Showing posts with label Iraq. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iraq. Show all posts

Sunday, January 12, 2020

What did Donald Trump do today?

He basically admitted he'd lied in his most recent version of why he ordered the assassination of an Iranian general.

Ever since Qassem Soleimani, an Iranian general, was assassinated by drone strike on Trump's orders on January 2, Trump has struggled to offer a reason as to what (other than his own political situation) made it necessary. The official White House explanation has shifted wildly ever since, and classified Congressional briefings given after the fact left members of both parties furious over their lack of substance. 

On Thursday of this past week, Trump declared that Soleimani was involved in a plot to "blow up" an American embassy. 

Then, in an interview on Friday with Laura Ingraham of Fox News, Trump said that Soleimani was planning to destroy not one but four American embassies. (Neither version of Trump's story about embassy attacks made it into the top-secret briefing that senators got on Wednesday.)

Today, Defense Secretary Mark Esper made the rounds of Sunday talk shows and admitted that Trump's claim about multiple embassy attacks was not based on "evidence" but rather Trump's "belief" that such a thing could happen. 

Since there is no chance that Esper would make such an admission without Trump's approval, this essentially amounts to Trump admitting that he was making it up.

Trump's decision to kill Soleimani has led directly to the Iraqi parliament voting to expel American troops, and Iran's withdrawal from the arms control agreement that was holding back its development of nuclear weapons. 

Why is this a bad thing?

  • Presidents who have a good reason for the things they do don't need to make up fake ones.

Thursday, January 9, 2020

What did Donald Trump do today?

He accused Democrats of taking a page from his playbook.

Trump held a campaign rally tonight, the second he has held since being impeached for his efforts to get Ukraine to interfere in the 2020 election. He used it to claim that the reason he refused to inform Congressional leaders about his assassination attack on an Iranian general in Iraq was that they would have leaked the news. "We’re having people like Nancy Pelosi…they’re all trying to say, ‘How dare you take him out that way? You should get permission from Congress…so that we can call up the “fake news” that’s back there and we can leak it,'" Trump said.

There is real irony in Trump accusing Democrats of leaking sensitive military information. Just before the Soleimani attack, he tipped off his Mar-a-Lago customers that "something big" was going to happen with Iran—which was not even the first time that paying to have dinner near Trump resulted in military secrets being exposed. Trump also accidentally revealed the identity and methods of Israeli spies to Russia, The CIA was even forced to retire a spy deep within the Putin regime in Russia for fear that Trump had exposed them—or would.

In reality, Democrats—and Republicans—in Congress were furious because Congress has a legal right to be briefed in advance about military actions it hasn't authorized. Trump's apparent inability to explain why the strike was ordered in the first place—he changed his story yet again today—has led some to suspect that he saw it as a way to distract from his impeachment

Trump has been trying hard, but with limited success, to get the image of himself as a hero for the Soleimani assassination to catch on. Trump has promoted Soleimani as the "top terrorist" in the world, but fewer than 40% of Americans approve of the order to have him killed. Worse, for Trump, Americans believe by a better than 2-to-1 margin that Trump's assassination of him made the country less safe.

So what?

  • It's wrong to accuse other people of disloyal or stupid acts you've committed yourself.
  • Campaigning on an unpopular military strike with disastrous immediate consequences is beneath the presidency.

Wednesday, January 8, 2020

What did Donald Trump do today?

He tried to shift the blame for losing Iraq to Iran.

Trump addressed the nation today, beginning with a demand that Americans be "grateful and happy" for his handling of the crisis unfolding in Iran and Iraq. 

The speech was riddled with factual errors and lies. Trump said that the United States didn't need Middle Eastern oil anymore, but in reality almost 20% of American oil consumption comes from that region. He got both the beginning (2015, not 2013) and ending dates (2040, not "shortly") of the Iran nuclear agreement wrong. He claimed that to have "completely rebuilt" the entire military, which could mean anything but can't really be true regardless.

