I think “set up” is too strong.
But he wasn’t of near the value he used to be to them.
And was a distinct liability.
So, at least, it wasn’t as much of a risk to take him out as it had been.
“But he wasn’t of near the value he used to be to them.
And was a distinct liability.”
1. I don’t know how he was a liability to them.
2. Expansion and extension of the Mullah’s agenda across the Middle East has increasingly made a working military alliance relationship with Russia, in Syria and in sharing of military intelligence on U.S. in the Middle East. The Quds Force general was THE KEY component in the operational intersections between Iran and the Russians - he made their joint objectives work. He had in the last few years become MORE valuable to the Mullahs and valuable as a partner to Russia as well.
We got a “twofer” when we took him out. Relationships are vary important in the alliances of convenience the Mullahs and the Russians have. It will take time to rebuild relationships and trust between the Mullah’s new Quds Force commander (a “safe” choice, not a bold choice) and the Russians and the Iraqi Militias supported by Iran. That is why the Mullahs’ military response was so weak. It will take some time for the new Quds Force general to get his command up to speed.