For killing that terrorist general, Trump should win the fucking Nobel Peace Prize

[Erinwltr]

So, how is that writing gig going in NY? Are you back from your European travels yet? Wanna share some experiences with the folks here on USMB?

 

[Care4all]

Amazing cognitive dissonance to read 'peace prize' and 'killing' in the same sentence .....~S~

If you kill a mass murderer doesn't that help maintain the peace? Or are you just willfully stupid?

It depends on how simple minded one is, I suppose?

And if not simple minded, whether one is capable of assessing the whole picture in the region, and how much one cares about one's long term goals, strategies, and missions, and whether you have any concerns for the future safety of our state department and embassy workers, our military deployed in the middle east, and our allies in the region....from making such an assassination........

One would need a thorough risk assessment, And long term considerations of what the retaliation could look like, before pulling the proverbial, trigger.

HOPEFULLY, president Trump didn't just shoot from the hip, and took advice from advisors with knowledge and wisdom.

 

[sparky]

One would need a thorough risk assessment, And long term considerations of what the retaliation could look like, before pulling the proverbial, trigger.

.

>>>

~S~

 

[Erinwltr]

Amazing cognitive dissonance to read 'peace prize' and 'killing' in the same sentence .....~S~

If you kill a mass murderer doesn't that help maintain the peace? Or are you just willfully stupid?

He is not stupid, mikey. And we are not unblemished. We worked with General Suleimani in the past to obtain our goals in the ME.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Amazing cognitive dissonance to read 'peace prize' and 'killing' in the same sentence .....~S~

If you kill a mass murderer doesn't that help maintain the peace? Or are you just willfully stupid?

It depends on how simple minded one is, I suppose?

And if not simple minded, whether one is capable of assessing the whole picture in the region, and how much one cares about one's long term goals, strategies, and missions, and whether you have any concerns for the future safety of our state department and embassy workers, our military deployed in the middle east, and our allies in the region....from making such an assassination........

One would need a thorough risk assessment, And long term considerations of what the retaliation could look like, before pulling the proverbial, trigger.

HOPEFULLY, president Trump didn't just shoot from the hip, and took advice from advisors with knowledge and wisdom.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States had “clear, unambiguous” intelligence that a top Iranian general was planning a significant campaign of violence against the United States when it decided to strike him, the top U.S. general said on Friday, warning Soleimani’s plots “might still happen.”

Army General Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a small group of reporters “we fully comprehend the strategic consequences” associated with the strike against Qassem Soleimani, Tehran’s most prominent military commander.

But he said the risk of inaction exceeded the risk that killing him might dramatically escalate tensions with Tehran.

“Is there risk? Damn right, there’s risk. But we’re working to mitigate it,” Milley said from his Pentagon office.

Top U.S. general: Soleimani was planning 'campaign' of violence against U.S.

So President Trump made his decision to kill Soleimani on the basis of risk assessments from top US intelligence and military sources. How simple minded do you have to be to suggest it was just whimsical?

 

[sparky]

Amazing cognitive dissonance to read 'peace prize' and 'killing' in the same sentence .....~S~

If you kill a mass murderer doesn't that help maintain the peace? Or are you just willfully stupid?

It depends on how simple minded one is, I suppose?

And if not simple minded, whether one is capable of assessing the whole picture in the region, and how much one cares about one's long term goals, strategies, and missions, and whether you have any concerns for the future safety of our state department and embassy workers, our military deployed in the middle east, and our allies in the region....from making such an assassination........

One would need a thorough risk assessment, And long term considerations of what the retaliation could look like, before pulling the proverbial, trigger.

HOPEFULLY, president Trump didn't just shoot from the hip, and took advice from advisors with knowledge and wisdom.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States had “clear, unambiguous” intelligence that a top Iranian general was planning a significant campaign of violence against the United States when it decided to strike him, the top U.S. general said on Friday, warning Soleimani’s plots “might still happen.”

Army General Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a small group of reporters “we fully comprehend the strategic consequences” associated with the strike against Qassem Soleimani, Tehran’s most prominent military commander.

But he said the risk of inaction exceeded the risk that killing him might dramatically escalate tensions with Tehran.

“Is there risk? Damn right, there’s risk. But we’re working to mitigate it,” Milley said from his Pentagon office.

Top U.S. general: Soleimani was planning 'campaign' of violence against U.S.

So President Trump made his decision to kill Soleimani on the basis of risk assessments from top US intelligence and military sources. How simple minded do you have to be to suggest it was just whimsical?

