100 Marines to Baghdad (Iran conflict discussion)(Reopened & Merged) (2 Viewers)

Users who are viewing this thread

    We’re gonna try to stay on point in this one -🤞 .

    After the Iranian admission of shooting down the Ukrainian 737, which was carrying 82 Iranian passengers, protests against the Supreme Leader have broken out.

    The UK ambassador to Iran has been arrested for talking photos of the protests. President Trump has tweeted support for the protesters in English and Farsi.


     
    Uh, when in the past 20 years that he was commander of the Quds Force (international terrorism) branch of Iranian Republican Guard had Soleimani NOT had an imminent attack planned?

    Answer: He ALWAYS had one in the works somewhere.

    That's so weird.

    Did he plot and scheme them and never follow through?

    Was it all just for gags?

    I mean Saudis bombed the WTC both times. They were holed up in Afghanistan, but we all know the Afghanis had nothing to do with 911.

    When, again, did Iran attack us? What murders has this Soleimani guy committed against the US?
     
    Why are people upset about Soleimani being killed? Wasn't he genuinely a bad person?

    I don't think anyone is upset he's gone.

    For me, it's the question of whether it was in our best interest, as well as, the question of whether it was legally/morally justified.

    I do not trust President Trump. I'm not one to care about some enemy Iranian, but I do care about right and wrong. If there was no imminent threat then it was wrong and now that Trump has proven that he's lying about the imminent threat it's pretty clear he did it to cast attention other than on his impeachment problems.

    And then there's the issue with whether his killing makes us safer. I find it highly doubtful that it does. I also have the worry that Trump lit the fire by pulling out of the Iran deal with our allies and now kills Soleimani in order to give himself some way to argue he's saving us from the burning building he set ablaze.

    Any reasonable person would acknowledge that Trump habitually calls out others for his own faults and failings. He accused Obama of planning to start a war with Iran to save his re-election chances.

    The writing is on the wall and he's such a liar that nothing he says can be taken as truth.
     
    Trump broke an unspoken rule.

    For centuries, it has been okay to slaughter peasants in their thousands but princes and kings were often seen as bargaining chips and thus worth more alive.

    Over time, this has morphed into an unwritten rule of warfare to avoid targeting "political" leaders.

    Obviously, Soleimani considered himself in that protected class, as he was driving around in the open in the conflict zone.

    I like everything about Trump changing the dynamic in this way. It will change the way those who would challenge the United States will operate and lets them all know they are, personally, fair game if they choose be present in the conflict zone.

    It also puts US leadership in a position to also feel threatened when in theater and might just change the behavior that has resulted in a long series of never ending conflicts.

    I would rather two Generals face each other with pistols at 10 paces to decide a conflict as opposed to killing a few thousand Americans and a hundred thousand of the other guy's kids during decades of pointless conflict.

    I know it is very difficult for some to see anything positive emanating from Donald Trump but killing Soleimani should be a bright spot for anyone to see.

    If Trump had responded by killing a few hundred anonymous Iranian proxy fighters in Iraq, what would have been accomplished and would anyone be behaving any differently?

    If he is going to be pilloried from the left no matter what, I much prefer decisive action that is clearly different from what the US has been doing for 40 years against Iran.
    Are you expecting no further retaliation from Iran? You could be right, but it is way too soon to claim this paradigm shift being successful. An argument could be made that an airliner full of peasants just paid the price for your princes and king's actions.
     
    Are you expecting no further retaliation from Iran? You could be right, but it is way too soon to claim this paradigm shift being successful. An argument could be made that an airliner full of peasants just paid the price for your princes and king's actions.
    It is tragic that innocent lives were lost due to Iranian military and government incompetence.

    However, Iranians are protesting in the streets and being harshly dealt with according to some reports.

    Iranian journalists are resigning as a direct result of the attempted cover up of the shoot down.

    Iran killed 1500 protesters in 2019 but since there is no conceivable way to blame Trump, it is not important. That's nearly 10 airplanes worth.

    I am disgusted at the sole focus on framing everything in terms of hatred for the President.
     
    Uh, when in the past 20 years that he was commander of the Quds Force (international terrorism) branch of Iranian Republican Guard had Soleimani NOT had an imminent attack planned?

