HuMcK said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Midnight Rider said:

---

. . . aren't even at war with?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-iran-crisis-isnt-a-failure-of-the-executive-branch-alone/2020/01/09/cc0f3728-3305-11ea-9313-6cba89b1b9fb_story.html?fbclid=IwAR1KMfCPBmPequwOmEN-CQGzYV0APr-VOtzx1zys7_c8Ul3jYgvjQnVp5Ic#comments-wrapper

---

When did it become acceptable for a top leader of a country to organize and lead attacks and assassinations in foreign countries?

---

Dude had been killing our people for years .

Why should he not be killed in return ?

---

He should.

He was on foreign soil organizing and leading attacks against a 3rd country.

That is not acceptable and I said so in my first post.

---

Was he? The Caretaker PM of Iraq says Suleimani was in Bagdhad to deliver a response to diplomatic overture from SA. Trump's accusation that Suleimani was planning an imminent attack on multiple US embassies has not really stood up to scrutiny, Pompeo specifically refuses to say that intel exists when questioned then spins the conversation to a different direction, and Mark Esper was even on the sunday shows today saying he saw no such intelligence, Mike Lee also says he saw no such evidence. Far as I can tell, Trump seems to have made up the "Suleimani was targeting 4 embassies" line on the spot when he was challenged about justifications on camera, and no one has been able to back up that accusation yet.

---

Suleimani was not a diplomat. Feel free not to buy the admins claim on other embassy attacks, but don't buy the BS from Iraq on Suleimani. The primary embassy attack was enough to justify the reciprocity, and Suleimani is as much a global terror leader as any we've dealt with in the past.

---

What attack are you referring to? Are you talking about the event where unarmed Iraqi protestors (don't believe it was a militia, correct me if wrong) breached the embassy and left voluntarily, with no injuries or deaths caused? Is that what you call "reciprocity" where we kill an Iranian general after an angry Iraqi mob rushes our embassy? That reciprocity line may work for Trump's credulous base, but the rest of the world recognizes an escalation when they see one, which the Suleimani killing definitely was.

---

ATL Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Midnight Rider said:

---

. . . aren't even at war with?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-iran-crisis-isnt-a-failure-of-the-executive-branch-alone/2020/01/09/cc0f3728-3305-11ea-9313-6cba89b1b9fb_story.html?fbclid=IwAR1KMfCPBmPequwOmEN-CQGzYV0APr-VOtzx1zys7_c8Ul3jYgvjQnVp5Ic#comments-wrapper

---

When did it become acceptable for a top leader of a country to organize and lead attacks and assassinations in foreign countries?

---

Dude had been killing our people for years .

Why should he not be killed in return ?

---

He should.

He was on foreign soil organizing and leading attacks against a 3rd country.

That is not acceptable and I said so in my first post.

---

Was he? The Caretaker PM of Iraq says Suleimani was in Bagdhad to deliver a response to diplomatic overture from SA. Trump's accusation that Suleimani was planning an imminent attack on multiple US embassies has not really stood up to scrutiny, Pompeo specifically refuses to say that intel exists when questioned then spins the conversation to a different direction, and Mark Esper was even on the sunday shows today saying he saw no such intelligence, Mike Lee also says he saw no such evidence. Far as I can tell, Trump seems to have made up the "Suleimani was targeting 4 embassies" line on the spot when he was challenged about justifications on camera, and no one has been able to back up that accusation yet.

---

Suleimani was not a diplomat. Feel free not to buy the admins claim on other embassy attacks, but don't buy the BS from Iraq on Suleimani. The primary embassy attack was enough to justify the reciprocity, and Suleimani is as much a global terror leader as any we've dealt with in the past.

---

What attack are you referring to? Are you talking about the event where unarmed Iraqi protestors (don't believe it was a militia, correct me if wrong) breached the embassy and left voluntarily, with no injuries or deaths caused? Is that what you call "reciprocity" where we kill an Iranian general after an angry Iraqi mob rushes our embassy? That reciprocity line may work for Trump's credulous base, but the rest of the world recognizes an escalation when they see one, which the Suleimani killing definitely was.

---

Right, just an angry mob responding to actions taken in Syria. Was there a video too? The rest of the world just wants to be upset with the US, and proportionality is not required in dealing with parties such as this.

---

Florda_mike said:

---

Perhaps a better tactic would have been to have sent pallets, at night, with billions in cash???

Grow some ****ing nuts child!!!

---

Florda_mike said:

---

You do know obama sent them billions in cash?

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

You do know obama sent them billions in cash?

---

$1.7 billion, so not exactly billions.

