Time to go public with Soleimani attack intel

[Slade3200]

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.

There are ways to protect those... we are talking about potential war with Iran here. The stakes are pretty high. Our provocation should be justified to the world.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

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?

1. When you are in a proxy-war with the United States of America since 1979 and your General dies, well that is casualties of war.

2. The individual history alone warranted his death and even if our Government released details of any threat many of you on the left will say it is a lie.

3. You can not be murdered if you are waging a war against a country that killed you...

 

[progressive hunter]

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.

There are ways to protect those... we are talking about potential war with Iran here. The stakes are pretty high. Our provocation should be justified to the world.

we dont answer to the rest of the world,,,

 

[occupied]

The imminent attack excuse does not make sense. This man was a general in charge of a large international operation. Killing him does practically nothing to stop any ongoing operation that we can assume was handled through whatever command structure that exists. They are lying. Someone else will be promoted to his position and Iran has a new martyr to rally around. You can't kill martyrs.

Actually, we did kill their martyr.

Do you somehow not know what "martyr" means?

It means they’ve been killed. Do you?

Martyrs are the worshiped dead. They have become a patriotic symbol that gets other people marching and fighting. You can kill a man but symbols are immortal. This man is even more dangerous as a corpse.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

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.

There are ways to protect those... we are talking about potential war with Iran here. The stakes are pretty high. Our provocation should be justified to the world.

Yes there are, but people make dumb mistakes quite often.

After forty years of Iran directing the bulk of terror activity around the planet, in my opinion we need no further justification. The current regime has been a pain in the ass for far too long, and their own people want them out.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The imminent attack excuse does not make sense. This man was a general in charge of a large international operation. Killing him does practically nothing to stop any ongoing operation that we can assume was handled through whatever command structure that exists. They are lying. Someone else will be promoted to his position and Iran has a new martyr to rally around. You can't kill martyrs.

Actually, we did kill their martyr.

Two of them. Who wants to be lucky number three ?

 

[JustAGuy1]

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?

Don't be stupid. Intel revealed shows how intel was gathered. General Sulu played a calculated game and lost.

 

[Olde Europe]

The imminent attack excuse does not make sense. This man was a general in charge of a large international operation. Killing him does practically nothing to stop any ongoing operation that we can assume was handled through whatever command structure that exists. They are lying. Someone else will be promoted to his position and Iran has a new martyr to rally around. You can't kill martyrs.

Of course they are lying, and whatever bull they will call "intel" and eventually promulgate will also be lies. And yes, killing Suleimani won't stop an attack that was already planned and under way - this would be what "imminent" means. Therefore "imminent attack" is another lawyerly lie, and the killing was gratuitous and not proportionate. In other words, it was a war crime, and a high-profile campaign prop, with likely severe consequences for quite a few folks in the region. You got to love how, in order to distract from the upcoming Senate trial, they put the oh-so revered men and women in uniform at risk, and once they end up being killed, Trump can hide behind their bodies and create further distractions.

And our fine Trumpletons are swallowing, and swallowing, and swallowing...

 

[theHawk]

The imminent attack excuse does not make sense. This man was a general in charge of a large international operation. Killing him does practically nothing to stop any ongoing operation that we can assume was handled through whatever command structure that exists. They are lying. Someone else will be promoted to his position and Iran has a new martyr to rally around. You can't kill martyrs.

Actually, we did kill their martyr.

Do you somehow not know what "martyr" means?

It means they’ve been killed. Do you?

Martyrs are the worshiped dead. They have become a patriotic symbol that gets other people marching and fighting. You can kill a man but symbols are immortal. This man is even more dangerous as a corpse.

So the fact that Iranians and the left worship a terrorist and killer of Americans is President Trump’s fault?

 

[evenflow1969]

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?

not like you would give it a fair shake,,,
you just want something to focus on to satisfy your emotions,,,

No that would be your side. Your dumb fuck of a clown is like a bull in a china shop gives no thought to the dominos that will fall just wants to make headlines and piss off as many people as possible on the way..

 

[Slade3200]

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 agree in general, and I think the world would accept solid evidence (except for those who won't accept anything for other reasons).

The problem is always this: Exposing critical intel may also expose the methodology we used to acquire it. So reporting it may be counter-productive, and leaving it out might not be persuasive. A Catch-22.

What I'd like to see is leaders from the opposing party being shown the intel, and then coming out in favor of what happened. Unfortunately, I really can't trust them to be honest (regardless of the party), so that might be a waste of time, too.

