Time to go public with Soleimani attack intel

[Nostra]

There is little comparison of the aftermath of the event. I think there is a lot of comparison as to the act itself.

I think there is very little comparison at either end.

OBL when he was killed was purely a vengeance killing, there was no strategic value to it. I am not saying this as a bad thing, the man needed to die. If the reports are true, there was strategic value to taking out Soleimani.

OBL was not part of anyone's military and never was. Soleimani is a general in a country's army, this is not insignificant. I am not saying it alone means we should not kill him, but it does change the the expected responses.

Pakistan had knowledge of our mission and gave permission to fly in their airspace to take out OBL. Iraq was not told and gave no approval.

There is really just nothing the same between the two events.

Pakistan knew nothing about Obama’s violation of their airspace to assassinate Bin Laden.

Wrong again, at least you are consistent.

Pakistan army knew about operation against Osama bin Laden

Pakistani officials have told GlobalPost that the Pakistani army had full knowledge of the U.S. raid that led to the death of Osama bin Laden and that it played a larger role in the operation than previously acknowledged.

Anonymous sources supposedly from Pakistan?

You think that trumps the official position of the Pakistani govt?

Hehe.

 

[Polishprince]

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 problem with this kind of thing is that America has people high in the Iranian food chain, that need to stay in place. True Iranian patriots seeking to bring down their desperate and cooperating with Leader of the Free World, Donald J Trump.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

There is little comparison of the aftermath of the event. I think there is a lot of comparison as to the act itself.

I think there is very little comparison at either end.

OBL when he was killed was purely a vengeance killing, there was no strategic value to it. I am not saying this as a bad thing, the man needed to die. If the reports are true, there was strategic value to taking out Soleimani.

OBL was not part of anyone's military and never was. Soleimani is a general in a country's army, this is not insignificant. I am not saying it alone means we should not kill him, but it does change the the expected responses.

Pakistan had knowledge of our mission and gave permission to fly in their airspace to take out OBL. Iraq was not told and gave no approval.

There is really just nothing the same between the two events.

Pakistan knew nothing about Obama’s violation of their airspace to assassinate Bin Laden.

Wrong again, at least you are consistent.

Pakistan army knew about operation against Osama bin Laden

Pakistani officials have told GlobalPost that the Pakistani army had full knowledge of the U.S. raid that led to the death of Osama bin Laden and that it played a larger role in the operation than previously acknowledged.

Anonymous sources supposedly from Pakistan?

You think that trumps the official position of the Pakistani govt?

Hehe.

Post a link little man...all you have is empty talk

 

[FA_Q2]

There is little comparison of the aftermath of the event. I think there is a lot of comparison as to the act itself.

I think there is very little comparison at either end.

OBL when he was killed was purely a vengeance killing, there was no strategic value to it. I am not saying this as a bad thing, the man needed to die. If the reports are true, there was strategic value to taking out Soleimani.

OBL was not part of anyone's military and never was. Soleimani is a general in a country's army, this is not insignificant. I am not saying it alone means we should not kill him, but it does change the the expected responses.

Pakistan had knowledge of our mission and gave permission to fly in their airspace to take out OBL. Iraq was not told and gave no approval.

There is really just nothing the same between the two events.

I don't really disagree with anything you stated here.

I was mostly referring to the fact that they were valid targets in general for similar reasons. Killing OBL was strategic in my mind - weather or not he was able to actively engage in hostilities at the time does not change the strategic value in his very existence for continued terrorist actions.

Also agree that Iraq should have been part of this considering that the backlash from the attack is not something that was unexpected. IMHO, Trumps greatest folly among many is the utter ignorance of the importance allies play on the world stage.

 

[Nostra]

There is little comparison of the aftermath of the event. I think there is a lot of comparison as to the act itself.

I think there is very little comparison at either end.

OBL when he was killed was purely a vengeance killing, there was no strategic value to it. I am not saying this as a bad thing, the man needed to die. If the reports are true, there was strategic value to taking out Soleimani.

OBL was not part of anyone's military and never was. Soleimani is a general in a country's army, this is not insignificant. I am not saying it alone means we should not kill him, but it does change the the expected responses.

Pakistan had knowledge of our mission and gave permission to fly in their airspace to take out OBL. Iraq was not told and gave no approval.

There is really just nothing the same between the two events.

Pakistan knew nothing about Obama’s violation of their airspace to assassinate Bin Laden.

Wrong again, at least you are consistent.

Pakistan army knew about operation against Osama bin Laden

Pakistani officials have told GlobalPost that the Pakistani army had full knowledge of the U.S. raid that led to the death of Osama bin Laden and that it played a larger role in the operation than previously acknowledged.