---

Florda_mike said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

You do know obama sent them billions in cash?

---

$1.7 billion, so not exactly billions.

---

^^^ LMAO at your obama defense and justification! Even you admit $1.7B? Did you count it and do you know what Obama's kickback was?

Immigrate to Iran

You're pitiful

---

ATL Bear said:

---

???

---

Midnight Rider said:

---

. . . aren't even at war with?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-iran-crisis-isnt-a-failure-of-the-executive-branch-alone/2020/01/09/cc0f3728-3305-11ea-9313-6cba89b1b9fb_story.html?fbclid=IwAR1KMfCPBmPequwOmEN-CQGzYV0APr-VOtzx1zys7_c8Ul3jYgvjQnVp5Ic#comments-wrapper

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Midnight Rider said:

---

. . . aren't even at war with?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-iran-crisis-isnt-a-failure-of-the-executive-branch-alone/2020/01/09/cc0f3728-3305-11ea-9313-6cba89b1b9fb_story.html?fbclid=IwAR1KMfCPBmPequwOmEN-CQGzYV0APr-VOtzx1zys7_c8Ul3jYgvjQnVp5Ic#comments-wrapper

---

When did it become acceptable for a top leader of a country to organize and lead attacks and assassinations in foreign countries?

---

Dude had been killing our people for years .

Why should he not be killed in return ?

---

He should.

He was on foreign soil organizing and leading attacks against a 3rd country.

That is not acceptable and I said so in my first post.

---

Was he? The Caretaker PM of Iraq says Suleimani was in Bagdhad to deliver a response to diplomatic overture from SA. Trump's accusation that Suleimani was planning an imminent attack on multiple US embassies has not really stood up to scrutiny, Pompeo specifically refuses to say that intel exists when questioned then spins the conversation to a different direction, and Mark Esper was even on the sunday shows today saying he saw no such intelligence, Mike Lee also says he saw no such evidence. Far as I can tell, Trump seems to have made up the "Suleimani was targeting 4 embassies" line on the spot when he was challenged about justifications on camera, and no one has been able to back up that accusation yet.

---

Suleimani was not a diplomat. Feel free not to buy the admins claim on other embassy attacks, but don't buy the BS from Iraq on Suleimani. The primary embassy attack was enough to justify the reciprocity, and Suleimani is as much a global terror leader as any we've dealt with in the past.

---

What attack are you referring to? Are you talking about the event where unarmed Iraqi protestors (don't believe it was a militia, correct me if wrong) breached the embassy and left voluntarily, with no injuries or deaths caused? Is that what you call "reciprocity" where we kill an Iranian general after an angry Iraqi mob rushes our embassy? That reciprocity line may work for Trump's credulous base, but the rest of the world recognizes an escalation when they see one, which the Suleimani killing definitely was.

---

Right, just an angry mob responding to actions taken in Syria. Was there a video too? The rest of the world just wants to be upset with the US, and proportionality is not required in dealing with parties such as this.

---

On the border, with three targets in Iraq and two in Syria.

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Midnight Rider said:

---

. . . aren't even at war with?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-iran-crisis-isnt-a-failure-of-the-executive-branch-alone/2020/01/09/cc0f3728-3305-11ea-9313-6cba89b1b9fb_story.html?fbclid=IwAR1KMfCPBmPequwOmEN-CQGzYV0APr-VOtzx1zys7_c8Ul3jYgvjQnVp5Ic#comments-wrapper

---

When did it become acceptable for a top leader of a country to organize and lead attacks and assassinations in foreign countries?

---

Dude had been killing our people for years .

Why should he not be killed in return ?

---

He should.

He was on foreign soil organizing and leading attacks against a 3rd country.

That is not acceptable and I said so in my first post.

---

Was he? The Caretaker PM of Iraq says Suleimani was in Bagdhad to deliver a response to diplomatic overture from SA. Trump's accusation that Suleimani was planning an imminent attack on multiple US embassies has not really stood up to scrutiny, Pompeo specifically refuses to say that intel exists when questioned then spins the conversation to a different direction, and Mark Esper was even on the sunday shows today saying he saw no such intelligence, Mike Lee also says he saw no such evidence. Far as I can tell, Trump seems to have made up the "Suleimani was targeting 4 embassies" line on the spot when he was challenged about justifications on camera, and no one has been able to back up that accusation yet.

---

Suleimani was not a diplomat. Feel free not to buy the admins claim on other embassy attacks, but don't buy the BS from Iraq on Suleimani. The primary embassy attack was enough to justify the reciprocity, and Suleimani is as much a global terror leader as any we've dealt with in the past.

