Five Reasons Why The Left Went Insane Over Soleimani’s Death

This past week, President Trump took the courageous and bold action and ordered the hit on Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, killing one of the leaders in global terror and a man responsible for the death of hundreds of Americans and countless others. Under normal circumstances, this would have been seen as a strategic and morally good decision, and would have received praise from the media and Democrats, with some outlying wonderment as to the ramifications of the act. These, however, are not normal times, because Donald Trump is President and he is reviled by the Left. Therefore, much of the reaction to this event has been thoroughly insane, even by the political standards of the day. Those reactions basically break down into five different groups:

This group is embodied by Colin Kaepernick, failed quarterback and political activist. Kaepernick doesn’t view this conflict as anything but America’s racism harming people of color. “There is nothing new about American terrorist attacks against Black and Brown people for the expansion of American imperialism,” Kaepernick wrote on Twitter.

“America has always sanctioned and besieged Black and Brown bodies both at home and abroad. America [sic] militarism is the weapon wielded by American imperialism, to enforce its policing and plundering of the non white [sic] world.” To Kaepernick, and to those who support his political agenda, Soleimani and Iran are defined merely by their skin color, not at all by their actions. This is an unsurprising opinion from the man who led the movement against the American flag, but it embodies a small portion of the political Left.

Hatred of America also brought out the same anti-war protesters seen in the early 2000s. These are not the ones who have legitimate quarrels or concerns with Iraq or Afghanistan war policies; rather they are those who hijack demonstrations to bash America and, for some reason, Israel. In New York and Los Angeles, protesters gathered with pro-Soleimani signs and chanting, “Free free palestine” [sic] and “end all aid to Israel” for literally no reason.

This is very close to the “Hate America” group, because they fear retaliation from the Iranians and think that America is too weak and too morally incorrect to properly defend herself and her ideals. This is embodied by two camps: the cultural camp, led by actress Rose McGowan, and the political camp, led by New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio.

Rose McGowan tweeted a picture with a waving Iranian flag, saying, “Dear #Iran, The USA has disrespected your country, your flag, your people. 52% of us humbly apologize. We want peace with your nation. We are being held hostage by a terrorist regime. We do not know how to escape. Please do not kill us. #Soleimani.” According to McGowan, the Trump administration is the “terrorist regime,” not the Iranians, who actually fund terrorists. McGowan, after receiving a massive amount of criticism, clarified: “Of course #Soleimani was an evil evil man who did evil evil things. But that at this moment is not the [expletive deleted] point. The United States is morally corrupt and acts illegally. It is only logical to appeal to Iran’s pride by apologizing. I’m taking one for the team. #TeamStayAlive.” Through this tweet, fear of Iran is coupled with hatred of America, with a dash of naiveté sprinkled in. This is the naiveté of the Obama administration, that the government of Iran is a place that can be negotiated with through weakness, and not strength.

Mayor de Blasio, meanwhile, has the temerity to pretend to care about the prosperity of his city, which under his tenure has been besieged by anti-Semitic attacks, rampant homelessness, and increased crime. “Worried for our city + our nation,” the Mayor tweeted. “Without the approval of Congress, the US Government effectively declared war on Iran tonight. The American people had no say in the matter, despite voting time + again to stop endless wars + bring our troops home. This one will not end soon.” The mayor had nothing to say when President Obama dropped over 12,000 bombs during his final year in office; but now he is afraid, because he views Iran as a legitimate threat to the United States. Either that, or he’s using this legitimate and legal air strike as a political cudgel against the president, which is also a likely scenario.

Unsurprisingly, there are many who believe that Iran can be negotiated with because they are just another nation that wants to be in the family of nations. This has been the Obama era view on Iran, led by former National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes. Rhodes, who admitted that he lied to the American people about a “moderate Iran,” is paying public lip service to the evil of Soleimani, while blaming President Trump for escalation and slippery slope into war with Iran. As the architect behind the Iran Deal, this is par for the course for Rhodes.

