No Evidence of ‘Self-Defense’ in Soleimani’s Killing

It was an illegal assassination by the U.S. and an attack on international law, according to a new report

Posted on

From The American Conservative:

The U.N. special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions has said in a new report that the assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani earlier this year was in violation of international law, and noted that the US had provided no evidence that it had acted in self-defense:

The attack violated the UN Charter, Callamard wrote in a report calling for accountability for targeted killings by armed drones and for greater regulation of the weapons.

Callamard’s judgment is correct, but then we didn’t need a UN official to tell us what was right in front of us six months ago. The UN Charter prohibits the use of force except for the purpose of self-defense. The US was clearly not engaged in self-defense when it launched an attack to kill a senior member of a foreign government’s military on the territory of a third country. The US not only committed an act of aggression against Iran, but it trampled on Iraq’s sovereignty as well. Everything that the Trump administration told the public about this attack back in January was untrue or misleading, and its claim that the president had authority to launch this attack because of the 2002 Iraq war AUMF was spurious nonsense.

Read the rest of the article

8 thoughts on “No Evidence of ‘Self-Defense’ in Soleimani’s Killing”

  1. Qasem Soleimani had to die for the same reason Che Guevara had to die, he was a menace to America’s lust for international terrorism, and he should be mourned for the same reason Murray Rothbard mourned Che, “What made Che such an heroic figure for out time is that the, more than any man of our epoch or even of our century, was the living embodiment of the principle of Revolution.”

  2. If “self defense” doesn’t stick we can always throw out the “he was a terrorist because we said so” excuse. By the time our standard list of excuses is exhausted this will be forgotten.

    1. You make a very good point. However I think there may well be some nuance that you and I as reasonable people should keep in mind. The actions of the Iranian government and specifically General Qasem Soleimani are are not exactly those of those that wear the white gloves of innocence and purity. If you or a fellow reader want to research the case in favor of the assassination of Qasem Soleimani then I point you to four posts/episodes by Scott Adams on the topic.

      I wish I could give a good summary but the issue is a bit deep. Listen to Mr. Adams and come to your own best conclusion.

      1. I don’t defend anyone’s generals, including Iran’s. My point wasn’t to defend their general but to point out how we go from one standardized excuse to another until one sticks or the issue is forgotten.

Comments are closed.