Anonymous sources supposedly from Pakistan?

You think that trumps the official position of the Pakistani govt?

Hehe.

Post a link little man...all you have is empty talk

How about the comments of Obama’s right hand man, not some made up anonymous source.

Panetta explains why US didn't alert Pakistan of bin Laden raid

You lose again, Halfwit.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

The face of pure evil and hatred.......murdered untold masses.....
No wonder so many on the Left LOVED this sweetheart of a bastard.

 

[ColonelAngus]

There is little comparison of the aftermath of the event. I think there is a lot of comparison as to the act itself.

I think there is very little comparison at either end.

OBL when he was killed was purely a vengeance killing, there was no strategic value to it. I am not saying this as a bad thing, the man needed to die. If the reports are true, there was strategic value to taking out Soleimani.

OBL was not part of anyone's military and never was. Soleimani is a general in a country's army, this is not insignificant. I am not saying it alone means we should not kill him, but it does change the the expected responses.

Pakistan had knowledge of our mission and gave permission to fly in their airspace to take out OBL. Iraq was not told and gave no approval.

There is really just nothing the same between the two events.

This is the most lucid post I have ever seen from GG. I am so happy he got his meds in line. Gotta look out for a fellow Gator.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I think there is very little comparison at either end.

OBL when he was killed was purely a vengeance killing, there was no strategic value to it. I am not saying this as a bad thing, the man needed to die. If the reports are true, there was strategic value to taking out Soleimani.

OBL was not part of anyone's military and never was. Soleimani is a general in a country's army, this is not insignificant. I am not saying it alone means we should not kill him, but it does change the the expected responses.

Pakistan had knowledge of our mission and gave permission to fly in their airspace to take out OBL. Iraq was not told and gave no approval.

There is really just nothing the same between the two events.

Pakistan knew nothing about Obama’s violation of their airspace to assassinate Bin Laden.

Wrong again, at least you are consistent.

Pakistan army knew about operation against Osama bin Laden

Pakistani officials have told GlobalPost that the Pakistani army had full knowledge of the U.S. raid that led to the death of Osama bin Laden and that it played a larger role in the operation than previously acknowledged.

Anonymous sources supposedly from Pakistan?

You think that trumps the official position of the Pakistani govt?

Hehe.

Post a link little man...all you have is empty talk

How about the comments of Obama’s right hand man, not some made up anonymous source.

Panetta explains why US didn't alert Pakistan of bin Laden raid

You lose again, Halfwit.

Leon Panetta....

And of course you just blindly accept what the government tells you, that is what all big government statist do.

Look beyond the "official story" and find the truth...

 

[Olde Europe]

I think we all know by now there wasn’t an imminent attack. There was a threat of more of the same attacks this guy has been involved with. An maybe that is worth of a search and destroy warrant on this guy... but IMO that should be coordinated with our government and our allies.

Of course there was no imminent attack, and I contend we do not actually know what "this guy" was "involved with". Not on the basis of pronouncements by the know-nothings from the Trump administration, unless we go by the Muslim-haters' perennial propensity to assume the worst in them, solidly based on their own projections. And now, look here:

Although the Trump administration has said that the United States killed General Suleimani because he was planning imminent attacks against American interests, there were indications Monday that he may have been leading an effort to calm tensions with Saudi Arabia.

Prime Minister Abdul Mahdi of Iraq said that he was supposed to meet with General Suleimani on the morning he was killed, and that he expected him to bring messages from the Iranians that might help to “reach agreements and breakthroughs important for the situation in Iraq and the region.”​

Bears repeating: Trump murdered the man who was about to meet the Iraqi Prime Minister in pursuit of “agreements and breakthroughs important for the situation in Iraq and the region.”

I said it before, and I say it again: The Suleimani murder suffers from many defects, to name but a few, it was a flagrant violation of the law, it served no discernible foreign policy aim, it creates a threat of tit-for-tat escalation towards war from which there are no obvious off-ramps, and it was not embedded in an overarching strategy in the region. That latter, in particular, is the reason why it cannot be communicated within the U.S. government, and not coordinated with allies: How do you explain a course of action that is not reasonably grounded? "The Mob Boss wills it" is not a reasonable explanation, and that's why allies learned from the media that their personnel in the region has just been exposed to grave danger by Trump.

 

[Mac-7]

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?

Meaning libs want to know what we know and how we know it?

that should remain classified

 

[debbiedowner]

again not my words, you have serious comprehension issues. I think killing a high ranking general could start a war with the country that general served for. If Canada dropped a maple bomb on McMaster you best bet Canada’s gonna get fucked up.