    Answer: He ALWAYS had one in the works somewhere.

    I don’t disagree that he was generally conducting operations against our interests - but that’s not what ‘imminent’ means.
     
    It is tragic that innocent lives were lost due to Iranian military and government incompetence.

    However, Iranians are protesting in the streets and being harshly dealt with according to some reports.

    Iranian journalists are resigning as a direct result of the attempted cover up of the shoot down.

    Iran killed 1500 protesters in 2019 but since there is no conceivable way to blame Trump, it is not important. That's nearly 10 airplanes worth.

    I am disgusted at the sole focus on framing everything in terms of hatred for the President.
    it's not zero sum
    yes there should be coverage of iranian protests - but why would that be a mitigating factor in trump coverage ?

    btw i hear lots of iranian protests coverage on npr
     
    it's not zero sum
    yes there should be coverage of iranian protests - but why would that be a mitigating factor in trump coverage ?

    btw i hear lots of iranian protests coverage on npr
    In this thread specifically, the only deaths that matter are those which can be tied to Trump.

    To answer an earlier question, the only reason the left is upset about killing Soleimani is that it can easily be framed as a Trump success.

    Events since the killing have shown that it generally was the right move, so now there is intense focus on trying to present the killing in any negative light possible.

    Bin Laden and Soleimani are generally comparable figures. Well known purveyors of terror and important leaders in their respective movements.

    Compare the reaction to the killing of each and question why the difference?

    Both were responsible for thousands of deaths.
     
    That's so weird.

    Did he plot and scheme them and never follow through?

    Was it all just for gags?

    I mean Saudis bombed the WTC both times. They were holed up in Afghanistan, but we all know the Afghanis had nothing to do with 911.

    When, again, did Iran attack us? What murders has this Soleimani guy committed against the US?

    Hmmm . . . let's see, how to properly answer all these questions . . .

    Oh, he wasn't just some "guy." Let's start with the dead radical Islamic terrorist's title: Iranian Islamic Republican Guards, Quds Force Major General Soleimani.

    First, we have to understand what the Iranian Islamic Republican Guard is and what the Quds Force is.
    Here's a nice explanation from the Voice of America.


    OK, now the questions.

    Did he plot and scheme them and never follow through? I don't know.

    Was it all just for gags? The radical Islamic terrorist is dead, so no.

    When, again, did Iran attack us? What murders has this Soleimani guy committed against the US?
    A radical Islamic terrorist, Iranian Republican Guards Force Major General Soleimani was known as the father of the Improvised Explosive Device (IED) roadside bomb tactics.

    Explosively formed penetrators — a particularly deadly form of roadside bomb — killed 196 American soldiers in Iraq over a five-and-a-half-year period, according to recently declassified Pentagon documents.

    The Pentagon attributes the presence of EFPs in Iraq to the Quds Force, the special forces arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard led by
    Qasem Soleimani.

    1579011119883.png



    We could update this with more recent data, but at this point, you should probably research this "guy" yourself.

    Nice talking with you, dtc, as always.
     
    In this thread specifically, the only deaths that matter are those which can be tied to Trump.
    In this thread specifically, all the deaths can be tied to Trump.
    To answer an earlier question, the only reason the left is upset about killing Soleimani is that it can easily be framed as a Trump success.
    If the bar for success is that he killed Soleimani, then sure, it was a success. However, if we assassinated Putin, which led to a nuclear war that we then lost, would killing Putin be framed as a success?

    It's not the killing of Soleimani that is the issue, per se. It's the justification and the events that have followed or may follow in the future as a direct result of killing Soleimani that are the problem.
    Events since the killing have shown that it generally was the right move, so now there is intense focus on trying to present the killing in any negative light possible.
    Generally the right move only in the sense that he was a bad guy. We took out Saddam Hussein for basically the same reasons, and in hindsight that was clearly not the right move. "WMD" and "imminent threat" seem to have quite a few similarities here.
    Bin Laden and Soleimani are generally comparable figures. Well known purveyors of terror and important leaders in their respective movements.
    Bin Laden and Soleimani are not comparable figures. One masterminded the greatest attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor. The other did some stuff in the Middle East that no one cared about until last week.
    Compare the reaction to the killing of each and question why the difference?