But he said the risk of inaction exceeded the risk that killing him might dramatically escalate tensions with Tehran.

“Is there risk? Damn right, there’s risk. But we’re working to mitigate it,” Milley said from his Pentagon office.

I'll forgo the usual MI oxymoron , with the plan they have for>>>

~S~

 

[The VOR]

He has done more for peace than Obama ever did.

Just since October, Trump has:

1. Killed the founder and leader of ISIS, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
2. Killed the Iraqi military commander and head of the Popular Mobilization Forces, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis.
3. And now killed the Iranian Major General, the "General Patton" of Iran and commander of the Quds Force, Qasem Soleimani. And with no collateral damage.

THREE CHEERS FOR OUR ARMED FORCES!

Let's admit it: in any sane world, if this was anyone else, Obama, Hillary or another Democrat, Trump would be on the front page of every newspaper a national hero, they would be having ticket tape parades for him down Pennsylvania Avenue, and he would be pinned a champion of world peace with a Nobel Prize. I mean, they gave one to Barry Obumma just for getting elected a black man, waving his ass around and talking good jive. Instead, the Left is calling Trump a loose wheel, dangerous, out of control and practically a criminal.

If that doesn't prove how absolutely fucked up two-faced double standard hypocritical most of this world is, I don't know what else could.

You really need to get back on your meds, you delusional bootlicker.

So, a major terrorist leader SHOULDN'T have been taken out when we had the opportunity? That's what you're saying?

No, that's not what I'm saying. Try reading the post again, and then you can once again respond for freak.

Feel free to clarify for the class - what exactly is wrong with what Trump did?

Did I say something was wrong with what he did? No. Is that what you really got out of my reply to the idiot, toofreak?

However, with that said, I do think a ticker tape parade would probably be a little bit overboard at this point, don't you?

I have come to the conclusion that you are just playing stupid, or perhaps you are stupid. Either way, I'm not going to waste anymore time on you.

 

[The VOR]

You really need to get back on your meds, you delusional bootlicker.

So, a major terrorist leader SHOULDN'T have been taken out when we had the opportunity? That's what you're saying?

No, that's not what I'm saying. Try reading the post again, and then you can once again respond for freak.

^^^^ ^^^^ Asstards like VOR with major TDS are really just going through withdrawal pangs from not having their black honey anymore to beat their hard dicks against a picture of telling themselves that Progressivism really WAS winning, popular, working for everyone and getting ahead!

You are one fucked up asshhole. LOL. Get a life you fucking loser.

Poor baby fantasizes about groping Ivanka in his sleep with tortured dreams of Hillary.

You are an absolute moron.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Amazing cognitive dissonance to read 'peace prize' and 'killing' in the same sentence .....~S~

If you kill a mass murderer doesn't that help maintain the peace? Or are you just willfully stupid?

It depends on how simple minded one is, I suppose?

And if not simple minded, whether one is capable of assessing the whole picture in the region, and how much one cares about one's long term goals, strategies, and missions, and whether you have any concerns for the future safety of our state department and embassy workers, our military deployed in the middle east, and our allies in the region....from making such an assassination........

One would need a thorough risk assessment, And long term considerations of what the retaliation could look like, before pulling the proverbial, trigger.

HOPEFULLY, president Trump didn't just shoot from the hip, and took advice from advisors with knowledge and wisdom.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States had “clear, unambiguous” intelligence that a top Iranian general was planning a significant campaign of violence against the United States when it decided to strike him, the top U.S. general said on Friday, warning Soleimani’s plots “might still happen.”

Army General Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a small group of reporters “we fully comprehend the strategic consequences” associated with the strike against Qassem Soleimani, Tehran’s most prominent military commander.

But he said the risk of inaction exceeded the risk that killing him might dramatically escalate tensions with Tehran.

“Is there risk? Damn right, there’s risk. But we’re working to mitigate it,” Milley said from his Pentagon office.

Top U.S. general: Soleimani was planning 'campaign' of violence against U.S.

So President Trump made his decision to kill Soleimani on the basis of risk assessments from top US intelligence and military sources. How simple minded do you have to be to suggest it was just whimsical?

But he said the risk of inaction exceeded the risk that killing him might dramatically escalate tensions with Tehran.

“Is there risk? Damn right, there’s risk. But we’re working to mitigate it,” Milley said from his Pentagon office.

