So it looks like the armchair warriors are back.

[Hutch Starskey]

You cannot, however, deny the element of tribalism that is evident in support for these actions. I know that Obama's continuation of any of Bush's policies made me think differently about Bush's decisions because I trusted Obama where I did not trust Bush. Obama's actions made me trust Bush's more.

Trump is in a different category.

Why would I deny tribalism? It's probably the most prominent feature here, aside from a ghastly lack of manners.

Now, there may be situations in which taking out a terrorist to prevent an attack is a justifiable matter self-defense. However, since we are not privy to the information leading up to the drone strike, agreeing or not with it comes down to trust. Or rather, mendacity, as we see right now when they were obviously lying about the murder of Soleimani and the "imminent attack" they were not actually preventing.

That said, I understand the political perils of an allegedly underutilized tool, like drones, in the form of "he let that bad guy go" in case that bad guy launches an attack thereafter. That, I am convinced, had President Obama running scared, and overutilize drones. Hence my general rejection of his policies in this respect, and that's while he was in an entirely different universe as concerns trustworthiness.

They won't even inform the senate as to the reasons why.

Another far left lie!

White House informs Congress of Soleimani strike, Trump warns U.S. will hit Iran if attacked

Another far left lie!

Another ill informed poster.

Iran Intelligence Briefing Divides Senate Republicans | National Review

"A classified briefing on the intelligence behind Qasem Soleimani’s killing left Senate Republicans divided Wednesday, with Mike Lee and Ron Paul excoriating the assessment while Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio praised the intel.

Lee called the meeting “probably the worst briefing I’ve seen, at least on a military issues, in the nine years I’ve served in the United States Senate,” and while he commended Trump for showing “a lot of restraint” in the Soleimani affair, he added that he wanted to speak to the president directly about the lack of clarity in the assessment.
“I went in there hoping to get more specifics as far as the factual, legal, moral justification for what they did,” Lee said. “I’m still undecided on that issue, in part because we never got to the details.”

“It is not acceptable for officials within the executive branch of government — I don’t care whether they’re with the CIA, with the Department of Defense, or otherwise — to come in and tell us that we can’t debate and discuss the appropriateness of military intervention against Iran. It’s un-American. It’s unconstitutional. And it’s wrong. And I hope and expect that they will show more deference to their limited power in the future.”

 

[HappyJoy]

You cannot, however, deny the element of tribalism that is evident in support for these actions. I know that Obama's continuation of any of Bush's policies made me think differently about Bush's decisions because I trusted Obama where I did not trust Bush. Obama's actions made me trust Bush's more.

Trump is in a different category.

Why would I deny tribalism? It's probably the most prominent feature here, aside from a ghastly lack of manners.

Now, there may be situations in which taking out a terrorist to prevent an attack is a justifiable matter self-defense. However, since we are not privy to the information leading up to the drone strike, agreeing or not with it comes down to trust. Or rather, mendacity, as we see right now when they were obviously lying about the murder of Soleimani and the "imminent attack" they were not actually preventing.

That said, I understand the political perils of an allegedly underutilized tool, like drones, in the form of "he let that bad guy go" in case that bad guy launches an attack thereafter. That, I am convinced, had President Obama running scared, and overutilize drones. Hence my general rejection of his policies in this respect, and that's while he was in an entirely different universe as concerns trustworthiness.

They won't even inform the senate as to the reasons why.

Another far left lie!

White House informs Congress of Soleimani strike, Trump warns U.S. will hit Iran if attacked

No, idiot. The meeting today where the administration wouldn't answer any questions. Just ask Ron Paul and Mike Lee...you know, those 'far left' guys.

 

[Kosh]

$1.8 billion in cash to our enemy.....That doesn't sound strange to you?

It's not our money.

Yes the far left often says that, it is not about the amount it is the fact the money would be used for terrorism!

The far left always misses that point!

It's still not our money and most likely we weren't going to get anywhere until that was out of the way.

Yes I know you support the failed policies of Obama, just like all of the far left does!

So look at the mess it created, Iran did not use the money for it's people but to fund terrorism!

The far left will never learn!

For starters you don't know how the money was spent.