So, you are equating McMaster with the scum leader of a designated terrorist organization? I expect no better from America hating fuckwits.

im equating the way we feel about McMaster with the way Iranian people appear to feel about Soleimani... did you not understand that. Do I need to explain everything to you like a grade schooler?

Who cares how people feel about a terrorist leader, besides you?

Did we care about how Bin Laden’s followers felt?

my point has nothing to do with whether you care or not. Yet something else that goes right over your head. Where did you got your edication from cuz it ain’t workin tu guud

Who is talking about what I care about? You worrying about the feelings of the people following this terrorist is the topic.

Where was your rage when NK took out Otto W? After all wasn't NK one of the axix of evil?

Where was your rage when Turkey took out Jamal?

You must have supported both so selective of the far right.

 

[debbiedowner]

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?

Meaning libs want to know what we know and how we know it?

that should remain classified

Yea, maybe by taking out this guy Iran will crawl back to the negotiating table making us safer. Are you fucking brain dead? No negotiations and we are not safer.

 

[Olde Europe]

Leon Panetta....

And of course you just blindly accept what the government tells you, that is what all big government statist do.

Look beyond the "official story" and find the truth...

You know, Gator, if you want to figure out where the truth might be, ask yourself, who as an incentive to lie. I, for one, see no reason why Panetta should claim they have not informed the Pakistani government when they actually did. There plainly is nothing to be gained. Acting in coordination with a cooperative foreign government on foreign soil would have increased the prospects of success, and it would have obviated the need to fly that mission with stealth helicopters - one of which they lost.

On the other hand, the Pakistanis were hugely embarrassed they (allegedly) didn't know Osama lived where he lived, they did not know the U.S. found him, they did not detect the mission to kill him, and they have been kept in the dark about all of it. They've been decried in popular outrage as incompetent and patently useless. So, yes, they do have an incentive to claim they were in the loop.

Also, there always was at least a justifiable suspicion that Osama lived in Pakistan with the tacit consent by parts of the Pakistani government, its security service in particular. Informing Pakistan would risk mission failure if those folks tipped Osama off. Why risk that?

Hence, my money would be on Panetta to have told the truth.

 

[Mac-7]

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?

Meaning libs want to know what we know and how we know it?

that should remain classified

Yea, maybe by taking out this guy Iran will crawl back to the negotiating table making us safer. Are you fucking brain dead? No negotiations and we are not safer.

The irans are still killing Americans and others in the middle east

maybe its because the sanctions are hurting them and their people are getting restless

So they strike out at America and by your logic I suppose they want to force America to lift the pressure on them

but liberals have so much hate for trump that they cant think clearly

 

[debbiedowner]

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?

Meaning libs want to know what we know and how we know it?

that should remain classified

Yea, maybe by taking out this guy Iran will crawl back to the negotiating table making us safer. Are you fucking brain dead? No negotiations and we are not safer.

The irans are still killing Americans and others in the middle east

maybe its because the sanctions are hurting them and their people are getting restless

So they strike out at America and by your logic I suppose they want to force America to lift the pressure on them

but liberals have so much hate for trump that they cant think clearly

Just maybe libs and repubs that have their heads screwed on straight can see the ramifications down the road the trump party certainly can't. BTW its just not libs that have hate for trump, you left out the never trumpers.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I think we all know by now there wasn’t an imminent attack. There was a threat of more of the same attacks this guy has been involved with. An maybe that is worth of a search and destroy warrant on this guy... but IMO that should be coordinated with our government and our allies.

Of course there was no imminent attack, and I contend we do not actually know what "this guy" was "involved with". Not on the basis of pronouncements by the know-nothings from the Trump administration, unless we go by the Muslim-haters' perennial propensity to assume the worst in them, solidly based on their own projections. And now, look here:

Although the Trump administration has said that the United States killed General Suleimani because he was planning imminent attacks against American interests, there were indications Monday that he may have been leading an effort to calm tensions with Saudi Arabia.

Prime Minister Abdul Mahdi of Iraq said that he was supposed to meet with General Suleimani on the morning he was killed, and that he expected him to bring messages from the Iranians that might help to “reach agreements and breakthroughs important for the situation in Iraq and the region.”​

Bears repeating: Trump murdered the man who was about to meet the Iraqi Prime Minister in pursuit of “agreements and breakthroughs important for the situation in Iraq and the region.”

