Dems rush to implicate Trump for plane crash linked to Iran missile strike
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Democrats suggest Trump bears responsibility for Ukraine airliner shot down by Iran
In the wake of claims that an errant missile fired by Iran brought down a passenger jet earlier this week, some Democrats and media voices have appeared to make the case that President Trump at least shares in the blame for the death of 176 civilians.
Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., pointedly laid the blame for the tragedy at Trump's feet, in an interview Thursday.
“If what is being projected is true, this is yet another example of collateral damage from the actions that have been taken in a provocative way by the president of the United States,” Speier told CNN.
This, following a similar suggestion from Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg overnight, which appeared to assert a butterfly-effect argument that if the president had not ordered the U.S. military strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, Iran would not have retaliated, and therefore, the passenger jet would not have been shot down.
“Innocent civilians are now dead because they were caught in the middle of an unnecessary and unwanted military tit for tat,” Buttigieg tweeted. “My thoughts are with the families and loved ones of all 176 souls lost aboard this flight.”
Another 2020 presidential hopeful, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, when asked on Fox News' “America’s Newsroom” for reaction to Buttigieg’s comments, echoed a similar sentiment.
“I think this is a very, very unfortunate incident that has affected so many people and so many families, and this is one of these consequences of this escalation and this state of war that we are in,” Gabbard said, urging the president to have “foresight” and look at the “consequences” of war with Iran.
“This is the consequence of this escalation of war that further points to why we need to deescalate these tensions now,” she said. “And I urge President Trump to do so and get back to the negotiation table and make sure this doesn’t move forward.”
The connection between the Soleimani strike and the Iranian decision to fire missiles at U.S. bases in Iraq is not hard to make. However, efforts to implicate Trump in the plane tragedy have faced a fierce backlash, even from voices not normally allied with the U.S. president, in part because Iran ultimately fired those missiles and because the chain of events did not start with the Soleimani strike alone.
Last month, a U.S. defense contractor was killed and others were wounded in an Iran-linked rocket attack in northern Iraq. In response, the U.S. military carried out “precision defensive strikes” in Iraq and Syria, on sites housing Kataeb Hezbollah, an Iran-backed Iraqi militia. The strikes killed 25 fighters.
Days later, hundreds of protesters, including members of Iranian-backed militias, stormed the U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad—one of the most heavily fortified U.S. diplomatic missions in the world. The attack, which raised the specter of the 2012 Benghazi attack in which four Americans died, prompted the Pentagon to send hundreds of additional troops to the Middle East; more than 100 U.S. Marines were sent to the embassy alone to bolster security.
Trump then ordered the strike that killed Soleimani, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ elite Quds Force, among other military officials at Baghdad International Airport.
Then, late Tuesday, Iran fired 16 ballistic missiles into Iraq aimed at U.S. military bases. There were no casualties at those bases, but Pentagon officials said Thursday that the Ukrainian passenger plane that crashed around the same time after taking off from Tehran was shot down by mistake by Iranian missiles.
All 176 people on board the flight were killed.
The Associated Press, meanwhile, on Thursday posted an article headlined: "An Iranian general dies in U.S. attack, and innocents suffer." The outlet changed the headline after it was blasted by critics including on social media. The story was eventually republished with a different headline: "As Iran and U.S. take step back from the brink, Canada grieves."
An Associated Press spokesperson attempted to explain the situation when reached by Fox News.
“The headline was updated to more clearly describe what the story is about: Canadians struggling to come to terms with how the killing of an Iranian general in a U.S. drone strike may have led to the deaths of dozens of their citizens in a plane crash,” an AP spokesperson told Fox News.
“AP stories and headlines are routinely updated, as wire stories are. The original headline on this story when it was published yesterday evening was ‘An Iranian general dies in a U.S. attack, and Canada suffers.’ It became ‘An Iranian general dies in U.S. attack, and innocents suffer,’ when new information was added to the story. Overnight the headline became ‘As Iran and US take step back from the brink, Canada grieves,” the spokesperson continued.
