The terms "serious threat" and "diplomat" are not exactly synonymous. I haven't personally seen you refer to this guy as a serious threat. I have only seen you call him a diplomat, but I will take your word that you see him as a serious threat. Then why call him a diplomat? Would you call Saddam Hussein or Ghadaffi a diplomat? I dont think that term legitimately applies in such cases, and at least in those examples they are actual heads of state which Soleimani clearly was not. I think that it is abundantly clear that we are employing a strategy of economically isolating Iran in order to limit their ability to create further havoc throughout the region, and perhaps in the long term embolden their people to rise up and revolt aginst their oppressive government. It is also abundantly clear that Iran has been testing its boundaries as far as how hard it can push back without truly invoking a massive response from us. While it is true that we really do not want an all out war with Iran mainly because of the expense and additional loss of life, it is also true that Iran REALLY does not want an all out war with us, because their very survival LITERALLY depends upon it. The consequences for us are not nearly as dire. With that undeniably being the case, it is important that we are keenly aware of our advantage in that calculus. Killing Soleimani was bold. Iran had been getting increasingly bolder, all the way up to the point of over running our embassy, directly killing an American citizen, and reportedly planning over running several embassies in the region. Undoubtedly, their calculus was that we would likely precision bomb a munitions factory or something that is equally benign and typical of our response to provocation. Trump clearly escalated things by killing Soleimani, and lets be honest....they blinked. He truly has them wondering whether or not he was willing to go to an all out war, and they made damned sure to do nothing to invoke that response. In truth, he had me wondering the same thing. That uncertainty is a good thing. You can rest assured that going forward, the bounds of the line that they will be willing to cross just got a LOT smaller as a direct result of Trumps actions. To me, that IS a strategy. He leveraged our overwhelming military advantage and has likely tightened the bounds of their aggression towards us. The fact that he appears unpredictable is actually a good thing. They were prepared for us to do our predictable munitions factory bombing, but NOT prepared for us to take out their top general whom has killed so many Americans through rogue terrorist groups. This strategy worked when we bombed Ghaddafi's palace in Libya. He was completely neutered after we did that. One thing is for sure, Iran is going to think twice before their next provocation. Without a moments hesitation, I would have 100% supported Obama or any President if they had done the exact same thing. Iran needed to be reigned in a bit, and I believe that his actions/strategy accomplished that very objective.There is not one iota of partisanship in my support for this action.