I said it before, and I say it again: The Suleimani murder suffers from many defects, to name but a few, it was a flagrant violation of the law, it served no discernible foreign policy aim, it creates a threat of tit-for-tat escalation towards war from which there are no obvious off-ramps, and it was not embedded in an overarching strategy in the region. That latter, in particular, is the reason why it cannot be communicated within the U.S. government, and not coordinated with allies: How do you explain a course of action that is not reasonably grounded? "The Mob Boss wills it" is not a reasonable explanation, and that's why allies learned from the media that their personnel in the region has just been exposed to grave danger by Trump.

The Suleimani murder suffers from many defects

Murder?

 

[Mac-7]

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?

Meaning libs want to know what we know and how we know it?

that should remain classified

Yea, maybe by taking out this guy Iran will crawl back to the negotiating table making us safer. Are you fucking brain dead? No negotiations and we are not safer.

The irans are still killing Americans and others in the middle east

maybe its because the sanctions are hurting them and their people are getting restless

So they strike out at America and by your logic I suppose they want to force America to lift the pressure on them

but liberals have so much hate for trump that they cant think clearly

Just maybe libs and repubs that have their heads screwed on straight can see the ramifications down the road the trump party certainly can't. BTW its just not libs that have hate for trump, you left out the never trumpers.

Ramifications of what?

responding to iranian terrorist attacks in the middle east?

not responding has “ramifications” also

 

[Cosmos]

They got the opportunity to take the shot and they took it. Simple as that. This animal has been a target for decades. Good job, Trump.

 

[easyt65]

No Intel Needed.

General Soleimani was the terrorist leader of the Iranian IRCG QUD Force, an officially designated terrorist organization. He is credited with well over 500 US soldiers' deaths and the wounding of many more, with the deaths and wounding of US civilians, and with thousands of murders of civilian men, women, and children. Most recently, by his order, a rocket attack was launched against one of our bases, killing a US contractor and wounding others...AND...an attack was conducted on a US Embassy.

The United States has been targeting and taking out terrorists and terrorist leaders since 9/12/01. Every time Al Qaeda or ISIS simply announces a successor to their former terrorist leader the United States elevates the individual to the top of the 'kill' list...and the majority of them had far less blood on their hands than Soleimani.

Regarding al-Aulaqi, the terrorist killed in a President Obama drone strike, Democrats declared:

'Mr. al-Aulaqi [sic] clearly made a conscious decision to join an organized fighting force that was (and is) engaged in planning and carrying out attacks against the United States,” the senators wrote. “By taking on a leadership role in this organization, involving himself in ongoing operational planning against the United States, and demonstrating the capacity and intent to carry out these operations, he made himself a legitimate target for military action... We do not believe al-Awlaki’s citizenship provides a basis for concluding that he is immune from a use of force abroad”'

Likewise, General Soleimani made a conscious choice to be not only a part of the IRCG but to be its leader. He personally carried out and directed attacks against the United states and US citizens. By choosing and doing these things he made himself a legitimate target for military action...according to DEMOCRATS!

So snowflakes can stop with the whole BS narrative that if there is not ENOUGH 'just cause' in the way of sufficient Intel of an imminent attack directed by Soleimani that Trump has to answer to THEM.

 

[debbiedowner]

No Intel Needed.

General Soleimani was the terrorist leader of the Iranian IRCG QUD Force, an officially designated terrorist organization. He is credited with well over 500 US soldiers' deaths and the wounding of many more, with the deaths and wounding of US civilians, and with thousands of murders of civilian men, women, and children. Most recently, by his order, a rocket attack was launched against one of our bases, killing a US contractor and wounding others...AND...an attack was conducted on a US Embassy.

The United States has been targeting and taking out terrorists and terrorist leaders since 9/12/01. Every time Al Qaeda or ISIS simply announces a successor to their former terrorist leader the United States elevates the individual to the top of the 'kill' list...and the majority of them had far less blood on their hands than Soleimani.

Regarding al-Aulaqi, the terrorist killed in a President Obama drone strike, Democrats declared:

'Mr. al-Aulaqi [sic] clearly made a conscious decision to join an organized fighting force that was (and is) engaged in planning and carrying out attacks against the United States,” the senators wrote. “By taking on a leadership role in this organization, involving himself in ongoing operational planning against the United States, and demonstrating the capacity and intent to carry out these operations, he made himself a legitimate target for military action... We do not believe al-Awlaki’s citizenship provides a basis for concluding that he is immune from a use of force abroad”'

Likewise, General Soleimani made a conscious choice to be not only a part of the IRCG but to be its leader. He personally carried out and directed attacks against the United states and US citizens. By choosing and doing these things he made himself a legitimate target for military action...according to DEMOCRATS!

So snowflakes can stop with the whole BS narrative that if there is not ENOUGH 'just cause' in the way of sufficient Intel of an imminent attack directed by Soleimani that Trump has to answer to THEM.