Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
In some cases, public revelation of an item of intelligence tells the Bad Guys who or what provided the intel on their own side of the fence.I didn’t say anything about exposing sources and methods... of course those should be protectedAfter watching the public reaction to Soleimani’s murder followed by vows of revenge by Iran, we are apparently on the brink of war. At this point it seems obvious that we need to go public with the intel we have showing the imminent attack that was being planned against Americans.
This intel should clearly show the world that Soleimani was a clear and present danger and we had no choice but to go outside of protocol and assassinate him. Do you agree? Thoughts?
NO! I don't agree, there's no reason to expose our sources and methods just to satisfy you commies. Soleimani has been a know treat and terrorist leader for a couple of decades. He had the blood of countless people on his hands. Trump got a shot and he took it, deal with it. BTW, he wasn't murdered, that's commie propaganda, he was a terrorist enemy combatant that was justifiably taken out. That's not murder.
.
Hezbollah Losing Its Luster Under SoleimaniSorry. Soleimani.He actually was the head of Hezbollah. The quds commander was appointed by him. All under IRGC control,What do you not understand that Soleimani has been a leading terrorist for more that two decades. He's provided money and arms to the Hamas faction that attacked our embassy, do you think he was in Baghdad to have tea with the Hamas commander that went to Ala with him? Now you question whether he was a clear and present danger, when he's been one for at least two decades. Give me a fucking break. Did ask similar stupid questions when maobama took out OBL?
.
From wiki-
Hezbollah was founded in the early 1980s as part of an Iranian effort to aggregate a variety of militant Lebanese Shia groups into a unified organization.
I mentioned 3 individuals in my post, who is "he"?
.
Soleimani was the Cuds commander, he didn't answer to the Iran military chain of command, he only answered to the supreme leader. He may have had a hand in organizing Hezbollah, I don't think he directly command them.
.
THE SOLEIMANI EFFECT
After Soleimani was dispatched to Syria in the early days of the war, the Hezbollah-Iran dynamic changed quickly. The group's commanders had already been working under the IRGC's supervision for years, but Soleimani reportedly began micromanaging their military operations to an unprecedented degree. This shift, coupled with Soleimani's strict command over the consolidated Iraqi, Afghani, and Pakistani Shiite militias fighting in Syria, highlighted the complex relations between Persian and Arab Shiites.
I believe his history speaks for itself and he should have been taken out a long time ago.After watching the public reaction to Soleimani’s murder followed by vows of revenge by Iran, we are apparently on the brink of war. At this point it seems obvious that we need to go public with the intel we have showing the imminent attack that was being planned against Americans.
This intel should clearly show the world that Soleimani was a clear and present danger and we had no choice but to go outside of protocol and assassinate him. Do you agree? Thoughts?
New York Times :US officials say the evidence of an imminent attack on America was "razor thin":After watching the public reaction to Soleimani’s murder followed by vows of revenge by Iran, we are apparently on the brink of war. At this point it seems obvious that we need to go public with the intel we have showing the imminent attack that was being planned against Americans.
This intel should clearly show the world that Soleimani was a clear and present danger and we had no choice but to go outside of protocol and assassinate him. Do you agree? Thoughts?
After watching the public reaction to Soleimani’s murder followed by vows of revenge by Iran, we are apparently on the brink of war. At this point it seems obvious that we need to go public with the intel we have showing the imminent attack that was being planned against Americans.
This intel should clearly show the world that Soleimani was a clear and present danger and we had no choice but to go outside of protocol and assassinate him. Do you agree? Thoughts?
i don’t care what historical stats show. Trump is and always has been a very unpopular president. Add on top of that a series of bad decisions that provokes a war with Iran? He gone for sureWhen was the last time that you saw a sitting President lose an election in the middle of a war?...Oh I think if a war results from trumps mishandling of this then there is no way he wins re-election
dont need to cherry pick examples, my point still stands. Just because there are bad dudes out there doesn’t necessarily give us the license to kill them. It needs to be justified and worth the risks of retributionHow many of those killed were Americans?...How many people have Putin and Assad killed?...
When did either of those two have a direct hand in a large-scale paramilitary assault on an American Embassy compound?
Yes I understand that... my point still standsIn some cases, public revelation of an item of intelligence tells the Bad Guys who or what provided the intel on their own side of the fence.I didn’t say anything about exposing sources and methods... of course those should be protectedAfter watching the public reaction to Soleimani’s murder followed by vows of revenge by Iran, we are apparently on the brink of war. At this point it seems obvious that we need to go public with the intel we have showing the imminent attack that was being planned against Americans.
This intel should clearly show the world that Soleimani was a clear and present danger and we had no choice but to go outside of protocol and assassinate him. Do you agree? Thoughts?
NO! I don't agree, there's no reason to expose our sources and methods just to satisfy you commies. Soleimani has been a know treat and terrorist leader for a couple of decades. He had the blood of countless people on his hands. Trump got a shot and he took it, deal with it. BTW, he wasn't murdered, that's commie propaganda, he was a terrorist enemy combatant that was justifiably taken out. That's not murder.
.
--------------
"Mister Myagi... what's the best way to block an adversary from realizing the source of your intel?"
"Ahhhh... Daniel-san... Myagi say, best defense, no make intel public."
The only difference is partisan.In case no one asked, did you say that with Benghazi or about the 8 Benghazi inquisitors?After watching the public reaction to Soleimani’s murder followed by vows of revenge by Iran, we are apparently on the brink of war. At this point it seems obvious that we need to go public with the intel we have showing the imminent attack that was being planned against Americans.
This intel should clearly show the world that Soleimani was a clear and present danger and we had no choice but to go outside of protocol and assassinate him. Do you agree? Thoughts?
