander at the helm - on the mitigating front the airliner had left an airfield jointly used by Iranian military.

On another forum someone posted a commment to the effect that Russian anti aircraft technology has shot down more civilian airliners than any other country's.
Iranians not closing their airspace after launching a ballistic missile attack was disgraceful, you put yourself - or rather the people on plane - into the hands of the gods of war.

Full details on the 1980s incident:

Iran Air Flight 655 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org
 
Last edited:

In mid-July 1988, Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati asked the United Nations Security Council to condemn the United States saying the attack "could not have been a mistake" and was a "criminal act", a "massacre", and an "atrocity"

Will the response be the same from Iran for this event I wonder?



In 1996, the governments of the United States and Iran reached a settlement at the International Court of Justice which included the statement "...the United States recognized the aerial incident of 3 July 1988 as a terrible human tragedy and expressed deep regret over the loss of lives caused by the incident..."[12] As part of the settlement, even though the U.S. government did not admit legal liability or formally apologize to Iran, it still agreed to pay US$61.8 million on an ex gratia basis in compensation to the families of the Iranian victims.[13]

I presume Iran will honour the victims in the same way the US did also. You know, those aviation rules n'all...

Iran Air Flight 655 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org
 
Firefly said:
I presume Iran will honour the victims in the same way the US did also.
Click to expand...

I would suggest that the admission of responsibility within 4 days indicates a willingness to honor the victims in a more dignified manner.
Far more dignified that waiting six years for a settlement in International Court of Justice* where the perpetrators still refuse to publicly admit liability.

*Is this a global thing? How can this be? How can it be possible to implement such a complex thing on an international scale?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register