I'll forgo the usual MI oxymoron , with the plan they have for>>>

~S~

You may be too stupid to understand it, but the Iranian leaders know by now that any response against US personnel or property will be responded to by the US with attacks directly against the Iranian officials who ordered it. While you may be titilated by visions of dead Americans, the Iranians will more likely launch a symbolic attack against Saudi Arabia or Israel than risk another US response.

 

[JoeB131]

He has done more for peace than Obama ever did.

Quite right. When Iran has taken over Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the whole region... we will have peace.

 

[TheParser]

It is no secret that the Europeans who decide on the Peace Prize base their choice on political correctness.

(For example, they awarded the Peace Prize to an American president who had just moved into the White House and not even done anything yet.)

So even if President Trump were able to broker a peace agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians, the Nobel committee would never give the Prize to him.

 

[Meathead]

He has done more for peace than Obama ever did.

Quite right. When Iran has taken over Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the whole region... we will have peace.

Iran fought Iraq for years over a waterway. They couldn't even win that. But then a million dead Muslims is no great loss I guess.

 

[Circe]

Ever since Obama got the Nobel Peace Prize for breathing, that has no meaning any longer.

Obama got the Nobel Peace Prize for being black and everyone knows it, IMO.

Given that, it makes perfect sense for Trump to get the Nobel Peace Prize for assassinating an enemy commander.

 

[rightwinger]

The Nobel Peace Prize is overrated given the history of who has won the prize...........

Most prestigious award on earth

Too bad Republicans can’t win

 

[edward37]

If there was an award for AH's Trump would be the winner by a mile and he could share it with all his moron republicans

 

[BULLDOG]

Trump and Hannity discuss starting a war with Iran as a stunt to help election chances.

 

[Care4all]

Amazing cognitive dissonance to read 'peace prize' and 'killing' in the same sentence .....~S~

If you kill a mass murderer doesn't that help maintain the peace? Or are you just willfully stupid?

It depends on how simple minded one is, I suppose?

And if not simple minded, whether one is capable of assessing the whole picture in the region, and how much one cares about one's long term goals, strategies, and missions, and whether you have any concerns for the future safety of our state department and embassy workers, our military deployed in the middle east, and our allies in the region....from making such an assassination........

One would need a thorough risk assessment, And long term considerations of what the retaliation could look like, before pulling the proverbial, trigger.

HOPEFULLY, president Trump didn't just shoot from the hip, and took advice from advisors with knowledge and wisdom.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States had “clear, unambiguous” intelligence that a top Iranian general was planning a significant campaign of violence against the United States when it decided to strike him, the top U.S. general said on Friday, warning Soleimani’s plots “might still happen.”

Army General Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a small group of reporters “we fully comprehend the strategic consequences” associated with the strike against Qassem Soleimani, Tehran’s most prominent military commander.

But he said the risk of inaction exceeded the risk that killing him might dramatically escalate tensions with Tehran.

“Is there risk? Damn right, there’s risk. But we’re working to mitigate it,” Milley said from his Pentagon office.

Top U.S. general: Soleimani was planning 'campaign' of violence against U.S.

So President Trump made his decision to kill Soleimani on the basis of risk assessments from top US intelligence and military sources. How simple minded do you have to be to suggest it was just whimsical?

How could one not rationally have to assume such, after his withdrawing troops from Syria so easily after a phone call with Erdogan, and against advice of his experts, just a few weeks ago? It would be irrational NOT to be cautious or have concern and reservations....imo.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Amazing cognitive dissonance to read 'peace prize' and 'killing' in the same sentence .....~S~

If you kill a mass murderer doesn't that help maintain the peace? Or are you just willfully stupid?

It depends on how simple minded one is, I suppose?

And if not simple minded, whether one is capable of assessing the whole picture in the region, and how much one cares about one's long term goals, strategies, and missions, and whether you have any concerns for the future safety of our state department and embassy workers, our military deployed in the middle east, and our allies in the region....from making such an assassination........

One would need a thorough risk assessment, And long term considerations of what the retaliation could look like, before pulling the proverbial, trigger.

HOPEFULLY, president Trump didn't just shoot from the hip, and took advice from advisors with knowledge and wisdom.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States had “clear, unambiguous” intelligence that a top Iranian general was planning a significant campaign of violence against the United States when it decided to strike him, the top U.S. general said on Friday, warning Soleimani’s plots “might still happen.”

Army General Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a small group of reporters “we fully comprehend the strategic consequences” associated with the strike against Qassem Soleimani, Tehran’s most prominent military commander.

But he said the risk of inaction exceeded the risk that killing him might dramatically escalate tensions with Tehran.