Depends. Revealing it could compromise sources and means.
Relativistic. Benghazi was a different show.
That said, caution is wise when discussing intel. You could give away something without realizing it.
Of course I have a problem with an American being killed by a drone strike. What are you talking about. That’s the problem with you partisan hacks. You make assumptions and are often wrongAfter watching the public reaction to Soleimani’s murder followed by vows of revenge by Iran, we are apparently on the brink of war. At this point it seems obvious that we need to go public with the intel we have showing the imminent attack that was being planned against Americans.
This intel should clearly show the world that Soleimani was a clear and present danger and we had no choice but to go outside of protocol and assassinate him. Do you agree? Thoughts?
See the far left that thinks they are moderate makes claims of murder but had no problems with Obama doing away with due process and killed an american citizen there.
But then again the far left had no problems with the illegal wars of Obama.
I was referring to Iranians and Muslims in general.are you implying that I’m worshiping Soleimani like a martyr? If so, please explain what I said to make you think that.This intel should clearly show the world
what [intel]...?
Actually, we did kill their martyr.
No we made a martyr....
~S~
Every time we kill a terrorist or one of them blows themselves up, they worship them like a martyr.
Says something about those people, eh?
i don’t care what historical stats show. Trump is and always has been a very unpopular president. Add on top of that a series of bad decisions that provokes a war with Iran? He gone for sureWhen was the last time that you saw a sitting President lose an election in the middle of a war?...Oh I think if a war results from trumps mishandling of this then there is no way he wins re-election
Trump Bolted To Most Extreme Iran Measure Despite Reported Concerns By Aides
Some officials were skeptical of reports of “imminent attacks” by Iran against U.S. targets, according to The New York Times.
President Donald Trump suddenly rocketed to the most radical of considered options in Iran even as troubled aides worried about the legitimacy of the action and the fallout, according to media reports.
Pentagon officials were stunned, The New York Times reported, when Trump opted to target Iran’s top commander, Gen. Qassem Soleimani, in a deadly drone attack in Baghdad early Friday. It was a surprise from a president who often expressed a goal to extricate America from Mideast conflicts, not to entangle the nation a new potential war in the region.
The president went for the most extreme alternative despite some aides’ fear that the action was not legally justified, reported The Associated Press — and that evidence was weak of “imminent attacks” from Iran quickly claimed in the wake of Soleimani’s death by the Trump administration, a source told the Times.
Killing Soleimani was on the table of alternatives presented to Trump in the face of intelligence — disputed by some skeptical officials — claiming coming Iranian attacks on U.S. embassies and the military in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. But aides didn’t expect the president would pick that option.
REPORT: SHOCKED AIDES WEREN’T SOLD ON ‘INTEL’
Is this grounds to impeach Trump* - again?
ridiculous sh t, you guys come up with and spew...Why did Obama Bin Lying hide the fact that Obama Bin Laden and The 9-11 Terrorists were funded by General Soleimani & Iran?Trump Bolted To Most Extreme Iran Measure Despite Reported Concerns By Aides
Some officials were skeptical of reports of “imminent attacks” by Iran against U.S. targets, according to The New York Times.
President Donald Trump suddenly rocketed to the most radical of considered options in Iran even as troubled aides worried about the legitimacy of the action and the fallout, according to media reports.
Pentagon officials were stunned, The New York Times reported, when Trump opted to target Iran’s top commander, Gen. Qassem Soleimani, in a deadly drone attack in Baghdad early Friday. It was a surprise from a president who often expressed a goal to extricate America from Mideast conflicts, not to entangle the nation a new potential war in the region.
The president went for the most extreme alternative despite some aides’ fear that the action was not legally justified, reported The Associated Press — and that evidence was weak of “imminent attacks” from Iran quickly claimed in the wake of Soleimani’s death by the Trump administration, a source told the Times.
Killing Soleimani was on the table of alternatives presented to Trump in the face of intelligence — disputed by some skeptical officials — claiming coming Iranian attacks on U.S. embassies and the military in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. But aides didn’t expect the president would pick that option.
REPORT: SHOCKED AIDES WEREN’T SOLD ON ‘INTEL’
Is this grounds to impeach Trump* - again?
they weren't.... read the 9/11 report....
or you can say they assisted them as much as the USA assisted the hijackers by giving them visas to come here, or allowing them to go to our flight schools....
Why did Obama Bin Lying hide the fact that Obama Bin Laden and The 9-11 Terrorists were funded by General Soleimani & Iran?Trump Bolted To Most Extreme Iran Measure Despite Reported Concerns By Aides
Some officials were skeptical of reports of “imminent attacks” by Iran against U.S. targets, according to The New York Times.
President Donald Trump suddenly rocketed to the most radical of considered options in Iran even as troubled aides worried about the legitimacy of the action and the fallout, according to media reports.
Pentagon officials were stunned, The New York Times reported, when Trump opted to target Iran’s top commander, Gen. Qassem Soleimani, in a deadly drone attack in Baghdad early Friday. It was a surprise from a president who often expressed a goal to extricate America from Mideast conflicts, not to entangle the nation a new potential war in the region.
The president went for the most extreme alternative despite some aides’ fear that the action was not legally justified, reported The Associated Press — and that evidence was weak of “imminent attacks” from Iran quickly claimed in the wake of Soleimani’s death by the Trump administration, a source told the Times.
Killing Soleimani was on the table of alternatives presented to Trump in the face of intelligence — disputed by some skeptical officials — claiming coming Iranian attacks on U.S. embassies and the military in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. But aides didn’t expect the president would pick that option.
REPORT: SHOCKED AIDES WEREN’T SOLD ON ‘INTEL’
Is this grounds to impeach Trump* - again?