But most of Trump's lies or errors were aimed at trying to shift the blame for the debacle to President Obama. In particular, he said that "The missiles fired last night at us and our allies were paid for by the funds made available by the last administration." 

This just isn't true.

Trump has made little secret of his hatred for Obama, or his desire to destroy his predecessor's legislative and diplomatic achievements, if only to limit the credit that Obama gets for them. Last year, Trump withdrew the United States from the deal that limited the amount of enriched uranium Iran could produce, an amount enforced and monitored by international inspectors. (Enriched uranium can be used either for generating energy, or as a precursor to building nuclear weapons.) 

Iran was complying in spite of Trump's actions until this week.

Many observers have wondered if the assassination of Qassem Soleimani, an Iranian general, was Trump's way of—somewhat successfully—distracting from his recent impeachment over his attempts to force Ukraine to interfere in the 2020 election. He accused President Obama of doing exactly that, too, in 2011. (Obama won re-election in 2012 without going to war with Iran.)

Those suspicions were deepened today when, in a "briefing" six days after the fact for members of Congress, he refused to allow the Defense Department to actually say what imminent threat Soleimani represented. Even Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), normally a staunch defender of Trump, called it the "worst briefing on a military issue" he'd ever seen. Lee said that no evidence of any threat was presented, which fits with the similar lack of explanation for his actions that Trump has offered the American people.

Speaking to reporters afterwards, Sen. Lee was visibly furious at the Trump administration's claim, delivered in the classified session, that for Congress to even discuss its constitutional responsibility to control Trump's ability to launch attacks would somehow weaken the United States. As he put it:

I find this insulting and demeaning to the Constitution of the United States. It's un-American. It's unconstitutional. And it's wrong. ...They are appearing before a coordinate branch of government responsible for their funding, for their confirmation, for any approval of any military action they might take. They had to leave after 75 minutes while they were in the process of telling us that we need to be good little boys and girls and not debate this in public. I find that to be absolutely insane. I think it's unacceptable.

Why does this matter?

  • It's wrong for Presidents to lie to the American people, especially about something this important.
  • The most powerful person in the world probably ought to be able to take responsibility for his own actions.
  • The United States is not weakened by following the Constitution, even if it might hurt the president's political needs.

Tuesday, January 7, 2020

What did Donald Trump do today?

He said that all was well.

Trump's first and so far only reaction to news that Iran had hit Iraqi military bases housing American troops with a dozen or more ballistic missiles was to tweet, "All is well!"

Americans' immediate reaction to the oddly cheerful tweet was generally unkind.

Because Iran launched the missiles from its own territory—and, as experts immediately pointed out, because they were likely aiming to avoid places where people might be—American forces would have had ample warning to head to fortified bases. In that light, Trump may have trying to suggest that there were no Americans killed in the attacks. (As of 11:30 p.m. EST, no announcement about casualties had been made public yet.) 

Otherwise, Trump cannot be happy with what has happened on the ground in Iraq and Iran in the five days since he ordered the assassination of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani. In less than a week, he essentially lost Iraq. Soleimani was popular with the mostly-Shiite Iraqi militias fighting the Islamic State. The Iraqi government, which wasn't warned that Soleimani would be killed on their territory, responded almost instantly with a vote in Parliament to expel American troops. (The Iraqi government doubled down on that reaction again today.)

In the same short period, Iran has also used the conflict as an excuse to begin enriching uranium, which is the first step in creating nuclear weapons.

And while Trump pleasantly surprised some observers with his weirdly calm reaction—far better than the alternative—he's also losing face. Iran's attack came with a threat, delivered in English via Twitter, that if the United States responded further, they would attack Israel and Dubai. Any such attack on unrelated countries would also be a war crime, but Iran's military—while large and effective—is much more likely to actually carry out such an order than the United States armed forces would be.

In other words, by pretending he wasn't upset at having American troops attacked and being dared not to respond, Trump may be doing the only thing he can do in the situation he got himself into: declaring victory and changing the subject.

Why should I care about this?

