chances are HIGH Soleimani was taken out for good reasons

[Katniss]

It's called strategy. I'm sure you're familiar with "battles and wars". Sometimes it's smart to lose the battle if it will allow you to win the war.

Just something to think about and discuss.

....do you have examples of purposely losing a battle helping to win a war?

Why yes, yes I do. (grin)

1st example:
General Washington against the British. Washington, started with 20,000 men defending New York City, was beaten at Long Island, Brooklyn, White Plains, Fort Lincoln, Fort Lee, and then was chased by the British all the way down New Jersey to the Delaware River border. He crossed that river putting it between his much shrunken army and the British. The British, thinking victory assured, divided their forces and settled into territory-holding winter camps.

It was then that Washington crossed back over the Delaware River through the winter snow & ice with 1,500 men and a few cannon and destroyed the Hessian garrison at Trenton. The roused lion reassembled its scattered units and moved against him. Washington re-crossed the Delaware, played a little hide & seek with Cornwallis and trounced him again at Princeton. Both sides then retreated to winter quarters until the following spring.
That flow of events assured the Americans would take the field the following year.

The eventual outcome was the Americans winning their revolutionary war.

2nd example:
The initial Japanese successes at Pearl Harbor and Bataan guaranteed the eventual destruction of all Japanese forces and the razing of Japan’s cities.
It did not help that the attack plan at Pearl Harbor completely ignored the huge oil supply stockpiled there. That fuel supply enabled the USN fleet carriers to be at Midway six months after Pearl Harbor. If Adm Yamamoto had targeted those oil tanks and not the fleet, the raid would have resulted in minimal US casualties and not have outraged the American people as much as it did. Without oil, the US fleet would have been helpless; US forces in the Philippines would have been ripe pickings. The brutal Japanese treatment of POWs from Bataan showed how little the Japanese understood the American psyche. News of their “barbaric” handling further stiffened and made terrible American resolve.

So America lost those battles but won that war

3rd example:
The Alamo. Remember the Alamo became the mantra of the Texicans (americans and mexicans united to create a “free Texas”) as they fought the army of Santa Anna.

stop right there----!! idiocy----such much idiocy I don't know where to start
..so, we lost the ''battle'' of Pearl Harbor---but losing does not include the oil supplies not being destroyed???!!! hahahhahahahahah--so you just said, if we lost the oil supplies, the US would not have been victorious at Midway---so we would have ''lost the battle at Pear''l and lost the battle at Midway!!!??? WTF?

....you have a very shallow knowledge of war----the US had:

Nearly twice the population of Japan.

Seventeen time's Japan's national income.

Five times more steel production.

Seven times more coal production.

Eighty (80) times the automobile production.
more than double the war making potential of Germany and Japan combined
Grim Economic Realities
the US was not going to lose a Total war

You can make your point without being insulting. I’m trying to engage you in good faith. This site is toxic

 

[harmonica]

It's called strategy. I'm sure you're familiar with "battles and wars". Sometimes it's smart to lose the battle if it will allow you to win the war.

Just something to think about and discuss.

....do you have examples of purposely losing a battle helping to win a war?

Why yes, yes I do. (grin)

1st example:
General Washington against the British. Washington, started with 20,000 men defending New York City, was beaten at Long Island, Brooklyn, White Plains, Fort Lincoln, Fort Lee, and then was chased by the British all the way down New Jersey to the Delaware River border. He crossed that river putting it between his much shrunken army and the British. The British, thinking victory assured, divided their forces and settled into territory-holding winter camps.

It was then that Washington crossed back over the Delaware River through the winter snow & ice with 1,500 men and a few cannon and destroyed the Hessian garrison at Trenton. The roused lion reassembled its scattered units and moved against him. Washington re-crossed the Delaware, played a little hide & seek with Cornwallis and trounced him again at Princeton. Both sides then retreated to winter quarters until the following spring.
That flow of events assured the Americans would take the field the following year.

The eventual outcome was the Americans winning their revolutionary war.

