The Case for Killing Qassim Suleimani. The strike was justified and legally sound.

[Nostra]

The Case for Killing Qassim Suleimani. The strike was justified and legally sound.​

Opinion | The Case for Killing Qassim Suleimani - The New York Times
January 10, 2020 ~ By Tom Cotton
Last week, our military and intelligence services brought justice to Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s terror mastermind. President Trump ordered General Suleimani’s killing after months of attacks on Americans by Iran’s proxy forces in Iraq. These attacks culminated in a rocket strike that killed an American and wounded others, then the attempted storming of our embassy in Baghdad. The first attack crossed the red line drawn by the president last summer — that if Iran harmed an American, it would face severe consequences. The president meant what he said, as Mr. Suleimani learned the hard way. Mr. Suleimani’s killing was justified, legal and strategically sound. But the president’s critics swarmed as usual. After the embassy attack, a Democratic senator declared that the president had “rendered America impotent.” Some Democrats then pivoted after the Suleimani strike, calling him “reckless” and “dangerous.” Those are the words of Senator Elizabeth Warren, who also described Mr. Suleimani — the leader of a State Department-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization plotting to kill American troops — as a “senior foreign military official.” Senator Bernie Sanders likened America’s killing of a terrorist on the battlefield to Vladimir Putin’s assassination of Russian political dissidents.
Some Democrats seem to feel a strange regret for the killing of a monster who specialized in killing Americans. The linguist his proxies killed on Dec. 27, Nawres Hamid, was merely his last victim out of more than 600 in Iraq since 2003. His forces have instigated attacks against our troops in Afghanistan. He plotted a (foiled) bombing in Washington, D.C., and attempted attacks on the soil of our European allies. He armed the terrorist group Hezbollah in Lebanon with rockets to pummel the Jewish state of Israel.


Comment:
The underlying reason for this article is because the Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrat Left in this country have sold out America and the people that elected them and are more interested in getting Donald Trump, or any Republican, rather than rejoicing in doing good by ridding the world of this evil.
We all know, the theme of PMS/DSA Democrats has been to sympathize with Iran rather than to rejoice with America. The Democrat Party is truly despicable.
I was completely surprised that the NY Times would publish this article. Surely it will soon be pulled.
The killing of Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s terror mastermind, was both necessary and an act for peace not a precursor to conflict with Iran. That he continued to kill and destroy for this length of time was an abomination. The efficiency and swiftness of the decision and tactics are laudable as it occurred in Iraq where Suleimani was set to inflict more death and mayhem. Removing this individual provides a better opportunity for negotiating arms and trade agreements as Iran now comprehends the intentions and tolerance of the U.S.
Although Congress has had twisted underwear about the fact that Trump did not notify them of the attempt and successful killing of Suleimani. It appears that Trump was and is correct that had he notified the "gang of eight", Suleimani would have been made aware of the drone attack by Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats.
Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi Mark Warner and Chuck Schumer... My money would be on Schiff that would have leaked the coming drone attack to the media and Suleimani...

Uh NO

The Power To Declare War Vests With The Congress.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the U.S. Constitution, sometimes referred to as the War Powers Clause, vests in the Congress the power to declare war, in the following wording: ... To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water ..

Fuck Wad 45 does not the power under the Constitution to commit such an act without Congressional Approval. Which he did not have.

Did Barry Hussein have the power when he ordered 543 drone strikes without congressional approval?

 

[Siete]

The Case for Killing Qassim Suleimani. The strike was justified and legally sound.​

Opinion | The Case for Killing Qassim Suleimani - The New York Times
January 10, 2020 ~ By Tom Cotton
Last week, our military and intelligence services brought justice to Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s terror mastermind. President Trump ordered General Suleimani’s killing after months of attacks on Americans by Iran’s proxy forces in Iraq. These attacks culminated in a rocket strike that killed an American and wounded others, then the attempted storming of our embassy in Baghdad. The first attack crossed the red line drawn by the president last summer — that if Iran harmed an American, it would face severe consequences. The president meant what he said, as Mr. Suleimani learned the hard way. Mr. Suleimani’s killing was justified, legal and strategically sound. But the president’s critics swarmed as usual. After the embassy attack, a Democratic senator declared that the president had “rendered America impotent.” Some Democrats then pivoted after the Suleimani strike, calling him “reckless” and “dangerous.” Those are the words of Senator Elizabeth Warren, who also described Mr. Suleimani — the leader of a State Department-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization plotting to kill American troops — as a “senior foreign military official.” Senator Bernie Sanders likened America’s killing of a terrorist on the battlefield to Vladimir Putin’s assassination of Russian political dissidents.
Some Democrats seem to feel a strange regret for the killing of a monster who specialized in killing Americans. The linguist his proxies killed on Dec. 27, Nawres Hamid, was merely his last victim out of more than 600 in Iraq since 2003. His forces have instigated attacks against our troops in Afghanistan. He plotted a (foiled) bombing in Washington, D.C., and attempted attacks on the soil of our European allies. He armed the terrorist group Hezbollah in Lebanon with rockets to pummel the Jewish state of Israel.


