US may have killed Quds Force Commander Qasem Soleimani

[USAFgolferVol]

LOL

You might want to do some research. While you were at State he was terrorizing the ME or didn't you get the briefing?

I was specifically talking about attacks against US interests. Sorry for the confusion. BTW, I was an economic analyst for State..nowhere near diplomatic level

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

I don't care that the guy is dead. I am saying I would like some evidence that we did it for a legit reason. I have seen none.

It is not your right to see any of that evidence. The POS was a legitimate military target if nothing else.

 

[RikidyBones]

Hehahahahaha !!

Look, you may not think impeachment is a big deal, but it is BLATANTLY OBVIOUS that Trump is obsessed with discrediting it because it hurts his ego.

So he kills this guy. Out of the blue to serve as a distraction from impeachment process? Or because Soleimani represented an imminent threat of an attack on US forces or personnel?

Those seem to be the only two options. Trump claimed up and down, as did his administration , that it was because of an imminent threat. They in fact used that phrase, over and over.

Back off of that now and Trump looks quite the fool, as do those of you who seem to support this with no reservation at all as to why this, why now.

 

[Orange defense]

I think the question is what proof has been provided that he was planning an imminent attack? You guys just keep repeating the company line while some ask questions. You worship a knucklehead that has repeatedly denied US intelligence when it came to N. Korea and Russia, but now we are supposed to accept his word? GTFOH

Isreal and Saudi Arabia gave the proof, at least what I’m reading. I didn’t know that you were going to be ruffled? We’re just talking. Oh man!

 

[USAFgolferVol]

It is not your right to see any of that evidence. The POS was a legitimate military target if nothing else.

When the administration puts out conflicting reasoning for the attacks, it is everyone's right to know the truth. Your last statement is spot on. Trump should have left it at that and kept his mouth shut. Of course, we know he wants to revel and stick his chest out over it. I wonder how many of you Trumpers were go glee when Bin Laden was killed. Notice the difference in Obama's behavior after Bin Laden was killed and Trump's after Soleimani was killed

 

[Orange_Vol1321]

Are these more OAN, "I said it so it must be true" facts? Or do you have an actual source that supports this opinion? I'm not saying you're wrong, per se. Just establishing baselines.

They're actually over in Ukraine investigating. Nobody else is that I know of. I don't want CNN to hide stuff on the left and I don't want Fox hiding stuff on the right.

 

[lawgator1]

When the administration puts out conflicting reasoning for the attacks, it is everyone's right to know the truth. Your last statement is spot on. Trump should have left it at that and kept his mouth shut. Of course, we know he wants to revel and stick his chest out over it. I wonder how many of you Trumpers were go glee when Bin Laden was killed. Notice the difference in Obama's behavior after Bin Laden was killed and Trump's after Soleimani was killed

The difference is temperament and class.

Trump has neither.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

My point, and I know you get it, is that we would consider an assassination of one of our generals an attack on the US. To not acknowledge that it flows both ways is disingenuous. Nobody thinks they are the bad guys. Every country has justifications for their actions And many of those justifications are legitimate... on both sides.

So tell us because we all really want to know.... who's flag is on your front porch?

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

The difference is temperament and class.

Trump has neither.

He's still your elected president though.

 

[allvol123]

The difference is temperament and class.

Trump has neither.

At least you got something to make you feel better.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

When the administration puts out conflicting reasoning for the attacks, it is everyone's right to know the truth. Your last statement is spot on. Trump should have left it at that and kept his mouth shut. Of course, we know he wants to revel and stick his chest out over it. I wonder how many of you Trumpers were go glee when Bin Laden was killed. Notice the difference in Obama's behavior after Bin Laden was killed and Trump's after Soleimani was killed

I'm glad we finally have a president with balls. He's entitled to puff out his chest because he is putting us back on top where we belong. He's putting these asshats on notice that they have a limited life span if they **** with us.

GOOD. It's about time.

And wtf'ing h are you talking about with OBL? That was one of the greatest days in this country when the SEALs were pissing on his corpse. ONE thing that Zero did right and he deserves credit.

 

[1972 Grad]

I'm glad we finally have a president with balls. He's entitled to puff out his chest because he is putting us back on top where we belong.

And wtf'ing h are you talking about with OBL? That was one of the greatest days in this country when the SEALs were pissing on his corpse. ONE thing that Zero did right and he deserves credit.

We had a First Lady with balls. Does that count?

 

[lawgator1]

He's still your impeached president though.

Your post corrected.

 

[05_never_again]

I don't care that the guy is dead. I am saying I would like some evidence that we did it for a legit reason. I have seen none.