However, Rhodes is as mistaken today as he was in 2015 when he was lying to the American people. The Iran Deal was not a de-escalation and de-nuclearization deal; it was a delay tactic at best and Obama’s attempt at a legacy at worst. Kicking the nuclear can down the road is not an acceptable solution, and sending pallets of cash to the Ayatollah to fund terrorism isn’t de-escalation. The irony of Rhodes complaining that Trump proceeded “without congressional approval” is quite rich, considering that the Iran Deal is a “deal” as opposed to a “treaty” only because the Obama administration wanted to circumvent congressional approval.

Members of this group also, for reasons unknown to anyone but themselves, praise Soleimani as if he was a normal foreign diplomat. “Soleimani,” writes New Yorker magazine, “a flamboyant former construction worker and bodybuilder with snowy white hair, a dapper beard, and arching salt-and-pepper eyebrows, gained notice during the eight-year war with Iraq, in the 1980s.” The Washington Post referred to Soleimani as a “revered military leader,” not as a terrorist mastermind who has led to the death and suffering of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people. The media thinks that if they appease Iran through flattering descriptions, the Ayatollah would cease the calls of “Death to America.” He won’t.

This is the largest camp, and the easiest to join. This camp is comprised of celebrities, politicians, pundits, activists, and more. This group dislikes the move solely because they despise anything President Trump does. This group has CNN headlines such as “President Trump dined on ice cream as news of the airstrike broke,” as if Trump’s choice of dessert has any consequence. Each of the previous three groups contains an anti-Trump streak, but this group has no reason to be against this strike except that Trump ordered it.

This camp is filled to capacity with Trump’s political enemies who helped create the situation in the Middle East during the last administration. This camp is led by Joe Biden, who blames Trump for the failures that he was a part of. “President Trump just tossed a stick of dynamite into a tinderbox,” Biden wrote in a statement. He fails to mention that when he left office in 2016, the Middle East was in far worse shape than when he entered in 2009. He attacks Trump because of politics, not because of the action itself. Had Obama, or any Democrat for that matter, had the guts to take the same action, Biden would support it completely.

Nancy Pelosi, who hates Trump enough to impeach him for no reason, refers to killing Soleimani as a “provocative and disproportionate” action. Some questions for the Speaker include: How can it be a provocation when Soleimani orchestrated an attack on the US Embassy mere days before? What is a “proportionate” response to being the greatest terrorist in the world? Pelosi, like Ilhan Omar and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, spout nonsensical gibberish to appeal to a Democratic base, but would be supportive of the action were it taken by someone else.

This camp has some actual policy grievances, and therefore their arguments are being co-opted by the other groups. This group is worried about the cost of war, both in manpower and monetarily. The intellectually honest brokers of such arguments, however, are being drowned out by those who say there will be a draft (which there won’t be) and that World War III will begin (which it won’t). It’s reasonable to worry about what reaction Iran will have, but that reason has no voice amongst the Democrats and the media.

The fact is, the world is better off with Soleimani out of it. As far as worldwide terrorism is concerned, Soleimani was more influential than Osama bin Laden and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. According to Tony Badran, writing for Tablet Magazine, “In addition to being responsible for killing hundreds of US soldiers during the Iraq War, Soleimani directed a larger state project, which has shaped the geopolitics of the region.” This includes turning Lebanon into a “forward missile base” through Hezbollah, with tens of thousands of missiles pointing at Israel, and turning Iraq into a forward base to attack Saudi Arabia. Badran outlines multiple times Presidents Bush and Obama could have killed Soleimani, but didn’t.

President Trump was right to take out this evil terrorist. This level of deterrence may have some short-term consequences, but will have long-term gains. The doubters and naysayers have their own selfish and illegitimate qualms with this decision, but history will remember this action as one that made the world safer.