    Both were responsible for thousands of deaths.
    The reaction to each is different because killing bin Laden was justified because of 9/11 and there was very little downside to taking him out. On the other hand, there are very possible negative consequences to taking out Soleimani, and it is difficult to see the justification for taking him out other than getting us talking about this rather than impeachment.
     
    Hmmm . . . let's see, how to properly answer all these questions . . .

    Oh, he wasn't just some "guy." Let's start with the dead radical Islamic terrorist's title: Iranian Islamic Republican Guards, Quds Force Major General Soleimani.

    First, we have to understand what the Iranian Islamic Republican Guard is and what the Quds Force is.
    Here's a nice explanation from the Voice of America.


    OK, now the questions.

    Did he plot and scheme them and never follow through? I don't know.

    Was it all just for gags? The radical Islamic terrorist is dead, so no.

    When, again, did Iran attack us? What murders has this Soleimani guy committed against the US?
    A radical Islamic terrorist, Iranian Republican Guards Force Major General Soleimani was known as the father of the Improvised Explosive Device (IED) roadside bomb tactics.

    Explosively formed penetrators — a particularly deadly form of roadside bomb — killed 196 American soldiers in Iraq over a five-and-a-half-year period, according to recently declassified Pentagon documents.

    The Pentagon attributes the presence of EFPs in Iraq to the Quds Force, the special forces arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard led by
    Qasem Soleimani.

    1579011119883.png



    We could update this with more recent data, but at this point, you should probably research this "guy" yourself.

    Nice talking with you, dtc, as always.

    Inventing IEDs is pretty mean. Did he plant them? Did any of my questions get answered?

    Bad guy doesn't necessarily mean we have the legal right to kill him and not that I prefer him alive at all, but killing him like this doesn't make much sense except in the context of Donald Trump seeking attention be shifted away from his obvious crimes. Further. the assassination of this guy likely didn't make us any safer.

    I mean now that IEDs are invented, anyone can make them, right?
     
    I’m not sure we should be giving him credit for inventing IED’s.

    Pretty sure people have been improvising explosive devices and using them to blow people up for centuries.
     
    Hmmm . . . let's see, how to properly answer all these questions . . .

    Oh, he wasn't just some "guy." Let's start with the dead radical Islamic terrorist's title: Iranian Islamic Republican Guards, Quds Force Major General Soleimani.

    First, we have to understand what the Iranian Islamic Republican Guard is and what the Quds Force is.
    Here's a nice explanation from the Voice of America.


    OK, now the questions.

    Did he plot and scheme them and never follow through? I don't know.

    Was it all just for gags? The radical Islamic terrorist is dead, so no.

    When, again, did Iran attack us? What murders has this Soleimani guy committed against the US?
    A radical Islamic terrorist, Iranian Republican Guards Force Major General Soleimani was known as the father of the Improvised Explosive Device (IED) roadside bomb tactics.

    Explosively formed penetrators — a particularly deadly form of roadside bomb — killed 196 American soldiers in Iraq over a five-and-a-half-year period, according to recently declassified Pentagon documents.

    The Pentagon attributes the presence of EFPs in Iraq to the Quds Force, the special forces arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard led by
    Qasem Soleimani.

    1579011119883.png



    We could update this with more recent data, but at this point, you should probably research this "guy" yourself.

    Nice talking with you, dtc, as always.
    Wait, so if we are justified in taking out Soleimani because he came up with the EFP, then who in our defense department is now fair game for Iran to assassinate since he thought up drone strikes?
     
    Inventing IEDs is pretty mean. Did he plant them? Did any of my questions get answered?

    Bad guy doesn't necessarily mean we have the legal right to kill him and not that I prefer him alive at all, but killing him like this doesn't make much sense except in the context of Donald Trump seeking attention be shifted away from his obvious crimes. Further. the assassination of this guy likely didn't make us any safer.

    I mean now that IEDs are invented, anyone can make them, right?
    All of your questions got answered to my satisfaction. You can look up everything else on your own.

    Have a great day, dtc.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom