Time to go public with Soleimani attack intel

[irosie91]

Well, it got those assholes out of our embassy, so mission accomplished

oh was that the mission?! Ok got it.

it may also get escalated attacks and our troops kicked out of Iraq where we were fighting ISIS. But let’s buzz off just as Iran wants so they can step in. Brilliant move.

I bet those 4000 troops were just waiting for a Mid East vacation that they now get to take. Awesome!

Iran has already taken control of most of the Iraqi government. That's why ISIS was created. Sunnies got tired of being pushed around and murdered. Course under Saddam Sunnis were doing it to the Shiits for 25 years.

So we leave Iraq and the cycle starts all over.

Muslims only understand fighting and oppression. They either have Dictators or Holy Leaders, which is worse. Secular or a Theocratic government. Freedom is for infidels.

correct. And it is looking like this kill could be getting our troops kicked out of Iraq... leaving it open for Iran. How do you that’s going to play out?

it's going to be a Shiite shit hole and base of operations for Iran-----

how do you think it will impact ISIS?

ISIS will be even more unhappy than it was before with Iraq----
Isis is sunni ------Iraq will be thoroughly Shiite. Yemen will
suffer badly

 

[OKTexas]

Are you saying Iran is in any way civilized?

.

I’m saying that a civilized relationship is far more desired than an endless war

Iran has yet to express the same desire.

.

well they had complied with the agreement for years until recently. So yes that’s an expression of desire to cooperate. It’s all gone to shit now

Not stemming their terrorist activities tells a completely different story. Of course the mullahs have never been shy about talking form both sides of the mouth.

.

i see you ignoring the areas of compliance to point at the areas of conflict. I get why you’re doing that but you’re not acknowledging the whole picture

No I'm not, I've already stated the the holes in the inspection regime made it impossible to objectively verify compliance. We only saw what they agreed to show us.

.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

it's going to be a Shiite shit hole and base of operations for Iran-----

Which ends up making the Bush II decision even worse than before, if that was possible.

an unintended consquence

An unintended consequence of Trump's action or Bush's fuck up?

 

[irosie91]

it's going to be a Shiite shit hole and base of operations for Iran-----

Which ends up making the Bush II decision even worse than before, if that was possible.

an unintended consquence

An unintended consequence of Trump's action or Bush's fuck up?

bush/Obama fuck up--------inherited by Trump who is in a struggle
for damage control ------I am not sure he is up to it

 

[Harpy Eagle]

bush/Obama fuck up--------inherited by Trump who is in a struggle
for damage control ------I am not sure he is up to it

Since he is doing the opposite of damage control...I would agree.

 

[Slade3200]

I don’t oppose drone strikes and I don’t oppose taking out high profile targets as long as it is done in a smart and strategic way to benefit our country. Trumps move may have been a good one but it is too high profile to be done in this secret unilateral way. He needs to work with our congress and our allies when his moves escalate and provoke foreign powers to a point that risks war

Honestly, I never heard of a President going to Congress for approval like that. He is CinC.

obama reached out to several top officials in congress before the Osama Bin Laden raid. I never said POTUS needed approval by congress but with stakes this high it’s smart to coordinate with congress and our allies

OBL was a static target, Soleimani was on the move. Two different scenarios.

.

Perhaps... but we don’t know that there wasn’t time to consult and I havent heard them say that they didn’t have time to reach out. They said there was an imminent attack and now they seem to be walking that back.

let’s be honest trumps has zero interest in consulting with Dems about anything

Perhaps? Had he gone into the crowded airport, he could have been lost in the crowd. They verified him and his party getting into two cars and had minutes to take the shot and limit collateral damage. To my knowledge only the people in those two cars were killed or injured. There are too many variables in a situation like that to make the decision by committee. And considering the present political climate, I don't think the commies in congress could be trusted not to leak the info. You only need look at what smuckey schumer said today without any facts. Trump can do nothing right according to them.

.

You think the time from identifying Soleimani to taking the shot was minutes? Did I read that correctly? How do you know they didn’t know days in advance that Soleimani was going to be on that flight? They had time to brief the prez and prepare the strike... I said perhaps because yes it could have been a quick last minute thing. They said there was an imminent attack in progress that killing Soleimani prevented, if that’s true then the strike was legit. This is why I wrote the OP, they should communicate the intel about the attack and legitimize the kill. Pompeo has been questioned about the attack and he can’t give a straight answer. I watched 3 interviews with him and he dodged answers about it.

 

[Slade3200]

it was a step in the right direction towards civility and diplomacy. It wasn’t an end all solution. It got our foot in the door and had specific terms that were verified and adhered to.

I disagree.

.

Well let me ask... what do you think of Trumps North Korea agenda?