---

What attack are you referring to? Are you talking about the event where unarmed Iraqi protestors (don't believe it was a militia, correct me if wrong) breached the embassy and left voluntarily, with no injuries or deaths caused? Is that what you call "reciprocity" where we kill an Iranian general after an angry Iraqi mob rushes our embassy? That reciprocity line may work for Trump's credulous base, but the rest of the world recognizes an escalation when they see one, which the Suleimani killing definitely was.

---

Right, just an angry mob responding to actions taken in Syria. Was there a video too? The rest of the world just wants to be upset with the US, and proportionality is not required in dealing with parties such as this.

---

On the border, with three targets in Iraq and two in Syria.

---

This.

---

Buddha Bear said:

---

Midnight Rider said:

---

. . . aren't even at war with?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-iran-crisis-isnt-a-failure-of-the-executive-branch-alone/2020/01/09/cc0f3728-3305-11ea-9313-6cba89b1b9fb_story.html?fbclid=IwAR1KMfCPBmPequwOmEN-CQGzYV0APr-VOtzx1zys7_c8Ul3jYgvjQnVp5Ic#comments-wrapper

---

When did it become acceptable to flat out reject a sovereign country's right to kick us out of their own country? (Iraq)

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Midnight Rider said:

---

. . . aren't even at war with?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-iran-crisis-isnt-a-failure-of-the-executive-branch-alone/2020/01/09/cc0f3728-3305-11ea-9313-6cba89b1b9fb_story.html?fbclid=IwAR1KMfCPBmPequwOmEN-CQGzYV0APr-VOtzx1zys7_c8Ul3jYgvjQnVp5Ic#comments-wrapper

---

When did it become acceptable for a top leader of a country to organize and lead attacks and assassinations in foreign countries?

---

Dude had been killing our people for years .

Why should he not be killed in return ?

---

He should.

He was on foreign soil organizing and leading attacks against a 3rd country.

That is not acceptable and I said so in my first post.

---

Was he? The Caretaker PM of Iraq says Suleimani was in Bagdhad to deliver a response to diplomatic overture from SA. Trump's accusation that Suleimani was planning an imminent attack on multiple US embassies has not really stood up to scrutiny, Pompeo specifically refuses to say that intel exists when questioned then spins the conversation to a different direction, and Mark Esper was even on the sunday shows today saying he saw no such intelligence, Mike Lee also says he saw no such evidence. Far as I can tell, Trump seems to have made up the "Suleimani was targeting 4 embassies" line on the spot when he was challenged about justifications on camera, and no one has been able to back up that accusation yet.

---

Suleimani was not a diplomat. Feel free not to buy the admins claim on other embassy attacks, but don't buy the BS from Iraq on Suleimani. The primary embassy attack was enough to justify the reciprocity, and Suleimani is as much a global terror leader as any we've dealt with in the past.

---

What attack are you referring to? Are you talking about the event where unarmed Iraqi protestors (don't believe it was a militia, correct me if wrong) breached the embassy and left voluntarily, with no injuries or deaths caused? Is that what you call "reciprocity" where we kill an Iranian general after an angry Iraqi mob rushes our embassy? That reciprocity line may work for Trump's credulous base, but the rest of the world recognizes an escalation when they see one, which the Suleimani killing definitely was.

---

Right, just an angry mob responding to actions taken in Syria. Was there a video too? The rest of the world just wants to be upset with the US, and proportionality is not required in dealing with parties such as this.

---

On the border, with three targets in Iraq and two in Syria.

---

This.

---

"On Sunday evening in Iraq US forces bombed a headquarters of Kataib Hezbollah, an Iraqi-based Shi'ite militia, in response to an attack that killed a US contractor on Friday. US airstrikes targeted at least five locations of the Iraqi-based militia Kataib Hezbollah. The Pentagon says three targets were in Iraq and two in Syria."

https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Report-US-forces-launch-attack-on-Kataib-Hezbollah-base-in-Iraq-612478

---

Buddha Bear said:

---

Midnight Rider said:

---

. . . aren't even at war with?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-iran-crisis-isnt-a-failure-of-the-executive-branch-alone/2020/01/09/cc0f3728-3305-11ea-9313-6cba89b1b9fb_story.html?fbclid=IwAR1KMfCPBmPequwOmEN-CQGzYV0APr-VOtzx1zys7_c8Ul3jYgvjQnVp5Ic#comments-wrapper

---

When did it become acceptable to flat out reject a sovereign country's right to kick us out of their own country? (Iraq)

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Midnight Rider said:

---

. . . aren't even at war with?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-iran-crisis-isnt-a-failure-of-the-executive-branch-alone/2020/01/09/cc0f3728-3305-11ea-9313-6cba89b1b9fb_story.html?fbclid=IwAR1KMfCPBmPequwOmEN-CQGzYV0APr-VOtzx1zys7_c8Ul3jYgvjQnVp5Ic#comments-wrapper

---

When did it become acceptable for a top leader of a country to organize and lead attacks and assassinations in foreign countries?