Secondly, we've never had Iran directly attack the United States since 1979. We didn't have an Iran pulling out of the deal and now ready to start that nuclear program again until Trump.

The 'far left' that you repeat like a brain addled parrot also stretches to other countries that agreed to this deal, an agreement among countries about Iran that we may never see again. Iran, thanks to Bush and now Trump is only going to end up stronger after we leave Iraq. Russia has got to be loving this shit.

Yes you have been outed as far left, but if you choose to ignore it, that is on you.

Case and effect tells the story, but you have to be willing to see beyond the far left religious dogma!

Iran has wanted to build a nuke, no matter of any "deal". All the deal did was prolong it, did not stop it. But the far left will always ignore such facts!

Iran breaks nuclear deal enrichment targets for second time

But then again as you see the EU is not doing anything to stop it, since they are part of that deal as well.

 

[miketx]

Perhaps that swine they killed should not have been involved in the 79 Iranian hostage event and perhaps he should not have been directly involved in the last attack on the Embassy. The democrats are busy showing everyone how they hate rule of law, love terrorists, and hate Americans. How fried must someone's brain be to vote for one of those pos?

 

[miketx]

You cannot, however, deny the element of tribalism that is evident in support for these actions. I know that Obama's continuation of any of Bush's policies made me think differently about Bush's decisions because I trusted Obama where I did not trust Bush. Obama's actions made me trust Bush's more.

Trump is in a different category.

Why would I deny tribalism? It's probably the most prominent feature here, aside from a ghastly lack of manners.

Now, there may be situations in which taking out a terrorist to prevent an attack is a justifiable matter self-defense. However, since we are not privy to the information leading up to the drone strike, agreeing or not with it comes down to trust. Or rather, mendacity, as we see right now when they were obviously lying about the murder of Soleimani and the "imminent attack" they were not actually preventing.

That said, I understand the political perils of an allegedly underutilized tool, like drones, in the form of "he let that bad guy go" in case that bad guy launches an attack thereafter. That, I am convinced, had President Obama running scared, and overutilize drones. Hence my general rejection of his policies in this respect, and that's while he was in an entirely different universe as concerns trustworthiness.

They won't even inform the senate as to the reasons why.

Another far left lie!

White House informs Congress of Soleimani strike, Trump warns U.S. will hit Iran if attacked

No, idiot. The meeting today where the administration wouldn't answer any questions. Just ask Ron Paul and Mike Lee...you know, those 'far left' guys.

Why would they answer questions when you traitors will run and spill it to the enemy as soon as possible?

 

[Kosh]

You cannot, however, deny the element of tribalism that is evident in support for these actions. I know that Obama's continuation of any of Bush's policies made me think differently about Bush's decisions because I trusted Obama where I did not trust Bush. Obama's actions made me trust Bush's more.

Trump is in a different category.

Why would I deny tribalism? It's probably the most prominent feature here, aside from a ghastly lack of manners.

Now, there may be situations in which taking out a terrorist to prevent an attack is a justifiable matter self-defense. However, since we are not privy to the information leading up to the drone strike, agreeing or not with it comes down to trust. Or rather, mendacity, as we see right now when they were obviously lying about the murder of Soleimani and the "imminent attack" they were not actually preventing.

That said, I understand the political perils of an allegedly underutilized tool, like drones, in the form of "he let that bad guy go" in case that bad guy launches an attack thereafter. That, I am convinced, had President Obama running scared, and overutilize drones. Hence my general rejection of his policies in this respect, and that's while he was in an entirely different universe as concerns trustworthiness.

They won't even inform the senate as to the reasons why.

Another far left lie!

White House informs Congress of Soleimani strike, Trump warns U.S. will hit Iran if attacked

No, idiot. The meeting today where the administration wouldn't answer any questions. Just ask Ron Paul and Mike Lee...you know, those 'far left' guys.

Yes I know far left cult member.

I know you are not used to seeing people within their own party having different opinions. Sorry that the GOP is willing to question their own, unlike the far left, like you!

 

[HappyJoy]

It's not our money.

Yes the far left often says that, it is not about the amount it is the fact the money would be used for terrorism!

The far left always misses that point!