He isn't doing any worse than other presidents. At least he isn't giving away the store the way some did, hoping for a change in direction.

.

Right but you know Trumps position don’t you? He wants them to denuke in exchange for lifting sanctions and entering the world markets with trade deals. That means money.
I even think he tweeted about the riches they would obtain. Isn’t it ironic to see that negotiation happening on one side and then all the attacks about the money Iran got during the deal with Obam? You have to see the irony, yes?

Like I said, Trump isn't giving away the store without a provable change, just sticks, no carrots. maobama took a different approach with Iran.

.

Come on Tex I know you're a smart guy.. you see the irony don’t you? Just take the political hat off for a minute. Trump is promising Kim riches and praising him nonstop in an attempt to make a deal. You know if a deal was stuck the partisan Dems will attack it with the exact same talking points as you are using against Obama and you will defend it with the same points that they use to defend the Iran deal.

 

[Slade3200]

I’m saying that a civilized relationship is far more desired than an endless war

Iran has yet to express the same desire.

.

well they had complied with the agreement for years until recently. So yes that’s an expression of desire to cooperate. It’s all gone to shit now

Not stemming their terrorist activities tells a completely different story. Of course the mullahs have never been shy about talking form both sides of the mouth.

.

i see you ignoring the areas of compliance to point at the areas of conflict. I get why you’re doing that but you’re not acknowledging the whole picture

No I'm not, I've already stated the the holes in the inspection regime made it impossible to objectively verify compliance. We only saw what they agreed to show us.

.

yes, what’s wrong with that? That’s what agreements are about m. They agree to show us what their are cooking and limit the nuke dev and in exchange we lift sanctions. That was the deal. They were complying, now they aren’t

 

[ColonelAngus]

Iran has yet to express the same desire.

.

well they had complied with the agreement for years until recently. So yes that’s an expression of desire to cooperate. It’s all gone to shit now

Not stemming their terrorist activities tells a completely different story. Of course the mullahs have never been shy about talking form both sides of the mouth.

.

i see you ignoring the areas of compliance to point at the areas of conflict. I get why you’re doing that but you’re not acknowledging the whole picture

No I'm not, I've already stated the the holes in the inspection regime made it impossible to objectively verify compliance. We only saw what they agreed to show us.

.

yes, what’s wrong with that? That’s what agreements are about m. They agree to show us what their are cooking and limit the nuke dev and in exchange we lift sanctions. That was the deal. They were complying, now they aren’t

What should the response have been to the attack on our embassy? Specifically, lay out your response.

 

[OKTexas]

Honestly, I never heard of a President going to Congress for approval like that. He is CinC.

obama reached out to several top officials in congress before the Osama Bin Laden raid. I never said POTUS needed approval by congress but with stakes this high it’s smart to coordinate with congress and our allies

OBL was a static target, Soleimani was on the move. Two different scenarios.

.

Perhaps... but we don’t know that there wasn’t time to consult and I havent heard them say that they didn’t have time to reach out. They said there was an imminent attack and now they seem to be walking that back.

let’s be honest trumps has zero interest in consulting with Dems about anything

Perhaps? Had he gone into the crowded airport, he could have been lost in the crowd. They verified him and his party getting into two cars and had minutes to take the shot and limit collateral damage. To my knowledge only the people in those two cars were killed or injured. There are too many variables in a situation like that to make the decision by committee. And considering the present political climate, I don't think the commies in congress could be trusted not to leak the info. You only need look at what smuckey schumer said today without any facts. Trump can do nothing right according to them.

.

You think the time from identifying Soleimani to taking the shot was minutes? Did I read that correctly? How do you know they didn’t know days in advance that Soleimani was going to be on that flight? They had time to brief the prez and prepare the strike... I said perhaps because yes it could have been a quick last minute thing. They said there was an imminent attack in progress that killing Soleimani prevented, if that’s true then the strike was legit. This is why I wrote the OP, they should communicate the intel about the attack and legitimize the kill. Pompeo has been questioned about the attack and he can’t give a straight answer. I watched 3 interviews with him and he dodged answers about it.

They may have know he was moving, they couldn't however predict exactly how it would go once he landed. They prepared if the opportunity presented itself, it did, and they only had minutes before he disappeared into more populated areas. And I'll ask again, do you think he was there just to have tea with the commander of the folks that took over part of our embassy? Or do you think he was likely there to discuss the next step?

.

 

[ColonelAngus]

It’s interesting the left wing lunatics on this board love to blast any decisions that Trump makes, but they rarely share what they would have done in the same circumstance.

Is it because they are feckless wusses who have no real ideas of their own?

 

[basquebromance]

Arms Manufacturers Tell Investors That Iran Tension Fuels Business

"If only border wall manufacturers had legions of well paid lobbyists ..."