2nd example:
The initial Japanese successes at Pearl Harbor and Bataan guaranteed the eventual destruction of all Japanese forces and the razing of Japan’s cities.
It did not help that the attack plan at Pearl Harbor completely ignored the huge oil supply stockpiled there. That fuel supply enabled the USN fleet carriers to be at Midway six months after Pearl Harbor. If Adm Yamamoto had targeted those oil tanks and not the fleet, the raid would have resulted in minimal US casualties and not have outraged the American people as much as it did. Without oil, the US fleet would have been helpless; US forces in the Philippines would have been ripe pickings. The brutal Japanese treatment of POWs from Bataan showed how little the Japanese understood the American psyche. News of their “barbaric” handling further stiffened and made terrible American resolve.

So America lost those battles but won that war

3rd example:
The Alamo. Remember the Alamo became the mantra of the Texicans (americans and mexicans united to create a “free Texas”) as they fought the army of Santa Anna.

stop right there----!! idiocy----such much idiocy I don't know where to start
..so, we lost the ''battle'' of Pearl Harbor---but losing does not include the oil supplies not being destroyed???!!! hahahhahahahahah--so you just said, if we lost the oil supplies, the US would not have been victorious at Midway---so we would have ''lost the battle at Pear''l and lost the battle at Midway!!!??? WTF?

....you have a very shallow knowledge of war----the US had:

Nearly twice the population of Japan.

Seventeen time's Japan's national income.

Five times more steel production.

Seven times more coal production.

Eighty (80) times the automobile production.
more than double the war making potential of Germany and Japan combined
Grim Economic Realities
the US was not going to lose a Total war

You can make your point without being insulting. I’m trying to engage you in good faith. This site is toxic

....if we won the battle at Pearl Harbor, there would not have been a Midway battle
simmer down
..you initiated the '''insulting''' with your little '''grin'' crap ---or in other words, don't try to imagine being insulted when there is no insulting

 

[Katniss]

It's called strategy. I'm sure you're familiar with "battles and wars". Sometimes it's smart to lose the battle if it will allow you to win the war.

Just something to think about and discuss.

....do you have examples of purposely losing a battle helping to win a war?

Why yes, yes I do. (grin)

1st example:
General Washington against the British. Washington, started with 20,000 men defending New York City, was beaten at Long Island, Brooklyn, White Plains, Fort Lincoln, Fort Lee, and then was chased by the British all the way down New Jersey to the Delaware River border. He crossed that river putting it between his much shrunken army and the British. The British, thinking victory assured, divided their forces and settled into territory-holding winter camps.

It was then that Washington crossed back over the Delaware River through the winter snow & ice with 1,500 men and a few cannon and destroyed the Hessian garrison at Trenton. The roused lion reassembled its scattered units and moved against him. Washington re-crossed the Delaware, played a little hide & seek with Cornwallis and trounced him again at Princeton. Both sides then retreated to winter quarters until the following spring.
That flow of events assured the Americans would take the field the following year.

The eventual outcome was the Americans winning their revolutionary war.

2nd example:
The initial Japanese successes at Pearl Harbor and Bataan guaranteed the eventual destruction of all Japanese forces and the razing of Japan’s cities.
It did not help that the attack plan at Pearl Harbor completely ignored the huge oil supply stockpiled there. That fuel supply enabled the USN fleet carriers to be at Midway six months after Pearl Harbor. If Adm Yamamoto had targeted those oil tanks and not the fleet, the raid would have resulted in minimal US casualties and not have outraged the American people as much as it did. Without oil, the US fleet would have been helpless; US forces in the Philippines would have been ripe pickings. The brutal Japanese treatment of POWs from Bataan showed how little the Japanese understood the American psyche. News of their “barbaric” handling further stiffened and made terrible American resolve.

So America lost those battles but won that war

3rd example:
The Alamo. Remember the Alamo became the mantra of the Texicans (americans and mexicans united to create a “free Texas”) as they fought the army of Santa Anna.

stop right there----!! idiocy----such much idiocy I don't know where to start
..so, we lost the ''battle'' of Pearl Harbor---but losing does not include the oil supplies not being destroyed???!!! hahahhahahahahah--so you just said, if we lost the oil supplies, the US would not have been victorious at Midway---so we would have ''lost the battle at Pear''l and lost the battle at Midway!!!??? WTF?

....you have a very shallow knowledge of war----the US had:

Nearly twice the population of Japan.

Seventeen time's Japan's national income.

Five times more steel production.

Seven times more coal production.