It's still not our money and most likely we weren't going to get anywhere until that was out of the way.

Yes I know you support the failed policies of Obama, just like all of the far left does!

So look at the mess it created, Iran did not use the money for it's people but to fund terrorism!

The far left will never learn!

For starters you don't know how the money was spent.

Secondly, we've never had Iran directly attack the United States since 1979. We didn't have an Iran pulling out of the deal and now ready to start that nuclear program again until Trump.

The 'far left' that you repeat like a brain addled parrot also stretches to other countries that agreed to this deal, an agreement among countries about Iran that we may never see again. Iran, thanks to Bush and now Trump is only going to end up stronger after we leave Iraq. Russia has got to be loving this shit.

Yes you have been outed as far left, but if you choose to ignore it, that is on you.

Case and effect tells the story, but you have to be willing to see beyond the far left religious dogma!

Iran has wanted to build a nuke, no matter of any "deal". All the deal did was prolong it, did not stop it. But the far left will always ignore such facts!

Iran breaks nuclear deal enrichment targets for second time

But then again as you see the EU is not doing anything to stop it, since they are part of that deal as well.

Do you not read your own links? That happened a year after Trump pulled out of the deal.

 

[B. Kidd]

Perhaps that swine they killed should not have been involved in the 79 Iranian hostage event and perhaps he should not have been directly involved in the last attack on the Embassy. The democrats are busy showing everyone how they hate rule of law, love terrorists, and hate Americans. How fried must someone's brain be to vote for one of those pos?

Yes.
Fried.
Very, very fried!

 

[Kosh]

You cannot, however, deny the element of tribalism that is evident in support for these actions. I know that Obama's continuation of any of Bush's policies made me think differently about Bush's decisions because I trusted Obama where I did not trust Bush. Obama's actions made me trust Bush's more.

Trump is in a different category.

Why would I deny tribalism? It's probably the most prominent feature here, aside from a ghastly lack of manners.

Now, there may be situations in which taking out a terrorist to prevent an attack is a justifiable matter self-defense. However, since we are not privy to the information leading up to the drone strike, agreeing or not with it comes down to trust. Or rather, mendacity, as we see right now when they were obviously lying about the murder of Soleimani and the "imminent attack" they were not actually preventing.

That said, I understand the political perils of an allegedly underutilized tool, like drones, in the form of "he let that bad guy go" in case that bad guy launches an attack thereafter. That, I am convinced, had President Obama running scared, and overutilize drones. Hence my general rejection of his policies in this respect, and that's while he was in an entirely different universe as concerns trustworthiness.

They won't even inform the senate as to the reasons why.

Another far left lie!

White House informs Congress of Soleimani strike, Trump warns U.S. will hit Iran if attacked

Another far left lie!

Another ill informed poster.

Iran Intelligence Briefing Divides Senate Republicans | National Review

"A classified briefing on the intelligence behind Qasem Soleimani’s killing left Senate Republicans divided Wednesday, with Mike Lee and Ron Paul excoriating the assessment while Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio praised the intel.

Lee called the meeting “probably the worst briefing I’ve seen, at least on a military issues, in the nine years I’ve served in the United States Senate,” and while he commended Trump for showing “a lot of restraint” in the Soleimani affair, he added that he wanted to speak to the president directly about the lack of clarity in the assessment.
“I went in there hoping to get more specifics as far as the factual, legal, moral justification for what they did,” Lee said. “I’m still undecided on that issue, in part because we never got to the details.”

“It is not acceptable for officials within the executive branch of government — I don’t care whether they’re with the CIA, with the Department of Defense, or otherwise — to come in and tell us that we can’t debate and discuss the appropriateness of military intervention against Iran. It’s un-American. It’s unconstitutional. And it’s wrong. And I hope and expect that they will show more deference to their limited power in the future.”

Yes I know it is strange that people in their own party would have different opinions.

It is not like the far left, the GOP will question their own, the far left will not!

Thanks for pointing that out!

 

[Correll]

So, that is your position? We just let them kill our men?

we killed 25 of theirs.


WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE THAT HE WAS AN IMMINENT THREAT?

I don't care whether he was planning on killing Americans and Iraqis tomorrow, or next week, or next month.


