If it's good or the goose ...

[Paulie]

Was taking out Bin Laden state sponsored assassination?

That’s different

 

[dblack]

Truman killed hundreds of thousands who were innocent in hiroshima and nagasaki. Trump killed one general who had the blood of thousands on his hands.

Truman had a declaration of war.

A declaration of war doesn't justify killing hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women, and children. You cant hide behind that smoke screen.

Still, Congress declared war for Truman. They didn't for Trump.

So, how's your moral compass? If another country takes up state sponsored assassinations as a foreign policy tool, will you applaud it? Do you understand the concept of precedent? Do you understand the precedent that Trump just set?

Trump set no precedent. Are you kidding me? Im not sad at all for that general nor was I sad when O took out obl. My moral compass is fine.

Morality isn't about feeling sad. It's about the golden rule. It's about recognizing that if you claim something is ok for you to do, then it's ok for others - and if you claim something if wrong for others to do, it's wrong for you to do as well.

So, getting back to the question you're dodging - if another country condemned a US general as a criminal, would it be acceptable for them enter our country and kill him? It wouldn't be acceptable to me. Even if he was every bit the criminal the other country claimed, it's not their right to enter our airspace and carry out a death sentence.

Do disagree? Do you think it should be their right? Do you think it should be ours?

 

[gipper]

You are quite the funny child. Yes, do make paranoia the basis for your uneducated views.

Which dog was Obama wagging when he killed a different international terrorist, hmmmmm?

So how did you answer? Is it ok for other nations to adopt similar policies to the US? If they claim a US general is a terrorist, is it acceptable for them to just assassinate him?

I realize you are an extremely stupid child who supports the Mullahs, but this isn't a matter of "claiming" he is a terrorist, but the fact he IS a terrorist.

Obama killed Bin Laden because he is a terrorist who attacked us and was a continuing danger. . Trump did what he did for the very same reason.

I've long wondered whether being a hyper-partisan makes a person completely retarded, or whether being completely retarded leads one to become hyper-partisan.

Which is it with you?

So how did you answer? Is it ok for other nations to adopt similar policies to the US? If they claim a US general is a terrorist, is it acceptable for them to just assassinate him?

Truman killed hundreds of thousands who were innocent in hiroshima and nagasaki. Trump killed one general who had the blood of thousands on his hands.

The General was not the terrorist your lying government and media are telling you. Stop believing propaganda.

The US was aligned with this general not long ago, in efforts to destroy ISIS.

Get informed. Please.

Oh yes he was and I don't listen to the media and their lies. Dont get goofy.

Oh no he wasn’t.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Was taking out Bin Laden state sponsored assassination?

Nope. OBL was an international criminal. Any other stupid questions?

So was Soleimani.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Truman killed hundreds of thousands who were innocent in hiroshima and nagasaki. Trump killed one general who had the blood of thousands on his hands.

Truman had a declaration of war.

A declaration of war doesn't justify killing hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women, and children. You cant hide behind that smoke screen.

Still, Congress declared war for Truman. They didn't for Trump.

So, how's your moral compass? If another country takes up state sponsored assassinations as a foreign policy tool, will you applaud it? Do you understand the concept of precedent? Do you understand the precedent that Trump just set?

Trump set no precedent. Are you kidding me? Im not sad at all for that general nor was I sad when O took out obl. My moral compass is fine.

Morality isn't about feeling sad. It's about the golden rule. It's about recognizing that if you claim something is ok for you to do, then it's ok for others - and if you claim something if wrong for others to do, it's wrong for you to do as well.

So, getting back to the question you're dodging - if another country condemned a US general as a criminal, would it be acceptable for them enter our country and kill him? It wouldn't be acceptable to me. Even if he was every bit the criminal the other country claimed, it's not their right to enter our airspace and carry out a death sentence.

Do disagree? Do you think it should be their right? Do you think it should be ours?

We didn't kill him in Iran, dumbass!

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Some people think that the regressive leftists in league with Islamists.

It's no mystery for those of us who believe in God and in Satan. Once one accept that both are real, then one can understand the unlikely marriage of western, Godless leftists to Islam. Both segments have been deceived by Satan and both serve him. Satan's ultimate goal is the destruction of Israel and of Jews.

When you decide to believe in fantasy, you live a fantasy. Religion influences societies. Whether Islam or Christianity, it's all about control. No thanks.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Was taking out Bin Laden state sponsored assassination?

Nope. OBL was an international criminal. Any other stupid questions?

Are you and your LefTarded buddies appointed to decide who is and who isn’t an “international criminal”?
Do you have clearance and intel?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Nope. OBL was an international criminal. Any other stupid questions?

Some people think that the regressive leftists in league with Islamists do so out of stupidity. Some think regressive leftists in league with Islamists do so out of hatred for their own culture.

Now, for me, I think it takes a certain combination of both traits in order to make a sniveling coward embrace the Mullahs.

You know Obama ordered the strike on OBL...

Trump just surrendered Syria and is getting kicked out of Iraq...

There was nothing to surrender in Syria. We were there because Obama wanted us there.

We are getting kicked out of Iraq? Did you mean that non-binding resolution the Iraqis passed? That resolution? The one not even worth the paper it is printed on?

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

What say you good folks? And you not-so-good folks can respond as well.

Not just acceptable, mandatory.

Don't start a war and murder thousands when what is needed is to take out one bad actor.

But that's not how it is.