---

Dude had been killing our people for years .

Why should he not be killed in return ?

---

He should.

He was on foreign soil organizing and leading attacks against a 3rd country.

That is not acceptable and I said so in my first post.

---

Was he? The Caretaker PM of Iraq says Suleimani was in Bagdhad to deliver a response to diplomatic overture from SA. Trump's accusation that Suleimani was planning an imminent attack on multiple US embassies has not really stood up to scrutiny, Pompeo specifically refuses to say that intel exists when questioned then spins the conversation to a different direction, and Mark Esper was even on the sunday shows today saying he saw no such intelligence, Mike Lee also says he saw no such evidence. Far as I can tell, Trump seems to have made up the "Suleimani was targeting 4 embassies" line on the spot when he was challenged about justifications on camera, and no one has been able to back up that accusation yet.

---

Suleimani was not a diplomat. Feel free not to buy the admins claim on other embassy attacks, but don't buy the BS from Iraq on Suleimani. The primary embassy attack was enough to justify the reciprocity, and Suleimani is as much a global terror leader as any we've dealt with in the past.

---

What attack are you referring to? Are you talking about the event where unarmed Iraqi protestors (don't believe it was a militia, correct me if wrong) breached the embassy and left voluntarily, with no injuries or deaths caused? Is that what you call "reciprocity" where we kill an Iranian general after an angry Iraqi mob rushes our embassy? That reciprocity line may work for Trump's credulous base, but the rest of the world recognizes an escalation when they see one, which the Suleimani killing definitely was.

---

Right, just an angry mob responding to actions taken in Syria. Was there a video too? The rest of the world just wants to be upset with the US, and proportionality is not required in dealing with parties such as this.

---

On the border, with three targets in Iraq and two in Syria.

---

This.

---

"On Sunday evening in Iraq US forces bombed a headquarters of Kataib Hezbollah, an Iraqi-based Shi'ite militia, in response to an attack that killed a US contractor on Friday. US airstrikes targeted at least five locations of the Iraqi-based militia Kataib Hezbollah. The Pentagon says three targets were in Iraq and two in Syria."

https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Report-US-forces-launch-attack-on-Kataib-Hezbollah-base-in-Iraq-612478

---

I'm still not following. Kata'ib Hezbollah is an Iranian proxy run by Quds.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Midnight Rider said:

---

. . . aren't even at war with?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-iran-crisis-isnt-a-failure-of-the-executive-branch-alone/2020/01/09/cc0f3728-3305-11ea-9313-6cba89b1b9fb_story.html?fbclid=IwAR1KMfCPBmPequwOmEN-CQGzYV0APr-VOtzx1zys7_c8Ul3jYgvjQnVp5Ic#comments-wrapper

---

When did it become acceptable for a top leader of a country to organize and lead attacks and assassinations in foreign countries?

---

Dude had been killing our people for years .

Why should he not be killed in return ?

---

He should.

He was on foreign soil organizing and leading attacks against a 3rd country.

That is not acceptable and I said so in my first post.

---

Was he? The Caretaker PM of Iraq says Suleimani was in Bagdhad to deliver a response to diplomatic overture from SA. Trump's accusation that Suleimani was planning an imminent attack on multiple US embassies has not really stood up to scrutiny, Pompeo specifically refuses to say that intel exists when questioned then spins the conversation to a different direction, and Mark Esper was even on the sunday shows today saying he saw no such intelligence, Mike Lee also says he saw no such evidence. Far as I can tell, Trump seems to have made up the "Suleimani was targeting 4 embassies" line on the spot when he was challenged about justifications on camera, and no one has been able to back up that accusation yet.

---

Suleimani was not a diplomat. Feel free not to buy the admins claim on other embassy attacks, but don't buy the BS from Iraq on Suleimani. The primary embassy attack was enough to justify the reciprocity, and Suleimani is as much a global terror leader as any we've dealt with in the past.

---

What attack are you referring to? Are you talking about the event where unarmed Iraqi protestors (don't believe it was a militia, correct me if wrong) breached the embassy and left voluntarily, with no injuries or deaths caused? Is that what you call "reciprocity" where we kill an Iranian general after an angry Iraqi mob rushes our embassy? That reciprocity line may work for Trump's credulous base, but the rest of the world recognizes an escalation when they see one, which the Suleimani killing definitely was.