He was planning on killing us. Indeed, if he was a director of operations, then he WAS killing us, the entire time he was there, and planning on continuing to do so.


Your point, such as it is, is utterly irrelevant.

& when you can't afford gassing up yer car, you'll care. not that our men & woman coming home in body bags though. how do you KNOW he was planning on killing us? what intel are you privvy to that the rest of us thinking bipeds don't know?

will you swallow everything you are told because donny said it without evidense? lol - but of course you will. that's what they count on.

Well, you had a high level Iranian Military leader inside of Iraq, so, there is that to consider.


But yes, I guess I am just accepting the information that he was a director. YOu got any evidence that he was just an innocent tourist?

He most certainly had as much right to be there as we do.

We are there as allies of the nation of Iraq. He was there as an enemy of Iraq.


So, that is not true.

 

[HappyJoy]

You cannot, however, deny the element of tribalism that is evident in support for these actions. I know that Obama's continuation of any of Bush's policies made me think differently about Bush's decisions because I trusted Obama where I did not trust Bush. Obama's actions made me trust Bush's more.

Trump is in a different category.

Why would I deny tribalism? It's probably the most prominent feature here, aside from a ghastly lack of manners.

Now, there may be situations in which taking out a terrorist to prevent an attack is a justifiable matter self-defense. However, since we are not privy to the information leading up to the drone strike, agreeing or not with it comes down to trust. Or rather, mendacity, as we see right now when they were obviously lying about the murder of Soleimani and the "imminent attack" they were not actually preventing.

That said, I understand the political perils of an allegedly underutilized tool, like drones, in the form of "he let that bad guy go" in case that bad guy launches an attack thereafter. That, I am convinced, had President Obama running scared, and overutilize drones. Hence my general rejection of his policies in this respect, and that's while he was in an entirely different universe as concerns trustworthiness.

They won't even inform the senate as to the reasons why.

Another far left lie!

White House informs Congress of Soleimani strike, Trump warns U.S. will hit Iran if attacked

No, idiot. The meeting today where the administration wouldn't answer any questions. Just ask Ron Paul and Mike Lee...you know, those 'far left' guys.

Yes I know far left cult member.

I know you are not used to seeing people within their own party having different opinions. Sorry that the GOP is willing to question their own, unlike the far left, like you!

I guess I didn't tell a 'far left' lie, did I parrot?

Now, how come the Whitehouse won't inform the senate as to why they launched their attack? Was there no threat?

 

[HappyJoy]

we killed 25 of theirs.


WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE THAT HE WAS AN IMMINENT THREAT?

I don't care whether he was planning on killing Americans and Iraqis tomorrow, or next week, or next month.


He was planning on killing us. Indeed, if he was a director of operations, then he WAS killing us, the entire time he was there, and planning on continuing to do so.


Your point, such as it is, is utterly irrelevant.

& when you can't afford gassing up yer car, you'll care. not that our men & woman coming home in body bags though. how do you KNOW he was planning on killing us? what intel are you privvy to that the rest of us thinking bipeds don't know?

will you swallow everything you are told because donny said it without evidense? lol - but of course you will. that's what they count on.

Well, you had a high level Iranian Military leader inside of Iraq, so, there is that to consider.


But yes, I guess I am just accepting the information that he was a director. YOu got any evidence that he was just an innocent tourist?

He most certainly had as much right to be there as we do.

We are there as allies of the nation of Iraq. He was there as an enemy of Iraq.


So, that is not true.

And Iraq wants us to leave because.....?

 

[pknopp]

we killed 25 of theirs.


WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE THAT HE WAS AN IMMINENT THREAT?

I don't care whether he was planning on killing Americans and Iraqis tomorrow, or next week, or next month.


He was planning on killing us. Indeed, if he was a director of operations, then he WAS killing us, the entire time he was there, and planning on continuing to do so.


Your point, such as it is, is utterly irrelevant.

& when you can't afford gassing up yer car, you'll care. not that our men & woman coming home in body bags though. how do you KNOW he was planning on killing us? what intel are you privvy to that the rest of us thinking bipeds don't know?

will you swallow everything you are told because donny said it without evidense? lol - but of course you will. that's what they count on.