 

[OKTexas]

I disagree.

.

Well let me ask... what do you think of Trumps North Korea agenda?

He isn't doing any worse than other presidents. At least he isn't giving away the store the way some did, hoping for a change in direction.

.

Right but you know Trumps position don’t you? He wants them to denuke in exchange for lifting sanctions and entering the world markets with trade deals. That means money.
I even think he tweeted about the riches they would obtain. Isn’t it ironic to see that negotiation happening on one side and then all the attacks about the money Iran got during the deal with Obam? You have to see the irony, yes?

Like I said, Trump isn't giving away the store without a provable change, just sticks, no carrots. maobama took a different approach with Iran.

.

Come on Tex I know you're a smart guy.. you see the irony don’t you? Just take the political hat off for a minute. Trump is promising Kim riches and praising him nonstop in an attempt to make a deal. You know if a deal was stuck the partisan Dems will attack it with the exact same talking points as you are using against Obama and you will defend it with the same points that they use to defend the Iran deal.

Telling him what could be is part of the carrots, so is the praise. He hasn't lifted any of the sanctions and I don't think he will. Also the riches Trump was talking about would come from foreign investments, not from the US directly.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Iran has yet to express the same desire.

.

well they had complied with the agreement for years until recently. So yes that’s an expression of desire to cooperate. It’s all gone to shit now

Not stemming their terrorist activities tells a completely different story. Of course the mullahs have never been shy about talking form both sides of the mouth.

.

i see you ignoring the areas of compliance to point at the areas of conflict. I get why you’re doing that but you’re not acknowledging the whole picture

No I'm not, I've already stated the the holes in the inspection regime made it impossible to objectively verify compliance. We only saw what they agreed to show us.

.

yes, what’s wrong with that? That’s what agreements are about m. They agree to show us what their are cooking and limit the nuke dev and in exchange we lift sanctions. That was the deal. They were complying, now they aren’t

You can't prove that, because you don't know what's happening at other sites. Only Iran knows.

.

 

[basquebromance]

"when the leader of Hezbollah sounds more reasonable than the President Of The United States, there's something wrong"

 

[ColonelAngus]

Have we seen any USMB left wing poster lay out their specific strategy for countering the attack on our embassy in Iraq?

I haven’t. Why is that?

Can any Trump hater lay out specifically how they would have handled the situation? Don’t be cowards. Give us your brilliant ideas.

 

[Slade3200]

well they had complied with the agreement for years until recently. So yes that’s an expression of desire to cooperate. It’s all gone to shit now

Not stemming their terrorist activities tells a completely different story. Of course the mullahs have never been shy about talking form both sides of the mouth.

.

i see you ignoring the areas of compliance to point at the areas of conflict. I get why you’re doing that but you’re not acknowledging the whole picture

No I'm not, I've already stated the the holes in the inspection regime made it impossible to objectively verify compliance. We only saw what they agreed to show us.

.

yes, what’s wrong with that? That’s what agreements are about m. They agree to show us what their are cooking and limit the nuke dev and in exchange we lift sanctions. That was the deal. They were complying, now they aren’t

What should the response have been to the attack on our embassy? Specifically, lay out your response.

i wouldn’t pretend to be in the loop enough to be able to develop a response. If I’m spitballing I’d work with the Iraq government and military to break it up. If I wanted to send a message id take out a headquarters, military base or funding source for those responsible

 

[OKTexas]

"when the leader of Hezbollah sounds more reasonable than the President Of The United States, there's something wrong"

.

 

[basquebromance]

"when the leader of Hezbollah sounds more reasonable than the President Of The United States, there's something wrong"

.

around 10 minutes into the video!

 

[ColonelAngus]

Not stemming their terrorist activities tells a completely different story. Of course the mullahs have never been shy about talking form both sides of the mouth.

.

i see you ignoring the areas of compliance to point at the areas of conflict. I get why you’re doing that but you’re not acknowledging the whole picture

No I'm not, I've already stated the the holes in the inspection regime made it impossible to objectively verify compliance. We only saw what they agreed to show us.

.

yes, what’s wrong with that? That’s what agreements are about m. They agree to show us what their are cooking and limit the nuke dev and in exchange we lift sanctions. That was the deal. They were complying, now they aren’t

What should the response have been to the attack on our embassy? Specifically, lay out your response.

i wouldn’t pretend to be in the loop enough to be able to develop a response. If I’m spitballing I’d work with the Iraq government and military to break it up. If I wanted to send a message id take out a headquarters, military base or funding source for those responsible

So you really shouldn’t be critical of Trumps response, because you don’t know the details he knew.

At least you post an honest response.