Don't be fooled, attacks on embassies are acts of war

© 2020 Jim Spence - The Iranian general who was responsible for the murders of hundreds if not thousands of Americans, met with a fitting end earlier this week. The U.S. retaliation against terrorism came after this general’s followers attempted to storm the U.S. embassy in Baghdad and kill the occupants. 
Make no mistake, it is clear that General Soleimani felt confident enough in the lack of any punitive actions by the U.S. to move about freely in neighboring Iraq. Soleimani was openly supervising and coordinating terrorist acts against Americans and anti-Iran citizens living in Iraq.
History is replete with hostile action by the forces of radical Islam. Attacking American embassies has happened many times. Consider the Iranian government’s storming of the U.S. embassy in Tehran during the Carter years. That attack was essentially a state-sponsored aggression on our sovereign soil. Jimmy Carter attempted appeasement of the American-hating Iranian mullahs for many months during the siege. Then, and only reluctantly, Carter authorized a hapless rescue mission that exposed just how inept military preparedness was in the Carter White House. In the end, Jimmy Carter was sent packing by the voters and the American hostages were released just before Ronald Reagan had a chance to make Iran pay a steep price for their international transgressions.
In early August of 1998, United States embassies in both Kenya and Tanzania were attacked. More than 200 people were killed in the truck bomb explosions in these two East African countries. It came on the heels of Bill Clinton’s most serious domestic political troubles.
On September 11, 2012, radical Muslim terrorists sponsored by the same group that saw their general get nixed earlier this week, attacked and killed four people including the U.S. ambassador in Benghazi. These attacks were designed in part to influence the U.S. presidential election by making Barack Obama look weak. Obama was weak, and so was Hillary Clinton who issued those who could have saved lives an order to "stand down."
All civilized nations view the embassies of other countries as sacred and sovereign. American soldiers actually defended the Japanese embassy after their attacks on Pearl Harbor. The points here are pretty simple. America has enemies. These enemies hate Democrats and Republicans. These enemies are always looking for openings. Not coincidentally, North Korea is back on the offensive. These dictators are aggressive because they perceive signs of serious weakness in America's resolve. Impeachment proceedings are taken into account by those who hate all of us.
While the squabbles between Trump and the Democrats continues, the war between civilized nations and those that encourage and sponsor radical Islamic terror is ongoing. It has never ended. Despite the short attention span of the U.S. news media on the ongoing threat of radical Islam, the families of victims of the bombings listed above know these threats are all too real. Imagine the fear in the hearts of those with loved ones in the Baghdad embassy this week. In fact, the murderous intent of the Iranian mullahs is perhaps the most important reason why our borders should be secure. This was one of the primary findings of the bi-partisan 9-11 Commission Report.
In the end, the bogus impeachment scam and absurd reactions by Democrats to the securing of embassy personnel in Baghdad suggest they have suspended all pretenses of working together to combat terror. Sadly, this reality has more far-reaching consequences than many people imagine. 
That America is at war with itself is no longer subject to debate. According to several media research studies, over a six-week period from September 24, 2019 to November 5, 2019, the three major broadcast networks, NBC, ABC and CBS, supposedly evaluated Donald Trump 684 times on their nightly news shows. Despite a booming American economy, rising wages, strong performance in citizen retirement accounts, record low unemployment rates for minorities, and record low poverty rates for minorities, 96 percent of these so-called “evaluations” of Trump by ABC, NBC, and CBS were profoundly negative. Ironically, these same broadcast news outlets also ran many segments suggesting that Trump is somehow a “threat” to press freedom. When the U.S. press is running a ratio of 24 - 1 negative evaluations on a sitting president, and also accusing him of being a threat to freedom of speech, this is exceedingly comical. America's press could not hardly be any more “free,” with a ratio of negatives to positives coming in at 24 – 1. Consider that Putin in Russia and Xi in China got 100% positive coverage by the “journalists” in those countries. If Trump conducted himself like Putin and Xi, we would have dozens of dead journalist bodies to bury instead of seeing an army of strutting peacocks engaged in open season on Trump every night on broadcast news.
Finally, when you observe the Democrat’s reactions to the disposal of an American-murdering terrorist, you begin to understand why this column has been describing U.S. politics as naked warfare. Democrats prefer to pretend that Trump made a unilateral decision to stir up trouble in Baghdad. No doubt if Trump had done nothing about the embassy attack but issue empty threats, Democrats would have accused him of being indifferent to the dangers facing embassy personnel. 
 Clearly Trump can’t win with Democrats or with the news media. However, given their completely blind, reckless, and irrational hatreds, Democrats are now, as a consequence of their indifference towards the lives of those serving in American embassies, providing aid and comfort to people who are the enemies of all freedom-loving human beings on the planet.
Are American killers the people Democrats want to align with rather than support Trump? Is this a winning play with 1/3rd of Americans who are independent voters? Stay tuned.