After the headline change, the story still featured a paragraph that some took issue with, as it implies that the conflict with Iran “had begun” when Trump ordered a strike on Soleimani.
Others came forward to defend the president. Rep. Brian Mast, a Republican war veteran from Florida, said that the attack on Soleimani “was not unnecessary,” and that no matter what the president does, his critics will take the opposite position.
“It was not unjustified, and this is a common theme from the left,” Mast said on “Fox & Friends” Friday. “These American apologists that like to go out there and say that because America did something, this resulted in some other country going out there and taking some unnecessary actions, some ill-fated action. And it’s not the Americans’ fault—it’s the fault of those who went out there and took those actions themselves.”
Mast discussed a past sentiment that “politics end at the water’s edge,” but argued that that is “no longer true.”
“No matter what the president does, he’s going to be wrong in doing,” Mast said. “If he exercises diplomacy to go talk to Kim Jong Un or talk to Vladimir Putin, that’s wrong. If he withdraws our troops out of harm’s way on the border of Turkey and alongside the Kurds, then he’s wrong. ... Whatever he does, the other side is going to say he was incorrect for doing that for whatever the made-up reason is that they’re going to come up with.”
For the time being, the entire situation may be de-escalating. The president on Wednesday said that Iran “appears to be standing down,” a signal of a desire to reduce tensions in the region.
“The fact that we have this great military and equipment, however, does not mean we need to use it… we do not want to use it,” he said. “The U.S. is ready to embrace peace with all who seek it.”
Fox News' Brian Flood, Joseph Wulfson, Frank Miles and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Brooke Singman is a Politics Reporter for Fox News. Follow her on Twitter at @brookefoxnews.
Tags
Who is online
54 visitors
Just more proof of the TDS sufferers. It must suck to go through life with Trump on your brain 24/7
Just imagine if the US shot down a neutral jet. Would these people blame Iran?
No, they know that a majority of their base is a bunch of crying ass "But Trumpers" so they spew the rhetoric that appeals to them. You can even see the left wing trash hoping Iran performs more attacks on Americans and their interests
Been there, done that:
Iran Air Flight 655 was a scheduled passenger flight from Tehran to Dubai via Bandar Abbas that was shot down on 3 July 1988 by an SM-2MR surface-to-air missile fired from USS Vincennes, a guided-missile cruiser of the United States Navy.
The aircraft, an Airbus A300, was destroyed and all 290 people on board were killed.[1] The jet was hit while flying over Iran's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, along the flight's usual route, shortly after departing Bandar Abbas International Airport, the flight's stopover location.
This is a perfect example of why the United States should not have a nuclear weapon!
/sarc
No kidding. Did you blame Iran?
The Dems blamed Iran?
Maybe try reading the seed before you comment next time?
Yeah, so don’t let anyone tell you the AP isn’t partisan. It clearly is.
This is the problem. This is why we can’t talk about things. If he tries to make peace with someone, he’s committing treason. But when he uses force against someone who actually killed Americans and attacked American sovereignty (our embassy), he is the one starting a war. They accuse him of starting a war even though we never invaded, aren’t fighting, and he says publicly he doesn’t want a war.
He walks away from Kurds in Syria and it’s unconscionable! He sticks around to defend even more Kurds in Iraq and people demand he pull our troops out. Like wtf!
He kills two assholes, recognized by his predecessor as terrorists, and he’s a loose cannon. His predecessor kills thousands with drones (including an incident where children and pregnant women were killed) and it’s all totally fine. You get the Nobel Peace Prize, mate!
That's what makes it so hard to converse with these left wingers, Their opinion changes like the wind because of Trump.
Assuming you are not off topic....