Comment:
The underlying reason for this article is because the Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrat Left in this country have sold out America and the people that elected them and are more interested in getting Donald Trump, or any Republican, rather than rejoicing in doing good by ridding the world of this evil.
We all know, the theme of PMS/DSA Democrats has been to sympathize with Iran rather than to rejoice with America. The Democrat Party is truly despicable.
I was completely surprised that the NY Times would publish this article. Surely it will soon be pulled.
The killing of Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s terror mastermind, was both necessary and an act for peace not a precursor to conflict with Iran. That he continued to kill and destroy for this length of time was an abomination. The efficiency and swiftness of the decision and tactics are laudable as it occurred in Iraq where Suleimani was set to inflict more death and mayhem. Removing this individual provides a better opportunity for negotiating arms and trade agreements as Iran now comprehends the intentions and tolerance of the U.S.
Although Congress has had twisted underwear about the fact that Trump did not notify them of the attempt and successful killing of Suleimani. It appears that Trump was and is correct that had he notified the "gang of eight", Suleimani would have been made aware of the drone attack by Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats.
Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi Mark Warner and Chuck Schumer... My money would be on Schiff that would have leaked the coming drone attack to the media and Suleimani...

Uh NO

The Power To Declare War Vests With The Congress.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the U.S. Constitution, sometimes referred to as the War Powers Clause, vests in the Congress the power to declare war, in the following wording: ... To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water ..

Fuck Wad 45 does not the power under the Constitution to commit such an act without Congressional Approval. Which he did not have.

Did Barry Hussein have the power when he ordered 543 drone strikes without congressional approval?

as a nato member, YES.

On 19 March 2011, a multi-state NATO-led coalition began a military intervention in Libya, ostensibly to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973.

 

[Jitss617]

Rotten Cotton is a pathological liar just like Tramp!

The name calling the hate from the left is crazy

Tramp and the Right never do any name calling.
Sarcasm intended!

Of course lying scum Russia Limpboy claims his insults are an act of compassion, proving the Right can rationalize and hateful insult.

Why attack Tom
Cotton!? He’s a good guy

 

[bravoactual]

The Case for Killing Qassim Suleimani. The strike was justified and legally sound.​

Opinion | The Case for Killing Qassim Suleimani - The New York Times
January 10, 2020 ~ By Tom Cotton
Last week, our military and intelligence services brought justice to Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s terror mastermind. President Trump ordered General Suleimani’s killing after months of attacks on Americans by Iran’s proxy forces in Iraq. These attacks culminated in a rocket strike that killed an American and wounded others, then the attempted storming of our embassy in Baghdad. The first attack crossed the red line drawn by the president last summer — that if Iran harmed an American, it would face severe consequences. The president meant what he said, as Mr. Suleimani learned the hard way. Mr. Suleimani’s killing was justified, legal and strategically sound. But the president’s critics swarmed as usual. After the embassy attack, a Democratic senator declared that the president had “rendered America impotent.” Some Democrats then pivoted after the Suleimani strike, calling him “reckless” and “dangerous.” Those are the words of Senator Elizabeth Warren, who also described Mr. Suleimani — the leader of a State Department-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization plotting to kill American troops — as a “senior foreign military official.” Senator Bernie Sanders likened America’s killing of a terrorist on the battlefield to Vladimir Putin’s assassination of Russian political dissidents.
Some Democrats seem to feel a strange regret for the killing of a monster who specialized in killing Americans. The linguist his proxies killed on Dec. 27, Nawres Hamid, was merely his last victim out of more than 600 in Iraq since 2003. His forces have instigated attacks against our troops in Afghanistan. He plotted a (foiled) bombing in Washington, D.C., and attempted attacks on the soil of our European allies. He armed the terrorist group Hezbollah in Lebanon with rockets to pummel the Jewish state of Israel.


