Secretary of State Mike Pompeo did the Full Ginsburg this morning in an attempt to explain the Trump administration’s military retaliation on Iraq.

“Lawmakers in Iraq voted on Sunday to require the government to end the presence of American troops in the country after the United States ordered the killing of the Iranian leader of the elite Quds Force, Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, on Iraqi soil,” the New York Times reports.

Wall Street Journal: “Though it has no legal force, the vote casts further doubt on the future of an American troop presence that has been instrumental in the defeat of Islamic State, even as powerful Iranian-backed factions have come to dominate the government.”

The military adviser to Iran’s Supreme Leader told CNN that his country’s response to the killing by the United States of one its most influential commanders will certainly be a military response “against military sites.”

“In the chaotic days leading to the death of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s most powerful commander, top American military officials put the option of killing him — which they viewed as the most extreme response to recent Iranian-led violence in Iraq — on the menu they presented to President Trump,” the New York Times reports.

“They didn’t think he would take it. In the wars waged since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Pentagon officials have often offered improbable options to presidents to make other possibilities appear more palatable.”

“After initially rejecting the Suleimani option on Dec. 28 and authorizing airstrikes on an Iranian-backed Shia militia group instead, a few days later Mr. Trump watched, fuming, as television reports showed Iranian-backed attacks on the American Embassy in Baghdad… By late Thursday, the president had gone for the extreme option. Top Pentagon officials were stunned.”

President Trump said the United States has targeted 52 Iranian sites and was prepared to strike “very fast and very hard” in the event Tehran retaliates for the killing of Gen. Qassem Soleimani, The Hill reports.

Politico: “Trump did not disclose which specific sites the U.S. has identified for possible strikes, however, the president’s indication the target list included sites of cultural significance drew an immediate outcry on social media.”

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan reportedly expressed his “regret” for the loss of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani in a call with his Iranian counterpart, Hassan Rouhani, days after Soleimani was killed in a U.S. airstrike, the Daily Beast reports.

According to RT, the Turkish President called Soleimani a “martyr” and said he understood the anger of Iran’s people and leaders.

“President Trump is not the first American leader to have Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani in his sights, but he was the first to pull the trigger,” the AP reports.

“It’s a pattern that has emerged throughout Trump’s presidency. On a range of national security matters, he has cast aside the same warnings that gave his predecessors in both parties pause.”

“At times, he has simply been willing to embrace more risk. In other moments, he has questioned the validity of the warnings altogether, even from experts within his own administration. And he has publicly taken pride in doing so.”

New York Times reporter Rukmini Callimachi:

“I’ve had a chance to check in with sources, including two US officials who had intelligence briefings after the strike on Suleimani. Here is what I’ve learned. According to them, the evidence suggesting there was to be an imminent attack on American targets is ‘razor thin’.”

More: “One official described the planning for the strike as chaotic. The official says that following the attack on an Iraqi base which killed an American contractor circa Dec. 27, Trump was presented a menu of options for how to retaliate. Killing Suleimani was the ‘far out option.'”

Wall Street Journal: “Oil companies in the Middle East are tightening security as U.S. officials say American energy infrastructure in the region is a likely target for Iranian retaliation following the killing by the U.S. of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander Qassem Soleimani.”

“With a single momentous decision to authorize a drone strike killing a top Iranian commander in Baghdad, President Trump immediately thrust himself into the center of a volatile and unpredictable region — taking his presidency into just the kind of foreign entanglement he pledged to avoid,” the Washington Post reports.

“Trump followed early Friday’s targeted strike on Qasem Soleimani — the leader of Iran’s special-operations forces abroad — with a decision Friday to send an additional 3,500 soldiers to the Middle East to respond to the heightened tensions.”

“Coming in quick succession, the drone strike and troop deployment cast Trump as a pivotal figure in what could be America’s next military conflict with a foreign power. The moves also underscored how Trump’s impulsive approach to the presidency can swiftly upend the status quo to produce a sense of disarray.”

Los Angeles Times: “When President Trump’s national security team came to his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida on Monday, they weren’t expecting him to approve an operation to kill Gen. Qassem Suleimani.”

Washington Post: “Why Trump chose this moment to explore an operation against the leader of Iran’s Quds Force, after tolerating Iranian aggression in the Persian Gulf for months, was a matter of debate within his own administration. Officials gave differing and incomplete accounts of the intelligence they said prompted Trump to act. Some said they were stunned by his decision, which could lead to war with one of America’s oldest adversaries in the Middle East.”

Richard Haass: “The case for killing Soleimani could be based on his past actions — he masterminded attacks that have killed many Americans — as well as potential ones. The air strike could have constituted a pre-emptive attack, if, as US secretary of state Mike Pompeo asserted on Friday, the Iranian general was planning new attacks that were in fact imminent. That would be consistent with self-defense under international law.”

“But what may be legally justifiable is not the same as a prudent course of action. U.S. strategy towards Iran under Donald Trump’s administration has been controversial from the outset.”

“Politico spoke to more than a dozen European diplomats and State Department officials about the possibility of a second Trump term. And while none would go on the record, for fear of drawing White House ire, they were unanimous in their prediction that four more years of Trump would represent a notch up on the Richter scale, making the last few years of instability feel like a light tremor in comparison.”

The U.S. will deploy thousands of additional troops to the Middle East as tensions with Iran mount following the airstrike that killed Qasem Soleimani, CNN reports.

“President Trump’s decision to strike and kill the second most powerful official in Iran turns a slow-simmering conflict with Tehran into a boiling one, and is perhaps the riskiest move made by the United States in the Middle East since the invasion of Iraq in 2003,” the New York Times reports.

Robert Reich: “And Trump did it without consulting Congress. He has no support from our allies. He has no exit strategy for a war with Iran. America is still bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan. He has no credibility anywhere, with anyone, because he has lied about everything.”

In a now deleted tweet, Eric Trump apparently knew about the U.S. strike against an Iran military commander — and hinted to the world about it — two days before it happened.

Said Trump: “Bout to open up a big ol’ can of whoop ass #DontMessWithTheBest #USAUSAUSA”