---

Right, just an angry mob responding to actions taken in Syria. Was there a video too? The rest of the world just wants to be upset with the US, and proportionality is not required in dealing with parties such as this.

---

On the border, with three targets in Iraq and two in Syria.

---

This.

---

"On Sunday evening in Iraq US forces bombed a headquarters of Kataib Hezbollah, an Iraqi-based Shi'ite militia, in response to an attack that killed a US contractor on Friday. US airstrikes targeted at least five locations of the Iraqi-based militia Kataib Hezbollah. The Pentagon says three targets were in Iraq and two in Syria."

https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Report-US-forces-launch-attack-on-Kataib-Hezbollah-base-in-Iraq-612478

---

I'm still not following. Kata'ib Hezbollah is an Iranian proxy run by Quds.

---

I'm just saying that the embassy mob was responding to actions taken against an Iraqi militia mostly in Iraq, not Syria.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

We really don't know why Soleimani was killed. He flew into the country with Iraq's approval, reportedly to advocate for withdrawal of American troops. We tried to kill another IRGC commander in Yemen at the same time, which undermines the imminent threat rationale.

As Webb points out, we didn't designate China's military as a terrorist group or kill their officers when they were working against us in Vietnam. You can expect opposition when you meddle in what another power perceives to be its sphere of influence. Can you use that as a justification for expanding the war if you want to? Sure. But you only do it if you want to. It's by no means required.

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Midnight Rider said:

---

. . . aren't even at war with?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-iran-crisis-isnt-a-failure-of-the-executive-branch-alone/2020/01/09/cc0f3728-3305-11ea-9313-6cba89b1b9fb_story.html?fbclid=IwAR1KMfCPBmPequwOmEN-CQGzYV0APr-VOtzx1zys7_c8Ul3jYgvjQnVp5Ic#comments-wrapper

---

When did it become acceptable for a top leader of a country to organize and lead attacks and assassinations in foreign countries?

---

Dude had been killing our people for years .

Why should he not be killed in return ?

---

He should.

He was on foreign soil organizing and leading attacks against a 3rd country.

That is not acceptable and I said so in my first post.

---

Was he? The Caretaker PM of Iraq says Suleimani was in Bagdhad to deliver a response to diplomatic overture from SA. Trump's accusation that Suleimani was planning an imminent attack on multiple US embassies has not really stood up to scrutiny, Pompeo specifically refuses to say that intel exists when questioned then spins the conversation to a different direction, and Mark Esper was even on the sunday shows today saying he saw no such intelligence, Mike Lee also says he saw no such evidence. Far as I can tell, Trump seems to have made up the "Suleimani was targeting 4 embassies" line on the spot when he was challenged about justifications on camera, and no one has been able to back up that accusation yet.

---

Suleimani was not a diplomat. Feel free not to buy the admins claim on other embassy attacks, but don't buy the BS from Iraq on Suleimani. The primary embassy attack was enough to justify the reciprocity, and Suleimani is as much a global terror leader as any we've dealt with in the past.

---

What attack are you referring to? Are you talking about the event where unarmed Iraqi protestors (don't believe it was a militia, correct me if wrong) breached the embassy and left voluntarily, with no injuries or deaths caused? Is that what you call "reciprocity" where we kill an Iranian general after an angry Iraqi mob rushes our embassy? That reciprocity line may work for Trump's credulous base, but the rest of the world recognizes an escalation when they see one, which the Suleimani killing definitely was.

---

Right, just an angry mob responding to actions taken in Syria. Was there a video too? The rest of the world just wants to be upset with the US, and proportionality is not required in dealing with parties such as this.

---

On the border, with three targets in Iraq and two in Syria.

---

This.

---

"On Sunday evening in Iraq US forces bombed a headquarters of Kataib Hezbollah, an Iraqi-based Shi'ite militia, in response to an attack that killed a US contractor on Friday. US airstrikes targeted at least five locations of the Iraqi-based militia Kataib Hezbollah. The Pentagon says three targets were in Iraq and two in Syria."

https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Report-US-forces-launch-attack-on-Kataib-Hezbollah-base-in-Iraq-612478

---

I'm still not following. Kata'ib Hezbollah is an Iranian proxy run by Quds.

---

I'm just saying that the embassy mob was responding to actions taken against an Iraqi militia mostly in Iraq, not Syria.

---

Which was prompted by Kata'ib Hezbollah's attack on a US base that killed a contractor. The mob wasn't random either, having the leaders of the PMF (another Iranian proxy) present during the embassy attack.