Comment:
The underlying reason for this article is because the Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrat Left in this country have sold out America and the people that elected them and are more interested in getting Donald Trump, or any Republican, rather than rejoicing in doing good by ridding the world of this evil.
We all know, the theme of PMS/DSA Democrats has been to sympathize with Iran rather than to rejoice with America. The Democrat Party is truly despicable.
I was completely surprised that the NY Times would publish this article. Surely it will soon be pulled.
The killing of Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s terror mastermind, was both necessary and an act for peace not a precursor to conflict with Iran. That he continued to kill and destroy for this length of time was an abomination. The efficiency and swiftness of the decision and tactics are laudable as it occurred in Iraq where Suleimani was set to inflict more death and mayhem. Removing this individual provides a better opportunity for negotiating arms and trade agreements as Iran now comprehends the intentions and tolerance of the U.S.
Although Congress has had twisted underwear about the fact that Trump did not notify them of the attempt and successful killing of Suleimani. It appears that Trump was and is correct that had he notified the "gang of eight", Suleimani would have been made aware of the drone attack by Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats.
Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi Mark Warner and Chuck Schumer... My money would be on Schiff that would have leaked the coming drone attack to the media and Suleimani...

Uh NO

The Power To Declare War Vests With The Congress.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the U.S. Constitution, sometimes referred to as the War Powers Clause, vests in the Congress the power to declare war, in the following wording: ... To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water ..

Fuck Wad 45 does not the power under the Constitution to commit such an act without Congressional Approval. Which he did not have.

Did Barry Hussein have the power when he ordered 543 drone strikes without congressional approval?

as a nato member, YES.

On 19 March 2011, a multi-state NATO-led coalition began a military intervention in Libya, ostensibly to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973.

It is now 2019. There was No Congressional Approval. No U.N. Approval. The lying Orange Shit Gibbon violated Section I Section VIII Clause XI of the U.S. Constituti

 

[Richard-H]

From the OP link to the NY Times:

Some of the president’s critics will concede that Mr. Suleimani was an evil man, but many complain his killing was unlawful. Wrong again.
He was a United States-designated terrorist commander. As I have been briefed, he was plotting further attacks against Americans at the
time of his death. The authority granted to the president under Article II of the Constitution provides ample legal basis for this strike.
Furthermore, those who accept the constitutionality of the War Powers Act should recall that Congress’s 2001 and 2002 Authorizations for
Use of Military Force very much remain in effect and clearly cover the Suleimani operation. This will be a relief to the Obama
administration, which ordered hundreds of drone strikes using such a legal rationale.


Was there an act of Congress that terminated the authority under the AUMF, or did it have a sunset clause of some kind? Or was it ever declared unconstitutional by the courts? Seems to me that Obama used this same authorization hundreds on times to kill somebody, even American citizens abroad, so did it suddenly become unlawful to kill an enemy combatant who was responsible for hundreds of American deaths and surely would have been responsible for many more?

The argument as I see it seems to center around the word 'imminent', but what does that mean. 30 days? What is it? So if he has planned an attack in 31 days against Americans then he can't be attacked? That's kinda bullshit, ya know? Does anyone want to contend this guy wasn't in the process of attacking Americans in the future? Does it really matter how much into the future it was?

I am damn sick and tired of one set of rules for Trump and another for everyone else. That's bullshit, I don't want my president restrained by minutia (31 days instead of 30) when it comes to protecting American lives. Stop trying to obstruct every fucking thing he's doing unless you've got a more compelling reason than what I've heard so far.

The AUMF only applies to organizations that wer invloved in the 9/11 attacks.

Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists - Wikipedia

Otherwise, Trump's withdrawal of forces from Northern Syria could be considered an act of treason.

 

[The Original Tree]

Iran is accepting applications for new recruits in to the Iranian Army, so why are you wasting your time boring us all here?

Some Democrats seem to feel a strange regret for the killing of a monster

Democrat Left in this country have sold out America and the people that elected them

We all know, the theme of PMS/DSA Democrats has been to sympathize with Iran

Trump was and is correct that had he notified the "gang of eight", Suleimani would have been made aware of the drone attack by Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats.

Good old Tom Cotton huh?

A Zebra can't change it's strips.

 

[The Original Tree]

Soleimani and Iran Gave the 9-11 Highjackers financial and logistical support and also gave safe passage to Al Queda and Bin Laden.