  • Nothing that gives enemy nations this much of an advantage in this short a period of time is a good thing.
  • Telling people "all is well" when they know it isn't is pretty insulting.

Monday, January 6, 2020

What did Donald Trump do today?

He found time in his busy schedule to claim he was too busy to be impeached.

Today, Trump had his first working day in the Oval Office since December 20, 2019, which lasted at least through a 1:00 p.m. lunch with Vice-President Mike Pence. But he began the day as usual on Twitter, and specifically by arguing that he was too "busy" to be impeached.

Trump spent the previous seventeen days at his luxury resort in Florida, and on thirteen of them spent the better part of the day at his golf course. During that time, his public schedule had zero official activities and only scattered political and social appearances. 

Of course, Trump wasn't completely idle during this period: he did order the assassination of an Iranian military leader—something his tweet today makes clear he hopes will push his impeachment out of the news. 

But the confusion and disarray in the administration's response to the aftermath doesn't make it seem like Trump is spending much time trying to work the problem. Even Trump's staunchest supporters don't seem to be able to agree on why Trump ordered the attack, what he hoped to achieve, or whether he had any good idea of what the consequences would be.

Today saw an embarrassing example of that. The commanding general of American forces in Iraq drafted a letter to the Iraqi government, dated today, in which he explained his plans for his troops' "movement out of Iraq" in "due deference to the sovereignty of the Republic of Iraq." The Iraqi parliament voted on Sunday to expel US forces. Gen. William Seely closed by acknowledging that "we respect your sovereign decision to order our departure." It was only after the letter was leaked to the press that the Defense Department walked back the letter. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark Milley, said that Seely's letter was "poorly phrased" and was only a draft—in spite of the fact that it appears to have actually been sent to some Iraqi leaders. 

While this was unfolding, Trump was indeed "busy"—campaigning for re-election on a radio show.

Why should this matter?

  • Commander-in-chief is a job, not just a title.
  • Presidents aren't above the law, even if they're "busy."
  • Busy people generally don't have time to play golf 13 times in 17 days.

Sunday, January 5, 2020

What did Donald Trump do today?

He found an interesting way to get the United States out of the "endless war" in Iraq.

Trump ended the seventeen-day Florida segment of his holiday vacation today, although not before getting in one visit to the golf course (his thirteenth of the trip). He has observed what, for Trump, is an eerie radio silence today, tweeting only once before 7 p.m. and avoiding reporters in a situation where he normally tries to find a camera. 

The reason for the reticence is probably that he managed to lose Iraq and Iran on the same day.

Trump's assassination of the Iranian military leader Qassim Soleimani took place on Iraqi soil. Soleimani had been visiting the anti-ISIS militias that Iran had supported in recent years. Today, the Iraqi parliament—which until now had welcomed American troops—voted to expel them. It is a stunning rejection by a democratically elected government that the United States essentially founded, even as Trump administration officials begged Iraqi legislators not to go through with it.

The vote, taken by under interim leadership, is not legally binding until it's ratified by a permanent government. But as the State Department announced today, the deteriorating relationship with the formerly friendly Iraqi government has forced the United States to abandon its own anti-ISIS partnerships in the country.

Asked about the vote on the way back to Washington, Trump responded with a threat to impose sanctions "like they've never seen before ever" on Iraq. Again, Iraq's government was (at least until today) a strategic ally of the United States.

Also today, Iran announced it would no longer restrict the amount of enriched uranium—which can be used to make nuclear weapons—that it would produce. Under the 2015 deal brokered between the United States, Iran, and five other countries, Iran was abiding by strict limits on the amount and type of nuclear fuel it was producing. Even after Trump yanked the United States out of the agreement in 2018 and reimposed economic sanctions—gaining nothing but the ability to say he had done so, and threatening America's closest military allies for not following suit—Iran continued to comply. 

So what?

  • It's bad to give an enemy nation an excuse to develop nuclear weapons.
  • When voters heard Trump say he wanted to pull the United States out of "endless wars," they probably didn't think he meant by having a formerly friendly government kick us out.

