The more I read, the less so credible NATO explanations for any of these events which some intend to form constituents' agreement for unrestricted, punitive discipline for Iraq and Iran governments. Let us not discard yet again age-old presumptions of aggression, foisted by "western" civilization onto the "east." Reasonable observers should always premise their consent to utter failure of negotiated conflict with a question: What then is the objective of violence?

Categorical dispossession.

However, these explanations, erupting from WH propagandists, do not project internal consistency of either affect ("feelings", motive) or effects (means, capabilities) on to the subject (illegal or unlawful war, itself an absurd doctrine) and "persons of interest" (individual suspect perpetrators). Indeed, the introduction of so-called systematic features of these crimes into systemic opprobium ascribed by their "neighbors" to those states is late, too late, an after-thought.

After all the foregoing, suddenly, I am to understand that one commander in the IRGC--or whateverfucking brigade--was so incapacitated by fear, incapable by any means, of differentiating a BOEING 737 passenger aircraft from a missile?

That profound sacrifice of that individual for peace, so-called de-escalation--immediately rejected by US Americans--is unacceptable to me. I refuse to do the work of the deranged vanguard of liars who fervently believe they have inherited the earth from the misery of beseiged "protesters". The hell I'm having that.