Maybe having another country come out in support after seeing the intel might work. It's a shame that it's so difficult to trust people in such critical times.
.

I agree, wouldn’t want to compromise sources and methods but the stakes are pretty damn high here and I see a country morning the loss of a highly respected general who we assassinated. They are vowing retribution which could very well lead to war. War involves not just our country but likely our allies so it is imperative to share our intel with our congress and our allies. I think a public explanation needs to be made. Either show the evidence of what threat we faced or gather statements from our leaders and our allies to stand behind the actions.

 

[Uncensored2008]

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?

Poor Communists, you lost a close ally. We understand that you are inconsolable. It's no different than had we killed bin Laden prior to 9-11, you're outraged..

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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?

The snag is there is no intelligence to go public with – no compelling evidence that Soleimani was a clear and present danger justifying he be assassinated.

Soleimani was killed for political reasons, not strategic.

Indeed, the attack has only further destabilized the Region, placed American interests and allies in greater jeopardy, and increased the likelihood of war in the ME.

 

[Slade3200]

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?

The imminent attack excuse does not make sense. This man was a general in charge of a large international operation. Killing him does practically nothing to stop any ongoing operation that we can assume was handled through whatever command structure that exists. They are lying. Someone else will be promoted to his position and Iran has a new martyr to rally around. You can't kill martyrs.

It don’t make a lot of sense but it the reasoning the admin is going with which is why I think the intel needs to be made public

NOPE
There’s lots of “intelligence” the public should never be privy to. If filthy LefTards will feel fucked off by the Trump admin for not sharing this bit of intel my bet is he won’t release it.

intel that starts a war is pretty damn important don’t you think? WMDs ring a bell? In retrospect don’t you think that intel should have been shared and verified?

 

[Slade3200]

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?

1. When you are in a proxy-war with the United States of America since 1979 and your General dies, well that is casualties of war.

2. The individual history alone warranted his death and even if our Government released details of any threat many of you on the left will say it is a lie.

3. You can not be murdered if you are waging a war against a country that killed you...

If this general was an enemy target for assassination then that move should have been brought to congress. Especially if his assassination could trigger a war. If he posed an immanent threat then the kill may be justified but the intel about the threat should be exposed.

 

[Meathead]

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?

That's a lot of butt hurt for the killing of a thug. The most I've heard since Trayvon in fact.

 

[Slade3200]

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?

Don't be stupid. Intel revealed shows how intel was gathered. General Sulu played a calculated game and lost.

The stakes are too high, we are talking about war with Iran. There is a time to show our cards and this is one of those times. The kill needs to be justified and explained

 

[evenflow1969]

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?

1. When you are in a proxy-war with the United States of America since 1979 and your General dies, well that is casualties of war.

2. The individual history alone warranted his death and even if our Government released details of any threat many of you on the left will say it is a lie.

3. You can not be murdered if you are waging a war against a country that killed you...

If this general was an enemy target for assassination then that move should have been brought to congress. Especially if his assassination could trigger a war. If he posed an immanent threat then the kill may be justified but the intel about the threat should be exposed.

Was not confirmed through our own instatutions and our allies were not consulted. Unalateral move all the way around. A move condemded by our allies if we have any left.

 

[Slade3200]

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?

Poor Communists, you lost a close ally. We understand that you are inconsolable. It's no different than had we killed bin Laden prior to 9-11, you're outraged..

As usual you have no clue what you are talking about. Sorry that I’m not pumped to go to war with Iran. I have a little more respect for our troops than that.

 

[harmonica]

The imminent attack excuse does not make sense. This man was a general in charge of a large international operation. Killing him does practically nothing to stop any ongoing operation that we can assume was handled through whatever command structure that exists. They are lying. Someone else will be promoted to his position and Iran has a new martyr to rally around. You can't kill martyrs.

you also do not know about history or military history
..there are great generals and there are idiot generals...if they replace him with an idiot general--that's good

Looks like you think we are dealing with the military retards who worked for Saddam. You'll see we are dealing with something way harder to defeat if Trump can't find some way to deescalate things.

hahahha-Iran is also a shithole like the rest of the Middle East
......Iraq had one of the largest, combat EXPERIENCED armies in the world--much more combat experience than the US forces -----yet we went through them like a hot knife through butter ...and Iran didn't defeat Iraq in the YEARS long Iran-Iraq War