From the OP link to the NY Times:

Some of the president’s critics will concede that Mr. Suleimani was an evil man, but many complain his killing was unlawful. Wrong again.
He was a United States-designated terrorist commander. As I have been briefed, he was plotting further attacks against Americans at the
time of his death. The authority granted to the president under Article II of the Constitution provides ample legal basis for this strike.
Furthermore, those who accept the constitutionality of the War Powers Act should recall that Congress’s 2001 and 2002 Authorizations for
Use of Military Force very much remain in effect and clearly cover the Suleimani operation. This will be a relief to the Obama
administration, which ordered hundreds of drone strikes using such a legal rationale.


Was there an act of Congress that terminated the authority under the AUMF, or did it have a sunset clause of some kind? Or was it ever declared unconstitutional by the courts? Seems to me that Obama used this same authorization hundreds on times to kill somebody, even American citizens abroad, so did it suddenly become unlawful to kill an enemy combatant who was responsible for hundreds of American deaths and surely would have been responsible for many more?

The argument as I see it seems to center around the word 'imminent', but what does that mean. 30 days? What is it? So if he has planned an attack in 31 days against Americans then he can't be attacked? That's kinda bullshit, ya know? Does anyone want to contend this guy wasn't in the process of attacking Americans in the future? Does it really matter how much into the future it was?

I am damn sick and tired of one set of rules for Trump and another for everyone else. That's bullshit, I don't want my president restrained by minutia (31 days instead of 30) when it comes to protecting American lives. Stop trying to obstruct every fucking thing he's doing unless you've got a more compelling reason than what I've heard so far.

The AUMF only applies to organizations that wer invloved in the 9/11 attacks.

Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists - Wikipedia

Otherwise, Trump's withdrawal of forces from Northern Syria could be considered an act of treason.

 

[The Original Tree]

Rotten Cotton is a pathological liar just like Tramp!

So says the rotten pathological liar.

 

[The Original Tree]

Your very existence is an act of treason.

From the OP link to the NY Times:

Some of the president’s critics will concede that Mr. Suleimani was an evil man, but many complain his killing was unlawful. Wrong again.
He was a United States-designated terrorist commander. As I have been briefed, he was plotting further attacks against Americans at the
time of his death. The authority granted to the president under Article II of the Constitution provides ample legal basis for this strike.
Furthermore, those who accept the constitutionality of the War Powers Act should recall that Congress’s 2001 and 2002 Authorizations for
Use of Military Force very much remain in effect and clearly cover the Suleimani operation. This will be a relief to the Obama
administration, which ordered hundreds of drone strikes using such a legal rationale.


Was there an act of Congress that terminated the authority under the AUMF, or did it have a sunset clause of some kind? Or was it ever declared unconstitutional by the courts? Seems to me that Obama used this same authorization hundreds on times to kill somebody, even American citizens abroad, so did it suddenly become unlawful to kill an enemy combatant who was responsible for hundreds of American deaths and surely would have been responsible for many more?

The argument as I see it seems to center around the word 'imminent', but what does that mean. 30 days? What is it? So if he has planned an attack in 31 days against Americans then he can't be attacked? That's kinda bullshit, ya know? Does anyone want to contend this guy wasn't in the process of attacking Americans in the future? Does it really matter how much into the future it was?

I am damn sick and tired of one set of rules for Trump and another for everyone else. That's bullshit, I don't want my president restrained by minutia (31 days instead of 30) when it comes to protecting American lives. Stop trying to obstruct every fucking thing he's doing unless you've got a more compelling reason than what I've heard so far.

The AUMF only applies to organizations that wer invloved in the 9/11 attacks.

Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists - Wikipedia

Otherwise, Trump's withdrawal of forces from Northern Syria could be considered an act of treason.

 

[georgephillip]

The killing of Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s terror mastermind, was both necessary and an act for peace not a precursor to conflict with Iran. That he continued to kill and destroy for this length of time was an abomination

Why did Bush and Obama refuse to authorize the murder of Suleimani?

Killing Soleimani made US less safe; Trump reckless on Iran, poll says

Trump's a moron whose assassination of Soleimani has made the US less safe than before he became POTUS, and, as his Senate trial approaches, his reckless behavior will only get worse.

Too much winning?

 

[BlindBoo]

Iran is accepting applications for new recruits in to the Iranian Army, so why are you wasting your time boring us all here?

Some Democrats seem to feel a strange regret for the killing of a monster

Democrat Left in this country have sold out America and the people that elected them

We all know, the theme of PMS/DSA Democrats has been to sympathize with Iran

Trump was and is correct that had he notified the "gang of eight", Suleimani would have been made aware of the drone attack by Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats.