Friday, January 3, 2020

What did Donald Trump do today?

He ordered American troops into, and American civilians out of, the place he said he'd made safer.

Yesterday, Trump ordered the assassination of an Iranian military leader, Qassim Suleimani, who was traveling in Iraq at the time. Trump kept Congress in the dark, and didn't warn allies in the region either.  (Trump did, however, drop hints in advance to his paying guests at Mar-a-Lago. Surprise sneak previews of major government actions is something of a perk for guests at Trump's luxury resort.)

Not telling designated Congressional leaders is illegal, but not informing allies is dangerous, because Iran is all but guaranteed to respond with violence. And reprisals are most likely to happen in the Middle East, rather than on American soil. 

Today, Trump tried to insist that Americans were safer with Suleimani dead. "Under my leadership," he declared from his vacation resort, "the world is a safer place."

But at the same time, he was ordering at least 3,500 additional American troops into the Middle East, with more likely on the way, in anticipation of counterattacks. And the State Department today urgently warned Americans to leave Iraq—previously a relatively safe area—immediately. Americans were warned not to even approach the U.S. Embassy, which is an extremely secure compound in Baghdad.

Why should I care about this?

  • Voters who believed Trump when he said he would get the United States out of "endless wars" in the Middle East probably didn't want him to start a new one.
  • It's wrong to say things are "safer" when your government is clearly preparing for things being more dangerous.
  • Presidents are not above the law.

Sunday, April 9, 2017

Sunday Week in Review, friends and family edition

What else did Donald Trump do this week?

Factions. He demanded an end to the "palace intrigue" stories fueled by leaks from the warring factions within his own administration. (This was immediately leaked, generating more palace intrigue stories.) 

However, most of the news on the subject was generated by Trump's own staffing changes. Three of the ever-shifting centers of power in the Trump White House are his son-in-law Jared Kushner, his chief of staff Reince Preibus, and his senior advisor Steve Bannon. The latter two were the subject of sustained rumors about their imminent firing or resignations, while Kushner drew attention for having been given (as a 36-year-old heir and political novice) a portfolio of jobs larger than would be typical for a seasoned vice-president. 

White House staffing changes are hardly unusual, but Trump's moves drew extra scrutiny because of the unusual degree of department-by-department chaos they suggest. Kushner, for example, has essentially taken over what is left of the State Department, with Rex Tillerson relegated to a supporting role. By contrast, National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster appears to have finally gained momentum in his none-too-discreet attempts to purge his office of loyalists to Bannon and Trump's original NSA Michael Flynn. 

Family. Kushner was not the only Trump Administration family member to make the news this week, although his now-enormous list of titles and responsibilities once again called attention to his unchecked conflicts of interest and the lack of any reason for his appointment other than being married to Trump's daughter. Trump's son Eric weighed in this week on the subject with perhaps unintentional candor, admitting that he and his siblings "might be here because of nepotism" before arguing that "nepotism is a factor of life" and that the Trump children had eventually earned through good work the various opportunities their father had given them. 

Eric Trump also claimed that their father would not hesitate to fire any of his children if they did a poor job, although since Eric and his brother Donald Jr. are ostensibly in charge of Donald Sr.'s business holdings, they might seem to be insulated from that during Trump's time in office. But their trusteeship has been revealed recently to be even less blind than originally claimed. Trump suggested he would know nothing for the "eight years" he expected to be president, but Eric admitted that he briefs Trump Sr. on business matters quarterly. On Monday, ProPublica revealed a secret change to the legal documents governing the trust that allow Donald Trump to secretly withdraw profits from the Trump Organization directly into accounts that he personally controls. (The Trump White House initially denied this, but subsequently admitted it.) Because Trump refuses to acknowledge that there can ever be an actual conflict of interest where the president is concerned, his use of the trust that theoretically gives day-to-day control to his sons has always been voluntarily. This change, however, allows him to secretly undo it to any extent at any time.