Just for argument's sake lets imagine Iran were assassinate one of our top commanders. Does every single man under his command just go home? Shit no, they get a new commander with a deep wish to get some payback. It is generally disastrous to do things to harden the resolve of the enemy.

And yet Iran and the Hezbollah-democrats are in disarray after the loss of Obama's dear, dear friend Soleimani.

Remember, Soleimani killed MORE Americans than Osama Bin Laden.

He was a bad guy, no question, but it was a tactical error to kill him assuming we really want to avoid another endless Mid-East conflict. A lot of Americans WILL die if we needlessly go to war, what about them? Was killing this guy worth it if it starts a war?

Nonsense. It was a political win for Trump, hence it angers you.

Attempting to score political points in such a politically divided nation is the act of a partisan coward. When the leadership doesn't reflect the best interests of an entire country, It just might be why your *pResident is so mutually despised.

 

[TheParser]

Sadly, neutralizing bad guys is occasionally necessary.

I have read that the good guys had a chance in the 1930s to "neutralize" that bad guy in Germany, but declined to do so. If they had, just think of the misery that the world would have been spared.

 

[task0778]

Soleimani was a combatant, planning and scheduling military operations against military functions against US military and civilian diplomatic personnel. His death was therefore NOT an assassination, any more than shooting a terrorist anywhere in the world is. Any individual who is engaged in planning and directing operations to lethally attack Americans anywhere in the world is subject to reprisal attacks on him or herself. Further, any American general in the field right now in the ME is also a target for enemy forces to attack, and such an effort would not and should not be considered an assassination.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Truman had a declaration of war.

A declaration of war doesn't justify killing hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women, and children. You cant hide behind that smoke screen.

Still, Congress declared war for Truman. They didn't for Trump.

So, how's your moral compass? If another country takes up state sponsored assassinations as a foreign policy tool, will you applaud it? Do you understand the concept of precedent? Do you understand the precedent that Trump just set?

Trump set no precedent. Are you kidding me? Im not sad at all for that general nor was I sad when O took out obl. My moral compass is fine.

Morality isn't about feeling sad. It's about the golden rule. It's about recognizing that if you claim something is ok for you to do, then it's ok for others - and if you claim something if wrong for others to do, it's wrong for you to do as well.

So, getting back to the question you're dodging - if another country condemned a US general as a criminal, would it be acceptable for them enter our country and kill him? It wouldn't be acceptable to me. Even if he was every bit the criminal the other country claimed, it's not their right to enter our airspace and carry out a death sentence.

Do disagree? Do you think it should be their right? Do you think it should be ours?

We didn't kill him in Iran, dumbass!

He spews forth about morality while creating intentionally false comparisons.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

*pResident is so mutually despised.

You speak of partisan cowards while vomiting forth the sort of language that only partisan cowards employ.

 

[dblack]

Was taking out Bin Laden state sponsored assassination?

Nope. OBL was an international criminal. Any other stupid questions?

Are you and your LefTarded buddies appointed to decide who is and who isn’t an “international criminal”?
Do you have clearance and intel?

No, I'm basing my assessment on worldwide consensus. No country claimed him. He was a wanted criminal in Pakistan.

That said, I didn't support the way OBL was taken out. When we discovered his location, we should have insisted that Pakistan apprehend him - and then declared war on them if they refused.

 

[joaquinmiller]

Trump didn't do it because it was the right thing. It was the right thing because Trump did it. You need to understand cultists.

 

[dblack]

Soleimani was a combatant ...

So, more of the 'war on terror' bullshit? Everybody's a combatant and the theater of war is everywhere. Unending, ubiquitous war. I'll pass.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

We are getting kicked out of Iraq? Did you mean that non-binding resolution the Iraqis passed? That resolution? The one not even worth the paper it is printed on?

History is also replete with examples where not going to war created a human toll much steeper than going to war. Chamberlain's cowardly "peace in our time" capitulation ended up costing millions more lives than had they confronted Hitler when less powerful.

Iran has expanded its power considerable over the last couple of decades and they plan on continuing. Conflict is inevitable. People can certainly argue as to best approach in how to deal with them, but appeasing them will only make them stronger.

 

[task0778]

Soleimani was a combatant ...

So, more of the 'war on terror' bullshit? Everybody's a combatant and the theater of war is everywhere. Unending, ubiquitous war. I'll pass.

Killing Soleimani does not mean an unending, ubiquitous war is obviously certain. THAT it bullshit.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Was taking out Bin Laden state sponsored assassination?

Nope. OBL was an international criminal. Any other stupid questions?

Are you and your LefTarded buddies appointed to decide who is and who isn’t an “international criminal”?
Do you have clearance and intel?

No, I'm basing my assessment on worldwide consensus. No country claimed him. He was a wanted criminal in Pakistan.

That said, I didn't support the way OBL was taken out. When we discovered his location, we should have insisted that Pakistan apprehend him - and then declared war on them if they refused.

“Worldwide consensus”?
So you develop your OPINIONS from the opinions of others?
Don’t you think accurate opinions derive from accurate intelligence?
Do you honestly believe the American public is ever privy to enough intel to arrive at an accurate opinion?

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

*pResident is so mutually despised.

You speak of partisan cowards while vomiting forth the sort of language that only partisan cowards employ.

You don't like the language only because it intentionally triggers Cult45. However, this *pResident's poll numbers for the last 3 year don't lie, do they? He is despised by many.