Good old Tom Cotton huh?

A Zebra can't change it's strips.

Tom Cotton is a partisan hack. You's still funny though.

What was that a shift change over there?

 

[The Original Tree]

More Truth for you and your fellow Iranian Pig Fornicators.

Iran after lying about launching Obama Bombs paid for with Obama Bucks, purchased from Russia at a Ukraine Airliner, just got caught exporting MORE Russian-Iranian Missiles in to Syria.

Israel reportedly attacks Syria-Iraq border, thwarts shipment of Iranian ballistic missiles

Eight members of Shiite militia apparently killed in strike. Witnesses say a big explosion was seen at the Abu Kamal border crossing, a site that has been attacked before. Israel has repeatedly warned Iran that it would not tolerate its arming of militias in Syria.


https://www.israelhayom.com/2020/01...warts-shipment-of-iranian-ballistic-missiles/

Iran is accepting applications for new recruits in to the Iranian Army, so why are you wasting your time boring us all here?

Some Democrats seem to feel a strange regret for the killing of a monster

Democrat Left in this country have sold out America and the people that elected them

We all know, the theme of PMS/DSA Democrats has been to sympathize with Iran

Trump was and is correct that had he notified the "gang of eight", Suleimani would have been made aware of the drone attack by Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats.

Good old Tom Cotton huh?

A Zebra can't change it's strips.

Tom Cotton is a partisan hack. You's still funny though.

What was that a shift change over there?

 

[Shawnee_b]

Tramp and the Right never do any name calling.
Sarcasm intended!
.

You didn't need to explain it was sarcasm, we are not democrats and need no explanation like they do.

 

[Nostra]

The Case for Killing Qassim Suleimani. The strike was justified and legally sound.​

Opinion | The Case for Killing Qassim Suleimani - The New York Times
January 10, 2020 ~ By Tom Cotton
Last week, our military and intelligence services brought justice to Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s terror mastermind. President Trump ordered General Suleimani’s killing after months of attacks on Americans by Iran’s proxy forces in Iraq. These attacks culminated in a rocket strike that killed an American and wounded others, then the attempted storming of our embassy in Baghdad. The first attack crossed the red line drawn by the president last summer — that if Iran harmed an American, it would face severe consequences. The president meant what he said, as Mr. Suleimani learned the hard way. Mr. Suleimani’s killing was justified, legal and strategically sound. But the president’s critics swarmed as usual. After the embassy attack, a Democratic senator declared that the president had “rendered America impotent.” Some Democrats then pivoted after the Suleimani strike, calling him “reckless” and “dangerous.” Those are the words of Senator Elizabeth Warren, who also described Mr. Suleimani — the leader of a State Department-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization plotting to kill American troops — as a “senior foreign military official.” Senator Bernie Sanders likened America’s killing of a terrorist on the battlefield to Vladimir Putin’s assassination of Russian political dissidents.
Some Democrats seem to feel a strange regret for the killing of a monster who specialized in killing Americans. The linguist his proxies killed on Dec. 27, Nawres Hamid, was merely his last victim out of more than 600 in Iraq since 2003. His forces have instigated attacks against our troops in Afghanistan. He plotted a (foiled) bombing in Washington, D.C., and attempted attacks on the soil of our European allies. He armed the terrorist group Hezbollah in Lebanon with rockets to pummel the Jewish state of Israel.


Comment:
The underlying reason for this article is because the Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrat Left in this country have sold out America and the people that elected them and are more interested in getting Donald Trump, or any Republican, rather than rejoicing in doing good by ridding the world of this evil.
We all know, the theme of PMS/DSA Democrats has been to sympathize with Iran rather than to rejoice with America. The Democrat Party is truly despicable.
I was completely surprised that the NY Times would publish this article. Surely it will soon be pulled.
The killing of Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s terror mastermind, was both necessary and an act for peace not a precursor to conflict with Iran. That he continued to kill and destroy for this length of time was an abomination. The efficiency and swiftness of the decision and tactics are laudable as it occurred in Iraq where Suleimani was set to inflict more death and mayhem. Removing this individual provides a better opportunity for negotiating arms and trade agreements as Iran now comprehends the intentions and tolerance of the U.S.
Although Congress has had twisted underwear about the fact that Trump did not notify them of the attempt and successful killing of Suleimani. It appears that Trump was and is correct that had he notified the "gang of eight", Suleimani would have been made aware of the drone attack by Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats.
Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi Mark Warner and Chuck Schumer... My money would be on Schiff that would have leaked the coming drone attack to the media and Suleimani...

