19 ms·

I agree with that. But to continue above analogy, The U.S. assassinated an Iranian major general in January claiming it was necessary to stop an imminent attac

by stunt 6y ago

I agree with that. But to continue above analogy, The U.S. assassinated an Iranian major general in January claiming it was necessary to stop an imminent attack. Israel has similar claims against Iran. That's why they are also assassinating Iranian scientists that are linked to their nuclear program. Iran has similar claims against MEK (Mujahedin-e-Khalq) organization in Paris. MEK was listed as a terrorist organization by the UN, EU, and the U.S. until a few years. Hence the failed attempt from Iran that you linked here. I think assassination of a scientist like that isn't justifiable, for the same reasons that Iran's attempt to target MEK organization isn't justifiable.

candiodari 6y ago
The attack on Qasem Soleimani was a military strike against a military target, WHILE this person was orchestrating military strikes against US soldiers. You start shooting at soldiers, they may shoot back, and the bullets coming back may kill you. That he used missiles instead of bullets makes this long-distance, but doesn't change the nature of what happened. This is not what people refer to when they say "assassination". There are very bad actions by the US military. This is not one of them. > Iran has similar claims against MEK (Mujahedin-e-Khalq) organization in Paris ... That they are developing nuclear weapons to use against Iranian civilians? Because that's the claim of the US and Israel, a claim that's essentially validated by the Iranian regime. The mission of this person was to develop and maintain nuclear strike capability ... Netanyahu nor Trump see themselves or their power threatened by an Iranian Nuclear bomb. They see large amounts of civilians threatened by a nuclear weapons, weapons essentially in the hands of racists. So no, I don't think anything about these claims is similar. And that is supposed to give the regime in Iran the authority to carry out terrorist actions, in a crowd of civilians, on foreign soil? Foreign soil where other terrorists have randomly killed hundreds of civilians, again for racist reasons? Good luck with that argument ... All attacks against these weapon development engineers and managers were pinpoint strikes. So no, I don't think the opponents here are very comparable, neither in reasoning nor in methods.

by stunt 6y ago

candiodari 6y ago

The attack on Qasem Soleimani was a military strike against a military target, WHILE this person was orchestrating military strikes against US soldiers. You start shooting at soldiers, they may shoot back, and the bullets coming back may kill you. That he used missiles instead of bullets makes this long-distance, but doesn't change the nature of what happened. This is not what people refer to when they say "assassination". There are very bad actions by the US military. This is not one of them. > Iran has similar claims against MEK (Mujahedin-e-Khalq) organization in Paris ... That they are developing nuclear weapons to use against Iranian civilians? Because that's the claim of the US and Israel, a claim that's essentially validated by the Iranian regime. The mission of this person was to develop and maintain nuclear strike capability ... Netanyahu nor Trump see themselves or their power threatened by an Iranian Nuclear bomb. They see large amounts of civilians threatened by a nuclear weapons, weapons essentially in the hands of racists. So no, I don't think anything about these claims is similar. And that is supposed to give the regime in Iran the authority to carry out terrorist actions, in a crowd of civilians, on foreign soil? Foreign soil where other terrorists have randomly killed hundreds of civilians, again for racist reasons? Good luck with that argument ... All attacks against these weapon development engineers and managers were pinpoint strikes. So no, I don't think the opponents here are very comparable, neither in reasoning nor in methods.