So far the current POTUS has doubled the amount of drone strikes in the Afghan war zone and cancelled the reports of civilian casualties
and collateral damage as as unnecessary. Drone strikes in Afghanistan are not considered when comparing Bush to Obama to Trump because it is a war zone where the field commanders now make the decisions on who to "drone".
So actually the body count is higher in the past three years but for "whatever" reason this Administration decided the "we the people" don't need to know that information.
But don't dismiss this article, it is actually pro Trump.
He actually was on topic, the article discussed AP headline.
Right in a War zone, You know a Zone recognized by congress? How many Bombs did the piece of shit obama drop outside of war zones? Yeah I'm sure it doesn't matter to the TDS sufferers because you know "But Trump".
Actually KDM
Bush averaged 57 per month over the few years of the initial drone program
Obama averaged 79 per month over 8 years outside of Afghanistan
Trump averaged 60% more than Obama in his first 2 years outside of Afghanistan
Figure vary by source and I try to only use pro Trump articles to make my point.
I am tired of posting the same Pro Trump BS every week to people who don't knpw hoe many drone strikes there were or how thaey are calculated inside and outside of a war zone. Trump has eclipsed his predecessors and turned off the public reporting to boot. Can't let information about how many more civilians are killed under Trump than previous Administrations get out now can we? bad optics.
Does it not make sense to you that in order to "win" an unwinnable war
trump would escalate drone strikes to enable the US to ultimately pull out of
Afghanistan & Pakistan, possibility Syria, Yemen, Somalia and Kenya?
Hence more drone strikes, more assassinations, more collateral damages as in more civilians killed and more terrorists created.
Just my opinion mind you...
but I guess it doesn't matter to ODS sufferers, butt......Obama,
LMAO
Keep dreaming.
He did whine about it though. He's actually jealous of the Prime Minister of Ethiopia. As a Trumpster, you must be so proud.
He's an asshole. Maybe where you come from assholes are popular people. Not where I come from.
[deleted]
Iran shoots down a plane departing from their own airport and Democrats blame Trump....liberal logic.
A President of the USA threatened overwhelming retaliation for any act of aggression towards American forces or assets.
The Iranians did just that.
It's likely that the Iranian in charge of this SA-15 unit thought he was shooting down a B-2 bomber leaving Tehran airspace and images of medals and virgins dancing in his head.
I would be surprised if he and his crew were still alive. Iran would have to grow up too quickly to admit the obvious.
And if he shot down a civilian plane, so what? It's happened before.
We (the USA ) eventually stopped denying what was obvious and apologized and settled the lawsuits for $69.1 million.
I am pretty certain the Iranians know whats coming and are figuring out the settlements already.
Like the US they will eventually settle, maybe not publicly, but they will settle.
Big fucking deal. Iran has never been threatened? Their military is not in communication with their major international airport.
The excuses manufactured for this country's fuck up is shocking.
What excuse. They are incompetent period. they will eventually admit this and settle with the victims.
This air crash might have saved untold American military lives.
Which country? In the fog of war there is so much blame to spread around.
Every god damned time.
I don't disagree but don't think this won't go to the World Court with Iran saying the US created a war atmosphere in an attempt to keep the damages down, at least to the foreigners.
They can demand thanks from their own people for sending them to Allah sooner.
What war?
Your sympathy and empty excuses for Iran killing 176 innocent civilians is disturbing.
Well your interpretation is nothing short of astounding.
In 1988 it was Iran threatening US naval ships.
I had the same sympathy for Capt Rogers when he fucked up, pursued 2 or 3 small insignificant Iranian naval vessels by surprise and shot another 290 people out of the sky in an "error of judgement".
Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it.
I just saw this comment. (#6.1)
However before I scrolled this far down the page I also made a comment about the same incident (see # 3. 3 and 3 .3. 1)
Are you implying that there is no war going on there...and therefore the U.S. was wrong in killing Suleimani?
(Perhaps you are right-- I don't know as I'm not an expert in International Law)
Again,
What the fuck does your comment have to do with the seed? Try to stay on topic, Dems blaming Trump for Iran shooting down jet.