Uh NO

The Power To Declare War Vests With The Congress.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the U.S. Constitution, sometimes referred to as the War Powers Clause, vests in the Congress the power to declare war, in the following wording: ... To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water ..

Fuck Wad 45 does not the power under the Constitution to commit such an act without Congressional Approval. Which he did not have.

Did Barry Hussein have the power when he ordered 543 drone strikes without congressional approval?

as a nato member, YES.

On 19 March 2011, a multi-state NATO-led coalition began a military intervention in Libya, ostensibly to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973.

Quote 1973 directly where it authorizes air attacks and regime change.

GO!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The Case for Killing Qassim Suleimani. The strike was justified and legally sound.​

Opinion | The Case for Killing Qassim Suleimani - The New York Times
January 10, 2020 ~ By Tom Cotton
Last week, our military and intelligence services brought justice to Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s terror mastermind. President Trump ordered General Suleimani’s killing after months of attacks on Americans by Iran’s proxy forces in Iraq. These attacks culminated in a rocket strike that killed an American and wounded others, then the attempted storming of our embassy in Baghdad. The first attack crossed the red line drawn by the president last summer — that if Iran harmed an American, it would face severe consequences. The president meant what he said, as Mr. Suleimani learned the hard way. Mr. Suleimani’s killing was justified, legal and strategically sound. But the president’s critics swarmed as usual. After the embassy attack, a Democratic senator declared that the president had “rendered America impotent.” Some Democrats then pivoted after the Suleimani strike, calling him “reckless” and “dangerous.” Those are the words of Senator Elizabeth Warren, who also described Mr. Suleimani — the leader of a State Department-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization plotting to kill American troops — as a “senior foreign military official.” Senator Bernie Sanders likened America’s killing of a terrorist on the battlefield to Vladimir Putin’s assassination of Russian political dissidents.
Some Democrats seem to feel a strange regret for the killing of a monster who specialized in killing Americans. The linguist his proxies killed on Dec. 27, Nawres Hamid, was merely his last victim out of more than 600 in Iraq since 2003. His forces have instigated attacks against our troops in Afghanistan. He plotted a (foiled) bombing in Washington, D.C., and attempted attacks on the soil of our European allies. He armed the terrorist group Hezbollah in Lebanon with rockets to pummel the Jewish state of Israel.


Comment:
The underlying reason for this article is because the Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrat Left in this country have sold out America and the people that elected them and are more interested in getting Donald Trump, or any Republican, rather than rejoicing in doing good by ridding the world of this evil.
We all know, the theme of PMS/DSA Democrats has been to sympathize with Iran rather than to rejoice with America. The Democrat Party is truly despicable.
I was completely surprised that the NY Times would publish this article. Surely it will soon be pulled.
The killing of Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s terror mastermind, was both necessary and an act for peace not a precursor to conflict with Iran. That he continued to kill and destroy for this length of time was an abomination. The efficiency and swiftness of the decision and tactics are laudable as it occurred in Iraq where Suleimani was set to inflict more death and mayhem. Removing this individual provides a better opportunity for negotiating arms and trade agreements as Iran now comprehends the intentions and tolerance of the U.S.
Although Congress has had twisted underwear about the fact that Trump did not notify them of the attempt and successful killing of Suleimani. It appears that Trump was and is correct that had he notified the "gang of eight", Suleimani would have been made aware of the drone attack by Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats.
Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi Mark Warner and Chuck Schumer... My money would be on Schiff that would have leaked the coming drone attack to the media and Suleimani...

Your thread title is misleading

The argument is valid, not "sound". It will only be "sound" when the evidence of the imminent threat is presented and is compelling.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The Case for Killing Qassim Suleimani. The strike was justified and legally sound.​

