Is Sean Hannity Responsible for 174 deaths?

[_honorentheos]

Here's a crazy scenario to chew on. Suppose that the outcome of the accidental shooting down of the civilian airliner is actual reform of some kind in Iran due to popular uprising that the Republican Guard are weakened in putting down because they perpetrated the event leading to the protests. The pending Iranian elections turn from a likely radical victory to a win for the moderates. It also leads to Shiite Muslims in Iraq distance themselves from Iran just as it looked probable they were firmly consolidating a pro-Iran coalition. Iraqi Kurds and Sunnis are able to find common ground with the Shiites that leaves the US in Iraq as welcomed partners again. The Saudis, sitting on the sidelines watching their regional foe eat crow, leverage the moment in some way that further consolidates regional influence and power for MBS. Putin and Erdogan, already primed to take the spotlight in the region as the supposed adults seeking to broker peace in Libya, come out looking like the global good guys. That's three strong authoritarian leaders essentially climbing over the pile of mistakes to the top of the heap.

Now, pivot to the US 2020 election. Turn all of the above into campaign messages and ads. Strong economy? Turned out in some peoples eyes at least, the Iran nuclear deal wasn't as effective in keeping the world safe as blowing up one of their high level commanders? Want to place bets under those circumstances how likely Bernie or Warren would be in winning the election? I'm not saying that's what's going to happen. I'm just pointing out how serious the accidental shooting of a civilian airliner could prove in the calculus here. That's an extreme outcome, but even the more realistic ones still side in Trump's favor more so than against him, in my opinion. The killing of Soleimani was proving a major issue for him that this accident flipped on its head. Trump haters will blame Trump for the accident in the same way Russians are blaming Ukraine right now. But that's just noting people who have an immoveable opinion are interpreting events to fit their opinions and nothing more. History only knows how it will actually play out, but this isn't just one more strike against Trump. He has to been pretty happy it happened, or those around him who actually know things ought to be anyway. As unpleasant as that sounds, all tragedies are tragedies but that doesn't mean events don't end up working in a direction that ends up being to someone's advantage.

[_subgenius]

It's caused Russian news agencies to shift focus away from criticism of the US for killing Soleimani to defending ...

It has so caused many Democrat/Libs who were mourning Soleimani to suddenly shut up about that.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Which Libs were mourning Soleimani?

- Doc

[_EAllusion]

It's caused Russian news agencies to shift focus away from criticism of the US for killing Soleimani to defending ...

It has so caused many Democrat/Libs who were mourning Soleimani to suddenly shut up about that.

I can't think of any Democrats/Libs "mourning" Soleimani. I can think of a bunch who criticized his assassination as reckless, dangerous to US interests, and a violation of important international norms, but that's not "mourning." I can also think of a bunch of Republicans who dishonestly tried to conflate criticizing assassinating him with somehow supporting him. But, since you aren't just aping their scurrilous dishonesty, you'll have no problem naming several prominent Democrats or liberals who did this starting....now.

[_EAllusion]

Internal protests in Iran is the leading story on Al Jazeera right now.

https://www.aljazeera.com/

It's caused Russian news agencies to shift focus away from criticism of the US for killing Soleimani to defending their ally, in part by blaming Ukraine for the accident. Western allies concerned with seeing tensions relieved have turned to calling for Iran to account for the killing of civilians. It exposed a riff between the elite Iranian Revolutionary Guard and the conventional military. It was about as bad a play as Iran could have made at a time they seemed to have won the global opinion game by not targeting US troops with their missile strikes. They were manuevering pretty well up to that, and it was a serious mistake. Giving Hannity credit for it seems...well. Yes, it's a tragedy. But in the game of thrones that is global politics it's a positive event for the US.

None of this shows a shift in public opinion. That's what I'm looking for. Since Iran isn't particularly well liked internationally and there is a reasonable basis for blaming the US's actions for what happened, I'm curious if there was the shift you surmised happened. It's entirely possible that opinion of Iran stayed about where it was while opinion of the US did the same or got worse. I'm just looking for evidence is all.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

So, reading through a lot of the chatter on the interwebz, apparently the flight out of the airport was delayed an hour and it's probable the Iranian government had a breakdown in communication between the air traffic control and the air defense command.

- Doc

[_subgenius]

So, reading through a lot of the chatter on the interwebz, apparently the flight out of the airport was delayed an hour and it's probable the Iranian government had a breakdown in communication between the air traffic control and the air defense command.

- Doc

And some would have us believe Iran has the military and political competence capable of being a formidable force towards a WW3?

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002

edit: Also see 20th and 21st century insurgencies. But I don't know why I'm responding to subgenius because he's a metaphor for an inferior force holding out against a superior one. *shrugs*

[_canpakes]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002

edit: Also see 20th and 21st century insurgencies. But I don't know why I'm responding to subgenius because he's a metaphor for an inferior force holding out against a superior one. *shrugs*

He also seems blissfully unaware of how ‘world wars’ aren’t fought between just two countries.

Aside that, the story of the Millennium Challenge has always been one of my favorites. I’ve always admired Van Riper’s cleverness in that.

[_MeDotOrg]

I guess where I’m confused is that there’s an airport RIGHT THERE. If the video is to be believed, the airplane was ascending away from the airport, which you’d totally see on radar, so I have no idea why a SAM site cdr would authorize a shot. 4/chan conspiratards are claiming there were informants on the flight who were leaving the country, but, you know, 4/chan. I guess where I’m hung up is why in the world do you shoot down a single aircraft clearly taking off from an airport?

- Doc

A civilian airliner is a big fat slow moving target with no counter-measures. If I had to guess what happened, it would be that there are more militias with shoulder-launched SAMs than there are competent operators of SAMs. Because of the number of different militias in Iraq, I would imagine there is less command and control.

So my hunch would be that an under-trained and over-enthusiastic member of some auxiliary militia group pulled the trigger. Just my guess.