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

We really don't know why Soleimani was killed. He flew into the country with Iraq's approval, reportedly to advocate for withdrawal of American troops. We tried to kill another IRGC commander in Yemen at the same time, which undermines the imminent threat rationale.

As Webb points out, we didn't designate China's military as a terrorist group or kill their officers when they were working against us in Vietnam. You can expect opposition when you meddle in what another power perceives to be its sphere of influence. Can you use that as a justification for expanding the war if you want to? Sure. But you only do it if you want to. It's by no means required.

---

You're stomping on thin ice making this much sense

Now it's imperative that we believe the fake news when they tell us that Soleimani was a mass murderer of Americans and on the verge of blowing up.....everything I guess

He played a crucial role in eliminating ISIS in Syria and Iraq

I guess he should have learned what Saddam and Qaddafi learned....best not to be a Middle East buddy of the US...we'll kill you eventually

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

We really don't know why Soleimani was killed. He flew into the country with Iraq's approval, reportedly to advocate for withdrawal of American troops. We tried to kill another IRGC commander in Yemen at the same time, which undermines the imminent threat rationale.

As Webb points out, we didn't designate China's military as a terrorist group or kill their officers when they were working against us in Vietnam. You can expect opposition when you meddle in what another power perceives to be its sphere of influence. Can you use that as a justification for expanding the war if you want to? Sure. But you only do it if you want to. It's by no means required.

---

You're stomping on thin ice making this much sense

Now it's imperative that we believe the fake news when they tell us that Soleimani was a mass murderer of Americans and on the verge of blowing up.....everything I guess

He played a crucial role in eliminating ISIS in Syria and Iraq

I guess he should have learned what Saddam and Qaddafi learned....best not to be a Middle East buddy of the US...we'll kill you eventually

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

We really don't know why Soleimani was killed. He flew into the country with Iraq's approval, reportedly to advocate for withdrawal of American troops. We tried to kill another IRGC commander in Yemen at the same time, which undermines the imminent threat rationale.

As Webb points out, we didn't designate China's military as a terrorist group or kill their officers when they were working against us in Vietnam. You can expect opposition when you meddle in what another power perceives to be its sphere of influence. Can you use that as a justification for expanding the war if you want to? Sure. But you only do it if you want to. It's by no means required.

---

You're stomping on thin ice making this much sense

Now it's imperative that we believe the fake news when they tell us that Soleimani was a mass murderer of Americans and on the verge of blowing up.....everything I guess

He played a crucial role in eliminating ISIS in Syria and Iraq

I guess he should have learned what Saddam and Qaddafi learned....best not to be a Middle East buddy of the US...we'll kill you eventually

---

He probably did kill a lot of Americans. And as you say, he also killed a lot of ISIS. So the question is what do we we gain or lose from it, and why now?

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

We really don't know why Soleimani was killed. He flew into the country with Iraq's approval, reportedly to advocate for withdrawal of American troops. We tried to kill another IRGC commander in Yemen at the same time, which undermines the imminent threat rationale.

As Webb points out, we didn't designate China's military as a terrorist group or kill their officers when they were working against us in Vietnam. You can expect opposition when you meddle in what another power perceives to be its sphere of influence. Can you use that as a justification for expanding the war if you want to? Sure. But you only do it if you want to. It's by no means required.

---

You're stomping on thin ice making this much sense

Now it's imperative that we believe the fake news when they tell us that Soleimani was a mass murderer of Americans and on the verge of blowing up.....everything I guess

He played a crucial role in eliminating ISIS in Syria and Iraq

I guess he should have learned what Saddam and Qaddafi learned....best not to be a Middle East buddy of the US...we'll kill you eventually

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

We really don't know why Soleimani was killed. He flew into the country with Iraq's approval, reportedly to advocate for withdrawal of American troops. We tried to kill another IRGC commander in Yemen at the same time, which undermines the imminent threat rationale.

As Webb points out, we didn't designate China's military as a terrorist group or kill their officers when they were working against us in Vietnam. You can expect opposition when you meddle in what another power perceives to be its sphere of influence. Can you use that as a justification for expanding the war if you want to? Sure. But you only do it if you want to. It's by no means required.

---

You're stomping on thin ice making this much sense

Now it's imperative that we believe the fake news when they tell us that Soleimani was a mass murderer of Americans and on the verge of blowing up.....everything I guess

He played a crucial role in eliminating ISIS in Syria and Iraq

I guess he should have learned what Saddam and Qaddafi learned....best not to be a Middle East buddy of the US...we'll kill you eventually

---

If you had to vote tomorrow for President, who would you vote for? (This should be good). Am fully expecting a cinque/ quash response. Which means no response.