Opinion | The Case for Killing Qassim Suleimani - The New York Times
January 10, 2020 ~ By Tom Cotton
Last week, our military and intelligence services brought justice to Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s terror mastermind. President Trump ordered General Suleimani’s killing after months of attacks on Americans by Iran’s proxy forces in Iraq. These attacks culminated in a rocket strike that killed an American and wounded others, then the attempted storming of our embassy in Baghdad. The first attack crossed the red line drawn by the president last summer — that if Iran harmed an American, it would face severe consequences. The president meant what he said, as Mr. Suleimani learned the hard way. Mr. Suleimani’s killing was justified, legal and strategically sound. But the president’s critics swarmed as usual. After the embassy attack, a Democratic senator declared that the president had “rendered America impotent.” Some Democrats then pivoted after the Suleimani strike, calling him “reckless” and “dangerous.” Those are the words of Senator Elizabeth Warren, who also described Mr. Suleimani — the leader of a State Department-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization plotting to kill American troops — as a “senior foreign military official.” Senator Bernie Sanders likened America’s killing of a terrorist on the battlefield to Vladimir Putin’s assassination of Russian political dissidents.
Some Democrats seem to feel a strange regret for the killing of a monster who specialized in killing Americans. The linguist his proxies killed on Dec. 27, Nawres Hamid, was merely his last victim out of more than 600 in Iraq since 2003. His forces have instigated attacks against our troops in Afghanistan. He plotted a (foiled) bombing in Washington, D.C., and attempted attacks on the soil of our European allies. He armed the terrorist group Hezbollah in Lebanon with rockets to pummel the Jewish state of Israel.


Comment:
The underlying reason for this article is because the Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrat Left in this country have sold out America and the people that elected them and are more interested in getting Donald Trump, or any Republican, rather than rejoicing in doing good by ridding the world of this evil.
We all know, the theme of PMS/DSA Democrats has been to sympathize with Iran rather than to rejoice with America. The Democrat Party is truly despicable.
I was completely surprised that the NY Times would publish this article. Surely it will soon be pulled.
The killing of Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s terror mastermind, was both necessary and an act for peace not a precursor to conflict with Iran. That he continued to kill and destroy for this length of time was an abomination. The efficiency and swiftness of the decision and tactics are laudable as it occurred in Iraq where Suleimani was set to inflict more death and mayhem. Removing this individual provides a better opportunity for negotiating arms and trade agreements as Iran now comprehends the intentions and tolerance of the U.S.
Although Congress has had twisted underwear about the fact that Trump did not notify them of the attempt and successful killing of Suleimani. It appears that Trump was and is correct that had he notified the "gang of eight", Suleimani would have been made aware of the drone attack by Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats.
Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi Mark Warner and Chuck Schumer... My money would be on Schiff that would have leaked the coming drone attack to the media and Suleimani...

Uh NO

The Power To Declare War Vests With The Congress.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the U.S. Constitution, sometimes referred to as the War Powers Clause, vests in the Congress the power to declare war, in the following wording: ... To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water ..

Fuck Wad 45 does not the power under the Constitution to commit such an act without Congressional Approval. Which he did not have.

Did Barry Hussein have the power when he ordered 543 drone strikes without congressional approval?

as a nato member, YES.

On 19 March 2011, a multi-state NATO-led coalition began a military intervention in Libya, ostensibly to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973.

It is now 2019. There was No Congressional Approval. No U.N. Approval. The lying Orange Shit Gibbon violated Section I Section VIII Clause XI of the U.S. Constituti

It is now 2019. There was No Congressional Approval. No U.N. Approval. The lying Orange Shit Gibbon violated Section I Section VIII Clause XI of the U.S. Constituti


exactly.well said. that is totaly false,It was UNSOUND and UNJUSTIFIED.

The OP is posting a false narrative,could not be any further from the truth,

The NY TIMES as the source? REALLY,SERIOUSLY? thats like taking Bill "I NEVER HAD SEX WITH THIS WOMAN? CLINTONS word at face value if you go to mcdonalds with him and leave your hamburger in the car with him and come back and it is not there and you ask him what happend to it and he replies_ I dont know,i did not eat it and then you believe him at his word.him.

Trump same as Obozo and Bush before him, is a murderer,here is the REAL story.

Lies, the Bethlehem Doctrine, and the Illegal Murder of Soleimani 636
Lies, the Bethlehem Doctrine, and the Illegal Murder of Soleimani - Craig Murray

patriot RINO Ron Paul tells the truth here as well that nobody has been able to counter.

Patriot american Ron Paul Does not trust Trump.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Rotten Cotton is a pathological liar just like Tramp!

Says a lib who supports pathological liars. Otherwise you have no credibility.

I don't support the pathological liars in the Tramp administration like you do!

I sure hope you did not support tramps fellow criminal warmonger Obomination either after he did this?

Did Barry Hussein have the power when he ordered 543 drone strikes without congressional approval?