“Is there risk? Damn right, there’s risk. But we’re working to mitigate it,” Milley said from his Pentagon office.

Top U.S. general: Soleimani was planning 'campaign' of violence against U.S.

So President Trump made his decision to kill Soleimani on the basis of risk assessments from top US intelligence and military sources. How simple minded do you have to be to suggest it was just whimsical?

How could one not rationally have to assume such, after his withdrawing troops from Syria so easily after a phone call with Erdogan, and against advice of his experts, just a few weeks ago? It would be irrational NOT to be cautious or have concern and reservations....imo.

If you had been paying attention, you would have known the President had been talking about withdrawing troops from Syria for some time, and you have realized it was not a spur of the moment thing. It was unreasonable to expect the US to support the Kurds nationalist ambitions since all the land they wanted for their state already belonged to other countries. The Kurds simply had to find a way to fit in Syria, and they have. President Trump made a hard choice but the right choice for the US that was based on the realities of the situation and there was nothing whimsical about it. Like most Democrats, you are so obsessed with President Trump, you are unable to see anything else.

 

[Care4all]

Amazing cognitive dissonance to read 'peace prize' and 'killing' in the same sentence .....~S~

If you kill a mass murderer doesn't that help maintain the peace? Or are you just willfully stupid?

It depends on how simple minded one is, I suppose?

And if not simple minded, whether one is capable of assessing the whole picture in the region, and how much one cares about one's long term goals, strategies, and missions, and whether you have any concerns for the future safety of our state department and embassy workers, our military deployed in the middle east, and our allies in the region....from making such an assassination........

One would need a thorough risk assessment, And long term considerations of what the retaliation could look like, before pulling the proverbial, trigger.

HOPEFULLY, president Trump didn't just shoot from the hip, and took advice from advisors with knowledge and wisdom.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States had “clear, unambiguous” intelligence that a top Iranian general was planning a significant campaign of violence against the United States when it decided to strike him, the top U.S. general said on Friday, warning Soleimani’s plots “might still happen.”

Army General Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a small group of reporters “we fully comprehend the strategic consequences” associated with the strike against Qassem Soleimani, Tehran’s most prominent military commander.

But he said the risk of inaction exceeded the risk that killing him might dramatically escalate tensions with Tehran.

“Is there risk? Damn right, there’s risk. But we’re working to mitigate it,” Milley said from his Pentagon office.

Top U.S. general: Soleimani was planning 'campaign' of violence against U.S.

So President Trump made his decision to kill Soleimani on the basis of risk assessments from top US intelligence and military sources. How simple minded do you have to be to suggest it was just whimsical?

But he said the risk of inaction exceeded the risk that killing him might dramatically escalate tensions with Tehran.

“Is there risk? Damn right, there’s risk. But we’re working to mitigate it,” Milley said from his Pentagon office.

I'll forgo the usual MI oxymoron , with the plan they have for>>>

~S~

You may be too stupid to understand it, but the Iranian leaders know by now that any response against US personnel or property will be responded to by the US with attacks directly against the Iranian officials who ordered it. While you may be titilated by visions of dead Americans, the Iranians will more likely launch a symbolic attack against Saudi Arabia or Israel than risk another US response.

It'll be an Asymmetrical retribution, on their timing. Never a direct attack by the Iranian govt.... hopefully not an assassination of one of our leaders, by someone from another country they discretely hire.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Obama Received a Nobel Peace Prize.

And you cons are still upset. Get Over it losers.

He did not deserve it.

Nobel chief regrets Obama peace prize

Obama will forever be known for his droning of countries we were never at war with...

Yet when this president does it, y'all are mum?

Did he order the attack on a country we are not at war with or have troops in the region?

See the fact is you are upset now that it was done in a region we have been involved in for almost two decades ( notice the almost part ) but sat quietly when Obama was using drones in Yemen which we had no reason to be in and used drones against Iranian backed terrorists to boot!

Do I agree with Trump using a drone?

No!

Why?

Order to Kill could have been carried out by Israel with our blessing and we should have not done it ourself.

Now with that written should I cry over that asshole death?

No!

Why?

Simple, that individual was wanted for decades by us and his death is a great blow to the Iranian Clerics that thought America had no bite.

What will become of this?

North Korea will make threats, Cartels and Gangs will stir up nonsense here and many places around the world from Manila to Houston will be targeted by Iranian Guard Members that have been sleeping.

So in the end if you never objected to Obama usage of drones to kill terrorists why now do you care?