Well I and others would think that the history of the USA shooting down an Iranian airliner in 1988 and blaming the Ayatollah, Iran and the pilots of flight 655 is pertinent to the story of Iran again being on a war footing and another plane full of Iranians is shot down with them blaming the US and our POTUS for war tensions would be on topic as the RA ruled last night.
Aside from that, the seed is now pointless as the Iranians have admitted that they shot the plane down believing it to be a
US B-2 or a US Cruise missile.
on top of that the President is deflecting blame to Obama.
But.........Obama!!!
Try reading the article, It has to do with the Dems blaming Trump for the shooting down of the jet. [Deleted]
Well, reasonably intelligent people will look and see that we fired no missiles into Iran.
Whatever Iran did in shooting down a passenger jetliner is ALL on Iran. We didn't have a damn thing to do with it, and I really hate when anyone attempts to blame the US for Iranian actions.
Iran OWNS this all by themselves.
AND many, many people will agree with you, reasonably intelligent and otherwise.
But as the seed suggest others blame the President to a degree, and he blames the previous President and several other Administrations.
I don't care if fools choose to blame the President for what Iran di all on their own. It merely displays their ignorance for all to see.
Blaming past Presidents may be wrong, but one does tend to wonder what would have happened if we had taken care of this long ago, instead of pussyfooting around and having policies of appeasement.
And there you hit the nail on the head.
US foreign policy has appeased non Communist terrorist regimes since WWI, IF they have OIL.
That Iranian radar and SAM site would never have detected a B-2 bomber if one were to have been there.
Well said. 👍
Well in SP previous posts he championed how Iran's national guard was so awesome they were actually launching missiles at our troops but not trying to hit them.
Iran Says It 'Unintentionally' Shot Down Ukrainian Jetliner
When Democrats "HATE" Someone....they ALWAYS do the "fail Safe" ……. "Love thy Enemy"...….Before they didn't !
I'd say republicans have a lot of nerve accusing democrats or anyone else of siding with the enemy when Trump has his entire head up Putin's ass, not easy when he also appeases Kim, MBS and Erdogan. Republicans are not patriotic at all, they are trying to justify Trump wagging the dog. He laid it all out years ago when he accused Obama of preparing to do it.
The shooting down of the airliner was a tragedy, horrible, sad, and not totally unexpected because this shit happens in conflicts. When actions are taken, you own part of the consequences, intended or not. Its one of the reasons Bush and Obama didn't take the guy out. Trump didn't even spend a second thinking about the consequences or what the plan would be in the aftermath of the killing. Trump does own things that are part of that decision. And that is how most people see it. A very very sad consequence of wars are civilians caught in the middle. And the same neocons who brought us Iraq are the same ones in Trump's ear with Iran.
Trump Sanctions against Russia, say otherwise.
Trump had as much to do with Iran's stupid-ass actions in shooting down a passenger airliner as you did.
None.
Why do some wish to make excuses for IRAN, FFS?
TDS to the Max-im. They spend too much time wondering about "Modeling under-wearouts".
Exactly. All the trump blaming and off topic comments on this seed are about TDS to the Max.
I'm sorry but I can not put the blame on President Trump for Iran shooting down a plane, If Iran wasn't sponsoring terrorisms with their General he wouldn't be found in a crater. Hell lets blame Jimmy Carter for Iran shooting down a jet using proglib logic.
I've come to the conclusion from everything I've been reading, that if a Democrat had a severe cardiac arrest and Trump rescued him and resuscitated him and got his heart beating again, the Democrat would accuse Trump of bruising his chest.
A better question would be to ask people if they saw Trump having a heart attack would they rescue him.
Gee, I remember the good old days when Americans came together to condemn countries like Iran that committed the same stupid acts.
Of course, back then, Americans didn't tend to support terrorist regimes.
