Online magazine editor Annabel Simons, 60, was told she was deficient in magnesium, but was at first skeptical about the effects she would feel by taking Magnesium+ 'I originally heard about Magnesium+ from my doctor two years ago, when I broke my shoulder. 'Initially, I thought I could be imagining the improvements, but I genuinely believe that Magnesium+ made me more energetic and I slept more consistently because I stopped waking up at night with excruciating muscle cramp. ' 'This combination meant my general wellbeing was much better. Suddenly exercise seemed easier and with more exercise, that cycle of improvement only got better. ' Annabel had similarly tried other magnesium supplements that had nowhere near the same effect as Magnesium+ and often failed to see any effect by adding magnesium to her everyday diet. 'Our foods don't have as many nutrients as they used to, ' she says. 'Our fruits and vegetables are often ripened artificially so even when we're getting our five a day, it's not enough. '
Denied Access
And like Clinton, Bush and Blair before him, such thoughtlessness has all too foreseeable 'unforeseen consequences'. The retaliatory actions. The deepening instability. The terroristic opportunities. This moral neediness is why Solemaini's grandstanding execution is not a surprise. From the start of Trump's presidency, he has consistently sought out the Islamic Republic as the stage on which to show off his moral leadership. Hence he has conjured it up as a uniquely murderous, terrorising and destabilising force, led by a collection of uniquely bad individuals. It always makes for a dangerously simplistic approach to global politics, in which the elimination of bad men, from Saddam Hussein and Colonel Gaddafi to Soleimani, will make everything better. It won't, of course. Ironically, however, this manichean approach is now mirrored by the Western liberal critics of Trump. They excuse the authoritarian brutality of the Islamic Republic, because the only evil they see is that of America.
The US refrained from attacking the Iranian state then, so what's the difference now? Incredibly, it appears to have been a tweet from the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's English-language Twitter account, in which he goaded Trump, saying 'You can't do anything'. And so Trump decided to prove him wrong. Because that's what strong, decisive leaders do when taunted by Bad Guys. It makes for yet another reckless action in a region long roiled and upturned by the past recklessness of the US and its allies. Yet again, there seems to have been no thought as to the consequences, in this case of assassinating one of Iran's de facto leaders. No concern over the territorial or realpolitik effects of a significant, symbolic attack on the Iranian state. No geopolitical strategising, or plan. That the US has only now told US citizens in Iraq to leave shows how little Trump et al thought about the effect that assassinating Soleimani would have on even their own countrymen. Like too many Western leaders over the past quarter of a century, Trump's decision seems to have been governed by a moral neediness, a desperate desire for the domestic PR glow that he believes comes from acting strongly, decisively, against a putative axis of evil.
No one should weep over the death of General Qasem Soleimani, who was killed, alongside other Iran -backed militia men, in a US drone attack at Baghdad airport. He was no hero. No spearhead of anti-US imperialism. Rather, he was a ruthless, brutal part of Iran's ruthless, brutal ruling elite. He did nothing that was not in the interests of the Islamic Republic. After all, that was the point of Revolutionary Guards' Quds force, which Soleimani led with strategic and murderous aplomb from 1998 onwards – namely, to defend the Iranian regime through an expansion of its regional and international power. Rivals were assassinated, and allies were armed. The result is a network that extends throughout the Middle East, and sometimes beyond, of militias and political factions who fight the Iranian regime's external opponents. Think of Hezbollah in Lebanon. Or the Houthis in Yemen. Or the Badr Organisation in Iraq. This transnational, largely Shia militancy is arguably Iran's greatest military and political achievement.