One year ago, the US targeted killing of #Iran’s #GeneralSoleimani in #Iraq became the first known incident outside the context of a declared conflict in which a State invoked self-defence as justification for an attack against a State-actor.

The international community feared its aftermath would see military escalation with devastating consequences. However, while the worst in terms of a global conflict was avoided, worse struck nevertheless. https://t.co/Stzq6ObsZn
On 8 January,176 innocent people subsequently lost their lives when their flight, PS 752, was struck down by Iranian missiles. A month later, Iranians were killed, and hundreds arrested, as they demonstrated for accountability and truth from the Iranian leadership for this attack
And what of the young Iraqis killed throughout 2020 because they dared demand a better world? Because they dared reject the rule of the militias? A year later, those demonstrations have been crushed in blood. https://t.co/dlb3C0qwkO
So yes, there was no international war. But many paid the highest price, and many more continue, in the name of justice, to risk the same. And didn’t the US attack and its aftermath hammer yet another nail in the coffin of international law and international rule?
The justifications advanced by the US for its drone attack against General Soleimani, and later by Iran for its attack against US bases in Iraq, lacked any evidence of imminent threat. Clearly, the strikes were made in retaliation or as reprisals. And thus they were unlawful.
The US killing of General Soleimani, a State officials, also failed to meet the standards of necessity and proportionality. It was unlawful under human rights law. What does its precedent mean?
We now confront the real prospect that States may opt to strategically eliminate high-ranking officials outside the context of a known war and then attempt to justify such a killing on the grounds of the target classification as a “terrorist who posed an undefined, future threat.
And it means we also face the possibility that ALL soldiers, anywhere in the world at any time, may be deemed a legitimate target. Further, by killing General Soleimani on Iraqi soil without first obtaining Iraq’s consent, the US violated the territorial integrity of Iraq.
And what about the fact that, one year later, the US and Iran are still threatening each other, thus the whole region, if not the world, with further attacks? Where is accountability for all the victims fallen collateral to this conflict-without-a-name?
Where is the global leadership mediating for its resolution? Demanding accountability for its prosecution? How are we to mend the law and standards there to protect us all, but damaged perhaps beyond repair? Where are the institutions ready and able to intervene, to act, to mend?
Those are the questions we should be asking. And it is their answers that we should be demanding. As we look to priorities for 2021, they may be among the most important actions we have to take.

More from Government

🧵⬇️1. Fb is LifeLog, LifeLog is Darpa, and DARPA is a Enterprise Run by CIA... Well... Past President... Big Tech, Big Pharma, MSM, HOLLYWOOD, DC...

Past Presidents....Zuckerberg, Gates...
All C_A... the Family business.... The company...


2. Past Presidents....Zuckerberg, Gates...
All C_A... the Family business.... The company...The Farm.... all C_A assets... most of them related by blood, business, or marriage...


3. "The individual is handicapped by coming face-to-face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst." - J. Edgar Hoover


4. diff. names & faces.... Monsters that lurk in the Shadows. Swamp, Deep State, Establishment, Globalist Elite Cabal...

Shall we go back...How far back...


5. I know these monsters... it's when I try to explain them to others is when I run into a problem.This is why I'm better at retweeting and compiling. I never know where to start... Everytime I try to thread, i end up w/ a messy monstrous web.I'm better at helping others thread.

You May Also Like

1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”

Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?

A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:


2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to

- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal

3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:

Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.

Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.

4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?

To get clarity.

You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.

It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.

5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”

Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.