---

ATL Bear said:

---

I'll just say that Suleimani and the Quds arm of the IRG are not the hill to die on.

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

We really don't know why Soleimani was killed. He flew into the country with Iraq's approval, reportedly to advocate for withdrawal of American troops. We tried to kill another IRGC commander in Yemen at the same time, which undermines the imminent threat rationale.

As Webb points out, we didn't designate China's military as a terrorist group or kill their officers when they were working against us in Vietnam. You can expect opposition when you meddle in what another power perceives to be its sphere of influence. Can you use that as a justification for expanding the war if you want to? Sure. But you only do it if you want to. It's by no means required.

---

You're stomping on thin ice making this much sense

Now it's imperative that we believe the fake news when they tell us that Soleimani was a mass murderer of Americans and on the verge of blowing up.....everything I guess

He played a crucial role in eliminating ISIS in Syria and Iraq

I guess he should have learned what Saddam and Qaddafi learned....best not to be a Middle East buddy of the US...we'll kill you eventually

---

Suleiman was an angel. He loved the U.S., baseball, Apple pie, and Chevrolet. It touches my heart that you are so willing to fight for his "honor". You have just leap frogged quash as one of the most ultra-Liberal posters on this board! Quite an accomplishment! Congratulations.

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

We really don't know why Soleimani was killed. He flew into the country with Iraq's approval, reportedly to advocate for withdrawal of American troops. We tried to kill another IRGC commander in Yemen at the same time, which undermines the imminent threat rationale.

As Webb points out, we didn't designate China's military as a terrorist group or kill their officers when they were working against us in Vietnam. You can expect opposition when you meddle in what another power perceives to be its sphere of influence. Can you use that as a justification for expanding the war if you want to? Sure. But you only do it if you want to. It's by no means required.

---

You're stomping on thin ice making this much sense

Now it's imperative that we believe the fake news when they tell us that Soleimani was a mass murderer of Americans and on the verge of blowing up.....everything I guess

He played a crucial role in eliminating ISIS in Syria and Iraq

I guess he should have learned what Saddam and Qaddafi learned....best not to be a Middle East buddy of the US...we'll kill you eventually

---

Suleiman was an angel. He loved the U.S., baseball, Apple pie, and Chevrolet. It touches my heart that you are so willing to fight for his "honor". You have just leap frogged quash as one of the most ultra-Liberal posters on this board! Quite an accomplishment! Congratulations.

---

This is literally just a stupid and uninformed post

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

We really don't know why Soleimani was killed. He flew into the country with Iraq's approval, reportedly to advocate for withdrawal of American troops. We tried to kill another IRGC commander in Yemen at the same time, which undermines the imminent threat rationale.

As Webb points out, we didn't designate China's military as a terrorist group or kill their officers when they were working against us in Vietnam. You can expect opposition when you meddle in what another power perceives to be its sphere of influence. Can you use that as a justification for expanding the war if you want to? Sure. But you only do it if you want to. It's by no means required.

---

You're stomping on thin ice making this much sense

Now it's imperative that we believe the fake news when they tell us that Soleimani was a mass murderer of Americans and on the verge of blowing up.....everything I guess

He played a crucial role in eliminating ISIS in Syria and Iraq

I guess he should have learned what Saddam and Qaddafi learned....best not to be a Middle East buddy of the US...we'll kill you eventually

---

If you had to vote tomorrow for President, who would you vote for? (This should be good). Am fully expecting a cinque/ quash response. Which means no response.

---

Are you inferring that I need to be a good soldier and vote for Trumps even though he hasn't fulfilled any of his campaign promises?

And don't feed me that Dow 29000 bull***** That's not doing anything for anybody but people that were already rich to begin with

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

We really don't know why Soleimani was killed. He flew into the country with Iraq's approval, reportedly to advocate for withdrawal of American troops. We tried to kill another IRGC commander in Yemen at the same time, which undermines the imminent threat rationale.

As Webb points out, we didn't designate China's military as a terrorist group or kill their officers when they were working against us in Vietnam. You can expect opposition when you meddle in what another power perceives to be its sphere of influence. Can you use that as a justification for expanding the war if you want to? Sure. But you only do it if you want to. It's by no means required.

---

You're stomping on thin ice making this much sense

Now it's imperative that we believe the fake news when they tell us that Soleimani was a mass murderer of Americans and on the verge of blowing up.....everything I guess

He played a crucial role in eliminating ISIS in Syria and Iraq

I guess he should have learned what Saddam and Qaddafi learned....best not to be a Middle East buddy of the US...we'll kill you eventually

---

If you had to vote tomorrow for President, who would you vote for? (This should be good). Am fully expecting a cinque/ quash response. Which means no response.