Define your "good old days" time frame.
In the past we have been allies of pre WWII Japan when they were committing atrocities in Korea and China.
We were allies with Josef Stalin while he terrorized his own people during and after WWII
We were allies with The Shah of Iran and propped his murderous ass up for decades.
Ditto Sadam Hussein who was probably surprised at how badly he underestimated George H Bush.
Ditto, we supported or ignored Qaddafi in Libya until we didn't.
Hell, Texan1211, based on the White House's long lived love affair with the Royal House of Saud
one would have to conclude that
the US has had a blind spot for terrorists if they have an abundance of oil.
All of the 911 attackers were Saudis and the US actually blocked 911 related legal actions against Saudi Arabia for 15 years
until JASTA passed in 2016.
(In 2018 a Federal Judge finally allowed the lawsuits against SA to continue).
Of course American never supports Communist terrorist regimes, we have standards./s
I stated absolutely nothing about "good old days". I mentioned what America used to be like. Had I mentioned slavery, would you have assumed I wanted a return to it?
I made no such claim. No sarcasm tag necessary on my post.
If you are one who believes that our foreign policies over the year are wildly successful and should be continued as is, so be it. I disagree vehemently. Our policies have helped lead us to our present state. Time to try something different than mere handwringing and appeasement.
It is a proven fact that ignoring things like attacks on Americans and our embassies does NOT stop said attacks.
Oh come on already, this was your comment ( #10)
smh
No one said you did. Stop being so defensive already.
I know what I wrote.
And?
stop attributing things I don't say to me and I will never need to be defensive about your comments.
If you can't see the difference between now and 30-40 years ago, then that is on you personally, not me.
I know what I wrote and I know the value of understanding history.
i attributed nothing to you, I asked you for YOUR definition or time frame of the good old days, nothing more,
the rest of the commentary was mine and mine alone.
have a good Saturday Tex.
Texan1211 used the words: "Americans didn't tend to support terrorist regimes." Yet you added the word "Communist" and I would like you to explain why you did that. Now I'm sure you know I'm not a Communist just because I live in a Communist country, and in fact I've posted many times that I am entirely apolitical here and I have supported the Canada and Ontario Conservative Parties for at least the last 40 years. I am a Canadian citizen and I will never be a Chinese citizen, only a resident. Do you consider China to be a "terrorist" regime? I certainly don't, but then I live in China and I'll bet you've never been there but only get the picture of it from what you read or see on TV. The only terrorism I've seen that has anything to do with China is internal, and caused by separatists and dissidents. And as you know, there is no such thing as bias and fake stories in what you get to see in America. /s
Brother Buzz, fellow human, fellow NT member with privileges, perhaps you can reread what I wrote with your keen eye for editing next time around.
I explicitly said that the US has always maintained & supported terrorist nations that produce oil,
unless they are Communist nations. Where did I slight your China or Canada? Where did I insult you?
Immaterial.
There is always a case to be made that China and Russia and other nations support financial, political and military dissension around the world, it a basic part of the human game but I didn't say or imply that. Please don't put words in other peoples mouths.
Absolutely true, I have never "officially" been west of Guam. Your news about the rest of the world outside of China is undoubtedly filtered and biased. As you remember, we Americans and Canadians living in North America have our choice of biased news stations to watch and listen to. Do you?
Again immaterial to anything I wrote previously on this seed. You are creating a straw man.
Question, as this last statement is obviously false, did you intend the sarc tag to only apply to the last sentence
or the whole rant?
Seriously, SP
Then please tell that to the fools who keep blaming Trump for doing exactly what you suggest--forging his own path.
Trump did what other Presidents refused to do--just like he did when he moved our embassy to Jerusalem.
Some don't like it, but it is all well within his right to do as President.
Every time the Democrats open their mouths they are proving they are the greater of two evils.
I hate the whole "voting for the lesser of two evils" garbage; but the Democrats are making this way too easy.