I35 "So it sounds like 6 men defected Soleimani and took a lot of documents with them."?? I am trying to find this info. It makes sense. Is there a link
I listen to several talk radio stations. I believe that segment was on the Jay Sekulow show. That’s why I couldn’t link it.
Mona Here is a treatise from 2018 from the Military Academy where they talk of how unknown Suliemani was which was your point earlier https://ctc.usma.edu/qassem-soleimani-irans-unique-regional-strategy/ "One man is recognized as the principal architect of each of these policies: Major General Qassem Soleimani, long-time chief of the Quds Force, a crack special forces battalion of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Although revered in his home country and feared on battlefields across the Middle East, Soleimani remains virtually unknown in the West." Other interesting stuff in link
False alarm. The reports ended up being Liberals in their living room having melt downs because we didn’t get into a war.
? Mona I linked that USMA treatise since it proved your point right. As it pointed out prior to 2017 ( from link) " Although revered in his home country and feared on battlefields across the Middle East, Soleimani remains virtually unknown in the West." That was my way of apologizing for scoffing. Take back that confession
Iran has been long said to have a liberal populace but is being governed by religious radicals. I have no doubt about the video above from Erica. My big gripe through the whole thing isn't that we killed Soliemanni per se, but I have multiple quesitons before I can be for military action abroad. What is the grand strategy of the US in the ME broadly and for Iran specifically? What is the current purpose of having soldiers in Iraq? Is that purpose now past relevance? How reliable are the news sources we are hearing from? The information is coming from the same people that are typically described by Republicans as the Swamp or Deep State. I have no love for the Iranian government or Soliemanni. My hope for Iran is that the people rise up, overthrow the Ayatollah, and establish their own free society. I think THAT Iran would be an ally of the US.
ShAArk92, I hope that isn't a call to another war. The people of Iran need to fight their own war. They need to take risk and invest the cost. Sure, the US could help in some way. But this is for the Persian people, not the US military.
a call? No. only recognition good sir. Be ready. ... moreover, you can dispatch notions of my "military industrial complex" support.
and I'm open to answer 'em to the best of my ability/understanding. I said last year 2019 would be the last of "normal" as we've known normal post WWII. I've cited my reasons for making that statement. This retaliation by Iran probably had inert warheads or were at least launched without the "fuse" being set. Our electronic countermeasure folks put the impacts away from US Troops ... but the ordnance impacts are quite shallow ... as if there was no warhead ... or an unarmed one. No high order detonation. This is why I said I was a little bit shocked Monday night. Iran will rise-up and provoke an armed conflict soon ... but not quite 2 weeks soon. I posted a link to an article citing Jeremiah 49. it's worth a read, promise. perhaps on another thread ... here it is... written a couple of years ago ... but references the very site which experienced an "earthquake" Monday night.
If the Iranian people were equipped and trained to take on the Iran and likely Russian supplied military in place I think they would. I want us out of there now but if we leave Iran will smother Iraq and take any equipment we leave behind To use against protestors who have nothing. Do not know the answer if there is one.
Eirc Holder in 2012 -- the targeted elimination of a "senior operational leader" of a terrorist group or country who "presents an an imminent threat of violent attack" is NOT an "assassination," it is self-defense.
I wish I could send this ^to EVERY Dem and talking head. Of course the haters are now defining the word "imminent" to suit their vile agenda.
Word smithing is a loser argument. Besides, if the guy wasn’t planning to bomb US sites, what was he doing then? This is a core responsibility of his job.
I don't care much what he may or may not have been planning to do in the future. We know what he had just done to us in the immediate past.
Just move all the troops out leaving nothing behind but maybe some mines. At this point, Shia Iraq wants to work with Shia Iran. It is their choice to make not ours.
Read your article. It is difficult to assign fulfillments of prophecy like that. I am always careful in what I trust because they are so open ended. Plus, reading the article, it says, there is a huge growth in the church there. God isn't going to judge the nation as the church grows from millions to beyond. And the US should be very careful treating them harshly. The tyrannical government makes it complicated to know what to do, but the last thing I want is for Christians to be killed by my government.
I trust Ted. I generally want less military action, but will keep my mouth shut unless this situation drastically changes.
I don't necessarily think you need to keep your mouth shut. We were justified in taking Sulemani out. Whether it (as opposed to some other acts) was a good idea is a debatable point. If it was a good idea, how we choose to handle the situation after taking him out is another debatable point. Of course, the opposition's cries of "assassination" are rank to idiocy, and its effort to roll back executive war powers rings hollow because of their hypocrisy. However, there is definitely room for discussion.