---

Are you inferring that I need to be a good soldier and vote for Trumps even though he hasn't fulfilled any of his campaign promises?

And don't feed me that Dow 29000 bull***** That's not doing anything for anybody but people that were already rich to begin with

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

We really don't know why Soleimani was killed. He flew into the country with Iraq's approval, reportedly to advocate for withdrawal of American troops. We tried to kill another IRGC commander in Yemen at the same time, which undermines the imminent threat rationale.

As Webb points out, we didn't designate China's military as a terrorist group or kill their officers when they were working against us in Vietnam. You can expect opposition when you meddle in what another power perceives to be its sphere of influence. Can you use that as a justification for expanding the war if you want to? Sure. But you only do it if you want to. It's by no means required.

---

You're stomping on thin ice making this much sense

Now it's imperative that we believe the fake news when they tell us that Soleimani was a mass murderer of Americans and on the verge of blowing up.....everything I guess

He played a crucial role in eliminating ISIS in Syria and Iraq

I guess he should have learned what Saddam and Qaddafi learned....best not to be a Middle East buddy of the US...we'll kill you eventually

---

Suleiman was an angel. He loved the U.S., baseball, Apple pie, and Chevrolet. It touches my heart that you are so willing to fight for his "honor". You have just leap frogged quash as one of the most ultra-Liberal posters on this board! Quite an accomplishment! Congratulations.

---

This is literally just a stupid and uninformed post

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

We really don't know why Soleimani was killed. He flew into the country with Iraq's approval, reportedly to advocate for withdrawal of American troops. We tried to kill another IRGC commander in Yemen at the same time, which undermines the imminent threat rationale.

As Webb points out, we didn't designate China's military as a terrorist group or kill their officers when they were working against us in Vietnam. You can expect opposition when you meddle in what another power perceives to be its sphere of influence. Can you use that as a justification for expanding the war if you want to? Sure. But you only do it if you want to. It's by no means required.

---

You're stomping on thin ice making this much sense

Now it's imperative that we believe the fake news when they tell us that Soleimani was a mass murderer of Americans and on the verge of blowing up.....everything I guess

He played a crucial role in eliminating ISIS in Syria and Iraq

I guess he should have learned what Saddam and Qaddafi learned....best not to be a Middle East buddy of the US...we'll kill you eventually

---

If you had to vote tomorrow for President, who would you vote for? (This should be good). Am fully expecting a cinque/ quash response. Which means no response.

---

Are you inferring that I need to be a good soldier and vote for Trumps even though he hasn't fulfilled any of his campaign promises?

And don't feed me that Dow 29000 bull***** That's not doing anything for anybody but people that were already rich to begin with

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

I'll just say that Suleimani and the Quds arm of the IRG are not the hill to die on.

---

My point exactly.

---

Canada2017 said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

We really don't know why Soleimani was killed. He flew into the country with Iraq's approval, reportedly to advocate for withdrawal of American troops. We tried to kill another IRGC commander in Yemen at the same time, which undermines the imminent threat rationale.

As Webb points out, we didn't designate China's military as a terrorist group or kill their officers when they were working against us in Vietnam. You can expect opposition when you meddle in what another power perceives to be its sphere of influence. Can you use that as a justification for expanding the war if you want to? Sure. But you only do it if you want to. It's by no means required.

---

You're stomping on thin ice making this much sense

Now it's imperative that we believe the fake news when they tell us that Soleimani was a mass murderer of Americans and on the verge of blowing up.....everything I guess

He played a crucial role in eliminating ISIS in Syria and Iraq

I guess he should have learned what Saddam and Qaddafi learned....best not to be a Middle East buddy of the US...we'll kill you eventually

---

If you had to vote tomorrow for President, who would you vote for? (This should be good). Am fully expecting a cinque/ quash response. Which means no response.

---

Are you inferring that I need to be a good soldier and vote for Trumps even though he hasn't fulfilled any of his campaign promises?

And don't feed me that Dow 29000 bull***** That's not doing anything for anybody but people that were already rich to begin with

---

You are right...Trump has done very little.

Tax cuts
Increased military spending
Re worked trade agreements
Got us out of the Paris Accord
Put our embassy in Jerusalem
Killed off ISIS
Expanded border security
Forced NATO partners to pay more towards their own defense .
Nominated conservative Supreme Court justices .
Prison reform


By all means vote for whomever you wish....any Dem would produce a more conservative agenda .

---