Other Trump administration figures' family members made the news, too. Education secretary Betsy DeVos's brother is Erik Prince, best known as the founder of Blackwater, the private military organization responsible for the 2007 murder of seventeen Iraqi civilians in Nisour Square. Prince has stayed largely out of the public eye since then (and has changed the name of Blackwater twice) but has remained influential in GOP political circles. This week it was revealed that just before Trump's inauguration, Prince orchestrated a secret meeting with a representative of Vladimir Putin, in order to establish a diplomatic backchannel between Trump and Putin.

Friends. Trump went to bat for Bill O'Reilly, the Fox News pundit who yet again found himself in the spotlight because of sexual harassment lawsuits. Trump, who has been accused of sexual harassment himself more times than can be exhaustively documented, said that O'Reilly was a "good person" and added "I don’t think Bill did anything wrong" in any of the five most recent cases where O'Reilly settled out of court with his accusers. Trump has proclaimed April as National Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month. The official declaration that Trump signed calls for "supporting victims" and "prosecuting offenders to the full extent of the law," and emphasizes the importance of "changing social norms that accept or allow indifference to sexual violence."

Why should anyone care about these things?


  • A president who wants to end "palace intrigue" stories should try harder to avoid being manipulated by the factions within his own administration.
  • A 36-year-old who has never run a business he didn't purchase with his inheritance money is probably not the best choice to run several executive branch departments simultaneously.
  • Nepotism doesn't stop being wrong just because the beneficiary of it thinks he might be pretty good at the job he got unfairly.
  • A president with completely transparent and unfettered access to his vast business holdings does not in any sense have a blind trust.
  • Presidents who arrange for secret backchannel diplomatic connections to Russia may have secret backchannel diplomatic connections to Russia.
  • Donald Trump thinking someone is a good guy doesn't make that guy automatically innocent of any wrongdoing.

Wednesday, March 1, 2017

What did Donald Trump do today?

He decided to put off signing a new executive order on immigration for publicity purposes.

When a series of federal court decisions stayed the implementation of Trump's wide-ranging ban on immigration from certain countries and refugees, he ominously predicted that even the slightest delay could allow terrorists to infiltrate the country. In fact, Trump's central argument was that the threat posed by refugees and other legal immigrants was so urgent a matter of national security that courts had no right to review it. 

Meanwhile, his administration has worked to produce a new, more narrowly targeted order more likely to pass constitutional muster. The new order was to have been signed today, but after his relatively restrained speech to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday generated a rare positive news cycle for Trump, his political advisers convinced him to wait until tomorrow at the earliest to sign it. 

A senior administration official openly admitted that this was a political calculation designed to allow the new order "to have its own 'moment'" and, by implication, to prevent any new controversy from overshadowing coverage of the Tuesday speech.

Who cares?

  • It's bad if a president deliberately chooses flattering press coverage over something he thinks is a matter of urgent national security.
  • It's just as bad if a president claims drastic emergency measures are necessary but does not actually believe it.

Monday, February 20, 2017

What did Donald Trump do today?

He announced, through his defense secretary, that the United States does not intend to seize Iraq's oil.

It was probably necessary for James Mattis, who is visiting Iraq today, to make such an announcement because Trump has repeatedly declared that Iraq's oil industry is a prize of war that the United States should have taken because "to the victor go the spoils." 

Seizing Iraq's oil against its will would involve nothing short of the permanent military conquest and occupation of the country. The last serious attempt at seizing even a small oil-producing region was Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait in 1990, although ISIL has used oil fields in territory it controls to provide for its own oil needs and to raise cash from small-scale smuggling operations.

Why should anyone care about this?

  • It's bad if a president needs to explicitly reassure allied governments that he does not intend to invade them and take their natural resources.
  • Saddam Hussein and ISIL are poor role models for a president of the United States.

If you see something on this site that you think your friends on social media might not have heard, please share it on Facebook or mention us on Twitter. Thank you!