Wouldn’t the more appropriate comparison be an attack on the CENTCOM or SOCOM commander?
-
-
-
Given Suleimani's long term, super high-level role in Iran, I don't think so. In *political* importance in Iran he was more like Eisenhower or Marshall, or at least Colin Powell in his heyday. Not "this year's 4 star" at a theater command
- Još 4 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
That’s a fair question to ask, but it implicitly mirror-images US leadership roles onto Iranian ones, doesn’t it? No US CIA Director ever flew into Bagram Airfield or personally posed an imminent threat to Soviet forces during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.
-
It still gets to the heart of the issue: can all great powers can do this? Or is it a superpower prerogative? The US has a long history of backing jihadists abroad, by accident or by design. People who insist on 'order' superintended by the US really ought to have an answer.
- Još 3 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Killing US figures usually required politburo approval. Which is not to say wet affairs never happened (Adolph Dubs, Major Nicholson for example) but that it wasn’t supposed to be decided by the KGB or Red Army on their own authority.
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
Or Russia could simply designate certain Ukrainian entities (Azov, Right Sector, MVD) as terror supporters and proceed to eradicate their leaders.
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
Very, very different... The US was not to the Mujaheddin what Iran is to Shia militias in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.