Well, you had a high level Iranian Military leader inside of Iraq, so, there is that to consider.


But yes, I guess I am just accepting the information that he was a director. YOu got any evidence that he was just an innocent tourist?

He most certainly had as much right to be there as we do.

We are there as allies of the nation of Iraq. He was there as an enemy of Iraq.


So, that is not true.

Funny how they voted us out.

 

[Kosh]

Yes the far left often says that, it is not about the amount it is the fact the money would be used for terrorism!

The far left always misses that point!

It's still not our money and most likely we weren't going to get anywhere until that was out of the way.

Yes I know you support the failed policies of Obama, just like all of the far left does!

So look at the mess it created, Iran did not use the money for it's people but to fund terrorism!

The far left will never learn!

For starters you don't know how the money was spent.

Secondly, we've never had Iran directly attack the United States since 1979. We didn't have an Iran pulling out of the deal and now ready to start that nuclear program again until Trump.

The 'far left' that you repeat like a brain addled parrot also stretches to other countries that agreed to this deal, an agreement among countries about Iran that we may never see again. Iran, thanks to Bush and now Trump is only going to end up stronger after we leave Iraq. Russia has got to be loving this shit.

Yes you have been outed as far left, but if you choose to ignore it, that is on you.

Case and effect tells the story, but you have to be willing to see beyond the far left religious dogma!

Iran has wanted to build a nuke, no matter of any "deal". All the deal did was prolong it, did not stop it. But the far left will always ignore such facts!

Iran breaks nuclear deal enrichment targets for second time

But then again as you see the EU is not doing anything to stop it, since they are part of that deal as well.

Do you not read your own links? That happened a year after Trump pulled out of the deal.

Oh my the far left is at it again!

They think the deal is only about the US!

What difference did it make? The deal was only with the US?

Iran makes threats all the time! They want sanctions removed before complying, only the far left does not see it!

The deal never stopped Iran from making Nukes, just prolonged it. It is going to happen anyway

 

[Correll]

It's been weird, watching the same people who made excuses for the wars Bush got us into, turn into anti-neocon doves when Trump came down the escalator.

How could these people have turned on a dime like that?

But now, Trump blows up a bad guy and they're back at full force. Welcome back, we missed ya! But could you at least make up your mind, one way or the other?
.

I don't want another war. But the guy was in a war zone, in a country he was directing hostile military operations against, and directing operations AGAINST US, killing our people.


He was a completely valid target.


If Iran chooses to pretend that their people engaging in warfare against us, are somehow supposed to be safe while doing so, that is their choice, to be insane.

Always an excuse to send others into war.

THey are already in a war.

 

[Kosh]

I don't care whether he was planning on killing Americans and Iraqis tomorrow, or next week, or next month.


He was planning on killing us. Indeed, if he was a director of operations, then he WAS killing us, the entire time he was there, and planning on continuing to do so.


Your point, such as it is, is utterly irrelevant.

& when you can't afford gassing up yer car, you'll care. not that our men & woman coming home in body bags though. how do you KNOW he was planning on killing us? what intel are you privvy to that the rest of us thinking bipeds don't know?

will you swallow everything you are told because donny said it without evidense? lol - but of course you will. that's what they count on.

Well, you had a high level Iranian Military leader inside of Iraq, so, there is that to consider.


But yes, I guess I am just accepting the information that he was a director. YOu got any evidence that he was just an innocent tourist?

He most certainly had as much right to be there as we do.

We are there as allies of the nation of Iraq. He was there as an enemy of Iraq.


So, that is not true.

And Iraq wants us to leave because.....?

Iraq wanted the US to leave under Obama, until they didn't.

 

[HappyJoy]

It's still not our money and most likely we weren't going to get anywhere until that was out of the way.

Yes I know you support the failed policies of Obama, just like all of the far left does!

So look at the mess it created, Iran did not use the money for it's people but to fund terrorism!

The far left will never learn!

For starters you don't know how the money was spent.

Secondly, we've never had Iran directly attack the United States since 1979. We didn't have an Iran pulling out of the deal and now ready to start that nuclear program again until Trump.