It's beyond dispute that he coordinated attacks on US servicemen, resulting in the deaths of several hundred of them. I think people are too hung up on doubting the "we stopped an imminent attack" angle - the guy's assassination isn't all that difficult to justify in the absence of that. That doesn't mean it was necessarily the "smart" call to whack him - I honestly don't know if it was because the escalations that it could lead to are unpredictable. Even Esper and Pompeo were surprised that Trump wanted to do this. But the act of whacking him itself isn't all that difficult to justify. He was the operational head of a campaign of proxy attacks across the Middle East, which is something that couldn't be said about bin Laden or Baghdadi at the times they were killed.

I doubt they had specific intel on an attack that was supposed to take place at a specific place and date/time. But the guy had been hopping around a lot lately between Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq, and he was known to have been involved in previous attacks.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Your post corrected.

Not yet there counselor. And if your gutless leader ever delivers the charges, he will be the first impeached president to win re-election.

 

[1972 Grad]

Your post corrected.

And we all know it isn't easy to get impeached these days.

 

[USAFgolferVol]

I'm glad we finally have a president with balls. He's entitled to puff out his chest because he is putting us back on top where we belong.

And wtf'ing h are you talking about with OBL? That was one of the greatest days in this country when the SEALs were pissing on his corpse. ONE thing that Zero did right and he deserves credit.

He doesn't have any balls. He's quite possibly the biggest puss to ever hold the office. No one has ever behaved as insecurely as him. His thin skin is already reached legendary status.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

He doesn't have any balls. He's quite possibly the biggest puss to ever hold the office. No one has ever behaved as insecurely as him. His thin skin is already reached legendary status.

you are so triggered by all things Trump

 

[allvol123]

He doesn't have any balls. He's quite possibly the biggest puss to ever hold the office. No one has ever behaved as insecurely as him. His thin skin is already reached legendary status.

And this is quite possibly the most absurd post ever considering we just came off Obama. That "guy" is a certifiable puss.

 

[1972 Grad]

He doesn't have any balls. He's quite possibly the biggest puss to ever hold the office. No one has ever behaved as insecurely as him. His thin skin is already reached legendary status.

Is or has???? I know proper grammar is important to you.

 

[USAFgolferVol]

And this is quite possibly the most absurd post ever considering we just came off Obama. That "guy" is a certifiable puss.

Really? How many times did Obama go onto twitter and personally insult someone who was critical of him or disagreed with him? Not a big Obama fan here, but at least he carried himself with class and dignity and didn't respond with personal insults at those who were in disagreement. Trump's a weak minded puss

 

[FLVOL_79]

He was in charge of Quds force. Those are the Iranians who go out and have combat operations outside of Iran, who is a state sponsor of terror.

Its like some of you are trying your best to not be able to connect the dots because MUH TRUMP ORANGE MAN BAD! Whats it like to hate America so much you'd side with the people who literally just threatened to kill you?

 

[LouderVol]

Hehahahahaha !!

Look, you may not think impeachment is a big deal, but it is BLATANTLY OBVIOUS that Trump is obsessed with discrediting it because it hurts his ego.

So he kills this guy. Out of the blue to serve as a distraction from impeachment process? Or because Soleimani represented an imminent threat of an attack on US forces or personnel?

Those seem to be the only two options. Trump claimed up and down, as did his administration , that it was because of an imminent threat. They in fact used that phrase, over and over.

Back off of that now and Trump looks quite the fool, as do those of you who seem to support this with no reservation at all as to why this, why now.

Way to completely avoid an easy question you should have an answer too.

You have described both as immeniment, the threat and the impeachment. I was trying to judge the threat based on the impeachment timeline, so I asked. I feel it would be fair to use the same timeline if we are judging immenimence.

According to Pelosi the impeachment has been in the works for 2 and half years, plenty of time for Soleimani to have something planned.

 

[AM64]

I haven't seen any evidence of it.

I don't think anybody in the CIA or other intelligence agency reports to you; so, yeah, you probably haven't seen evidence, and, no, you aren't entitled to see it. We elect "leaders" to look at evidence and make those kinds of decisions, and you just don't agree with the current one. Now give you a Jimmy, or Bill, or Barry/Hussein; and, well, that's different.

 

[lawgator1]

Way to completely avoid an easy question you should have an answer too.

You have described both as immeniment, the threat and the impeachment. I was trying to judge the threat based on the impeachment timeline, so I asked. I feel it would be fair to use the same timeline if we are judging immenimence.

According to Pelosi the impeachment has been in the works for 2 and half years, plenty of time for Soleimani to have something planned.

Yeah, but Trump has been stewing on it, especially lately, and it just passed the House, lurching its way to the Senate. Its the beginning of the year.

Good time to fidget spin Fox and his developmentally disabled base.