Eighty (80) times the automobile production.
more than double the war making potential of Germany and Japan combined
Grim Economic Realities
the US was not going to lose a Total war

You can make your point without being insulting. I’m trying to engage you in good faith. This site is toxic

....if we won the battle at Pearl Harbor, there would not have been a Midway battle
simmer down
..you initiated the '''insulting''' with your little '''grin'' crap ---or in other words, don't try to imagine being insulted when there is no insulting

I apologize. The grin was to lighten the remark and wasn’t intended as an insult.

 

[Crepitus]

....obviously our intel knew whatever Soleimani was up to for the fact we had great intel to take him out
...if we had such good intel to take him out, we should've had intel on what he was up to

Good reasons like tRump needed the news cycle off of impeachment.

hahahahha--thank you
...you people post CRAP---so, Mr Trump told ALL of his advisors/etc to kill someone so the news would talk about that and not impeachment???!!!!!??
big HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA bullshit
..do you know how ridiculous you sound???!!!

AND ALL of his advisors agreed and FAKED reasons to kill someone???!!

You think he wouldn't lie about that?

nonsense --pure nonsense if you think that

Lol, he lies about everything!

Of.course he's lying.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

What do you call someone that constantly lies and the justification for killing this POS changes everyday.

so how is it goin to change your mind by being written on a piece of paper???

we all know you wont believe anything so could you please shut the fuck up cause all youre doing is defending one of russias allies,,,

Hmmmm, is that what I am doing. Funny how you ass clowns have been bashing the intel community for the last 3yrs, now all of a sudden they are on point. Please explain that.

You Trump Humpers have defended Putin since Trump started calling him "buddy", now since folks are asking for justification for this killing we are defending Russian allies. Talk about a fucking hypocrite.

when did I bash the intel community??? got a link??

and when did I defend Putin once??? got a link???


what you are is a fucking liar

I said you damn Trump Humpers, maybe not you specifically but Trump damn sure did and so did his allies.

thats just your TDS talking,,,

and when did I claim to be a trump humper???

So there is no justification that you or they can really give other than he was a bad man, there are a lot of bad men in the world you just can't going around killing them without justification.

You damn sure do a good job acting like one.

 

[progressive hunter]

so how is it goin to change your mind by being written on a piece of paper???

we all know you wont believe anything so could you please shut the fuck up cause all youre doing is defending one of russias allies,,,

Hmmmm, is that what I am doing. Funny how you ass clowns have been bashing the intel community for the last 3yrs, now all of a sudden they are on point. Please explain that.

You Trump Humpers have defended Putin since Trump started calling him "buddy", now since folks are asking for justification for this killing we are defending Russian allies. Talk about a fucking hypocrite.

when did I bash the intel community??? got a link??

and when did I defend Putin once??? got a link???


what you are is a fucking liar

I said you damn Trump Humpers, maybe not you specifically but Trump damn sure did and so did his allies.

thats just your TDS talking,,,

and when did I claim to be a trump humper???

So there is no justification that you or they can really give other than he was a bad man, there are a lot of bad men in the world you just can't going around killing them without justification.

You damn sure do a good job acting like one.

my gosh you are one dumb mother fucker,,,,we have given reason after reason and being responsible for the deaths of hundreds of americans is just one of them,,,your TDS is blinding you to reality

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Hmmmm, is that what I am doing. Funny how you ass clowns have been bashing the intel community for the last 3yrs, now all of a sudden they are on point. Please explain that.

You Trump Humpers have defended Putin since Trump started calling him "buddy", now since folks are asking for justification for this killing we are defending Russian allies. Talk about a fucking hypocrite.

when did I bash the intel community??? got a link??

and when did I defend Putin once??? got a link???


what you are is a fucking liar

I said you damn Trump Humpers, maybe not you specifically but Trump damn sure did and so did his allies.

thats just your TDS talking,,,

and when did I claim to be a trump humper???

So there is no justification that you or they can really give other than he was a bad man, there are a lot of bad men in the world you just can't going around killing them without justification.

You damn sure do a good job acting like one.

my gosh you are one dumb mother fucker,,,,we have given reason after reason and being responsible for the deaths of hundreds of americans is just one of them,,,your TDS is blinding you to reality

You stupid ass cocksucka, the reason for the killing has changed everyday for almost a week.