Not disputing their retaliation, but to blame the US for this crash because they were on high alert due to their retaliation is absurd and nonsense. And as for illegal, that's up to whoever believes that.
Agreed with placing legal blame on the U.S. for the crash is kinda "out there".
However the assassination was illegal in every way, shape and form. If your belief that it was legal because he supported some organisations you view as terrorist, just switch sides here and you'll get that the U.S. did the exact same thing since the 1980's consistently, therefore U.S. officials should be fair game wherever they go, worldwide.
Well, for one he was violating sanctions traveling to Iraq. Secondly, what was he up to in Iraq? days after an attack on the US embassy.
Should the US gvt look the other way whils Iran:
1- Shoots down a US drone.
2- An attack on an oil processing facilities in Saudi Arabia
3- A US contractor dies on a rocket attack by Pro-Iranian militias?
4- An attack on the US embassy
Should they, I bet your gvt wouldn't. You need deterrance and the General had to pay unless a bigger conflict would have emerged in the region.
The killing itself stopped a war, despite getting us close to it, Iran and Trump standing down allows for some pause in all of this, and a warning to Iran to stop their aggression.
This sends a clear message to the regime that there would be responses to their actions.
Cool, I like this. An educated debate unlike most shitflinging that such threads usually turn into.
First off, the sanctions by the U.S. vs. Iran after the U.S. backed out of the 2015 agreement can be interpreted as a blockade, which in turn is considered an act of war. So that alone unties Iran's hands when it comes to funding and coordinating groups fighting the U.S. presense in Iraq and Syria.
That brings us to another point, maybe not a legal one, but a moral one.
The United States illegally (and under false and misleading pretenses) invaded Iraq back in 2003. Since then it is the U.S. that has been on Iran's doorstep and 10,000km away from theirs. Iranians have much more of a right to lets say get involved in Iraqi affairs for ethnic and religious reasons than the U.S. does (btw, why is the U.S. in Iraq anyways?). So you can't really blame them for getting involved in Iraq, on their doorstep with some similar interests, than the U.S. which is half a world away.
We can go further back to the 1950's when the United States started directly interefering in Iranian internal affairs and causing them a whole lot of hell.
But in any case, the balance of right and wrong, in my opinion is definately in favour of Iran being right, and the U.S. being wrong.
This is a very grey area here, there have been a shitload of violations of what we percieve as International Law by both parties and depending on where you place the "Start" line, either party can be considered as guilty of starting the conflict, and the other as simply responding to the first action. And then the escalation begins of course.
As your point of what would my government do? Well, something similar I bet, however not with such blatant disregard for reality with such rash actions. There was that time back in the 2000's that Chechen terrorist Yamadaev was assasinated in Qatar, but that was done at least more discretely, by car bomb and at least Russia officialy said "Wasn't us."
Had something similar happened here it wouldn't have been viewed as such a blatant act of agression, spitting and shitting all over the sovreignty of Iraq.
P.R. wise it would have been much better, wouldn't have pretty much all of Iraq and Iran united in the hatred for the U.S. and kicking them out right now.
I do not dream about movie stars, they must dream about me for I am real and they are not. - Alexander Popov