The 'far left' that you repeat like a brain addled parrot also stretches to other countries that agreed to this deal, an agreement among countries about Iran that we may never see again. Iran, thanks to Bush and now Trump is only going to end up stronger after we leave Iraq. Russia has got to be loving this shit.

Yes you have been outed as far left, but if you choose to ignore it, that is on you.

Case and effect tells the story, but you have to be willing to see beyond the far left religious dogma!

Iran has wanted to build a nuke, no matter of any "deal". All the deal did was prolong it, did not stop it. But the far left will always ignore such facts!

Iran breaks nuclear deal enrichment targets for second time

But then again as you see the EU is not doing anything to stop it, since they are part of that deal as well.

Do you not read your own links? That happened a year after Trump pulled out of the deal.

Oh my the far left is at it again!

They think the deal is only about the US!

What difference did it make? The deal was only with the US?

Iran makes threats all the time! They want sanctions removed before complying, only the far left does not see it!

The deal never stopped Iran from making Nukes, just prolonged it. It is going to happen anyway

The deal was kind of worthless without us.

You haven't noticed? Trump makes threats all the time too, even those that would be a war crime. What kind of leader of the free world does that?

 

[Kosh]

Yes I know you support the failed policies of Obama, just like all of the far left does!

So look at the mess it created, Iran did not use the money for it's people but to fund terrorism!

The far left will never learn!

For starters you don't know how the money was spent.

Secondly, we've never had Iran directly attack the United States since 1979. We didn't have an Iran pulling out of the deal and now ready to start that nuclear program again until Trump.

The 'far left' that you repeat like a brain addled parrot also stretches to other countries that agreed to this deal, an agreement among countries about Iran that we may never see again. Iran, thanks to Bush and now Trump is only going to end up stronger after we leave Iraq. Russia has got to be loving this shit.

Yes you have been outed as far left, but if you choose to ignore it, that is on you.

Case and effect tells the story, but you have to be willing to see beyond the far left religious dogma!

Iran has wanted to build a nuke, no matter of any "deal". All the deal did was prolong it, did not stop it. But the far left will always ignore such facts!

Iran breaks nuclear deal enrichment targets for second time

But then again as you see the EU is not doing anything to stop it, since they are part of that deal as well.

Do you not read your own links? That happened a year after Trump pulled out of the deal.

Oh my the far left is at it again!

They think the deal is only about the US!

What difference did it make? The deal was only with the US?

Iran makes threats all the time! They want sanctions removed before complying, only the far left does not see it!

The deal never stopped Iran from making Nukes, just prolonged it. It is going to happen anyway

The deal was kind of worthless without us.

The deal was worthless to begin with, that is what the far left does not understand!

 

[HappyJoy]

& when you can't afford gassing up yer car, you'll care. not that our men & woman coming home in body bags though. how do you KNOW he was planning on killing us? what intel are you privvy to that the rest of us thinking bipeds don't know?

will you swallow everything you are told because donny said it without evidense? lol - but of course you will. that's what they count on.

Well, you had a high level Iranian Military leader inside of Iraq, so, there is that to consider.


But yes, I guess I am just accepting the information that he was a director. YOu got any evidence that he was just an innocent tourist?

He most certainly had as much right to be there as we do.

We are there as allies of the nation of Iraq. He was there as an enemy of Iraq.


So, that is not true.

And Iraq wants us to leave because.....?

Iraq wanted the US to leave under Obama, until they didn't.

Yeah, I don't think Iraq wants to be the playing field for our skirmishes with Iran and Iran probably has more influence in Iraq than we do.

 

[miketx]

Well, you had a high level Iranian Military leader inside of Iraq, so, there is that to consider.


But yes, I guess I am just accepting the information that he was a director. YOu got any evidence that he was just an innocent tourist?

He most certainly had as much right to be there as we do.

We are there as allies of the nation of Iraq. He was there as an enemy of Iraq.


So, that is not true.

And Iraq wants us to leave because.....?

Iraq wanted the US to leave under Obama, until they didn't.

Yeah, I don't think Iraq wants to be the playing field for our skirmishes with Iran and Iran probably has more influence in Iraq than we do.

You should have stopped at "I dont think".