Tramp same as Obomination and Bush is a fucking murderer and war criminal.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The Case for Killing Qassim Suleimani. The strike was justified and legally sound.​

Opinion | The Case for Killing Qassim Suleimani - The New York Times
January 10, 2020 ~ By Tom Cotton
Last week, our military and intelligence services brought justice to Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s terror mastermind. President Trump ordered General Suleimani’s killing after months of attacks on Americans by Iran’s proxy forces in Iraq. These attacks culminated in a rocket strike that killed an American and wounded others, then the attempted storming of our embassy in Baghdad. The first attack crossed the red line drawn by the president last summer — that if Iran harmed an American, it would face severe consequences. The president meant what he said, as Mr. Suleimani learned the hard way. Mr. Suleimani’s killing was justified, legal and strategically sound. But the president’s critics swarmed as usual. After the embassy attack, a Democratic senator declared that the president had “rendered America impotent.” Some Democrats then pivoted after the Suleimani strike, calling him “reckless” and “dangerous.” Those are the words of Senator Elizabeth Warren, who also described Mr. Suleimani — the leader of a State Department-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization plotting to kill American troops — as a “senior foreign military official.” Senator Bernie Sanders likened America’s killing of a terrorist on the battlefield to Vladimir Putin’s assassination of Russian political dissidents.
Some Democrats seem to feel a strange regret for the killing of a monster who specialized in killing Americans. The linguist his proxies killed on Dec. 27, Nawres Hamid, was merely his last victim out of more than 600 in Iraq since 2003. His forces have instigated attacks against our troops in Afghanistan. He plotted a (foiled) bombing in Washington, D.C., and attempted attacks on the soil of our European allies. He armed the terrorist group Hezbollah in Lebanon with rockets to pummel the Jewish state of Israel.


Comment:
The underlying reason for this article is because the Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrat Left in this country have sold out America and the people that elected them and are more interested in getting Donald Trump, or any Republican, rather than rejoicing in doing good by ridding the world of this evil.
We all know, the theme of PMS/DSA Democrats has been to sympathize with Iran rather than to rejoice with America. The Democrat Party is truly despicable.
I was completely surprised that the NY Times would publish this article. Surely it will soon be pulled.
The killing of Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s terror mastermind, was both necessary and an act for peace not a precursor to conflict with Iran. That he continued to kill and destroy for this length of time was an abomination. The efficiency and swiftness of the decision and tactics are laudable as it occurred in Iraq where Suleimani was set to inflict more death and mayhem. Removing this individual provides a better opportunity for negotiating arms and trade agreements as Iran now comprehends the intentions and tolerance of the U.S.
Although Congress has had twisted underwear about the fact that Trump did not notify them of the attempt and successful killing of Suleimani. It appears that Trump was and is correct that had he notified the "gang of eight", Suleimani would have been made aware of the drone attack by Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats.
Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi Mark Warner and Chuck Schumer... My money would be on Schiff that would have leaked the coming drone attack to the media and Suleimani...

Uh NO

The Power To Declare War Vests With The Congress.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the U.S. Constitution, sometimes referred to as the War Powers Clause, vests in the Congress the power to declare war, in the following wording: ... To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water ..

Fuck Wad 45 does not the power under the Constitution to commit such an act without Congressional Approval. Which he did not have.

and to you as well George.Best damn post on the thread other than mine.LOL

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You didn't need to explain it was sarcasm, we are not democrats and need no explanation like they d

What an odd post, considering that more educated people tend to be more liberal. But, now that I think about it, that does kind of explain your dumb post.

 

[task0778]

There are real questions about whether the executive has been overreaching its war-powers authority for more than a decade, but this stunt won’t do a thing to start resolving them. Yesterday, the house passed a War Powers Resolution to “terminate the use of United States Armed Forces to engage in hostilities in or against Iran or any part of its government or military” absent an “imminent armed attack upon the United States.”

YET:

President Barack Obama ordered strikes in a half-dozen countries without a single congressional authorization, and Democratic leaders didn’t lift a finger to restrain him. Pakistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Syria: Obama bombed in all of them without Congress’ specific OK. He ordered 500-plus drone strikes that killed thousands, including a few hundred civilians — and Pelosi, Democratic House leader the whole eight years, made no righteous “statement.”

New York freshman Rep. Max Rose, an Army combat veteran of Afghanistan, was a rare Democrat who called out Pelosi’s ploy. “I refuse to play politics with questions of war and peace and therefore will not support this resolution,” he said. Would that more in Congress showed such courage.

https://nypost.com/2020/01/09/nancy-pelosis-pointless-war-powers-ploy/