Retired General to Sen. Chris Murphy (D): It's a Good Time to Shut Up

Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., speaks during the third day of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia , Wednesday, July 27, 2016. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

FILE- In this Sept. 18, 2016 photo released by an official website of the office of the Iranian supreme leader, Revolutionary Guard Gen. Qassem Soleimani, center, attends a meeting with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Revolutionary Guard commanders in Tehran, Iran. Iran’s paramilitary Revolutionary Guard faces new sanctions from U.S. President Donald Trump as he has declined to re-certify the nuclear deal between Tehran and world powers. But what is this organization? (Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader via AP, File)

Yesterday, I posted on Sen. Chris Murphy’s incredible shot and chaser dealing with the embassy attack and Soleimani’s death (see Sen. Chris Murphy (D) Leaves Us With an Incredible Shot and Chaser After He Responds to Soleimani’s Death). Murphy managed to go from “Trump is a coward and the U.S. isn’t feared” to setting his hair on fire because he punched Iran in the face for trying to kill Americans.

Now, retired general James Mark has some advice for the Connecticut Senator: Talk less.

This happened on CNN’s New Day, where the hosts were primed to push the Democrat talking points about starting a war (something they were never concerned about when Obama was actually, you know, starting wars). After being asked what he’d say to Murphy’s criticisms, Mark had this to say.

“What I would say to Senator Murphy is, why don’t you just be quiet?” Marx said — eliciting chuckles from CNN anchors and panelists off screen. “Look, when has Iran ever demonstrated self-restraint? I mean, that’s the question I have. So is the world more dangerous today? Maybe it’s more dangerous. But when has it not been dangerous? When have we not been a target of a regime like exists in Tehran? I mean, it happens as a matter of routine.”

Marks went on to call it “amazingly brazen” of Soleimani to visit Baghdad during the attack on the U.S. embassy, and posited that the strike against the Iranian general didn’t have as much to do with the embassy protest as it might seem, on the surface.

Mark’s point is well taken. Iran’s aggression is not new, nor is it the result of anything the current administration has done. Even with all the appeasement of the Obama era, Iran still took U.S. sailors hostage at one point during the former president’s term. There’s also the broader picture, which includes the killing of American soldiers and the decade long attempt to set up a puppet government within Iraq. The fact that the Obama administration and the mainstream media ignored these things at the time does not mean they didn’t happen.

Murphy actually has a checkered history when it comes to Iran, with him making numerous appearances before Iran’s lobbying arm in Washington. No Democrat who sat idly by during the Iran deal fiasco, including Iran’s increased terrorist activities while it was happening, has any ground from which to be pontificating from about killing Soleimani.

The strategy of letting Iran do whatever it wants failed on all fronts. They did not moderate as promised by people like Ben Rhodes. Instead, they hardened their internal oppression, became even more Islamic, and fomented the world’s largest terror operation. Trump has decided it’s time to take a different route and that means actually enforcing some red lines with the Mullahs.

Not a single Democrat expressing opposition would be doing so if it weren’t Trump who made the decision. That should tell you all you need to know about their motivations and Mark’s advice is prudent. It’s time for these partisans to just shut up.