Soleimani was going to blow up our Embassy. That was the imminent threat

[Slade3200]

i did hear that... it was super vague and didn’t make sense given the situation... was the strike on Soleimani a planned response to counter Iran’s raid of our embassy? Or Was it an imminent attack our intel agencies found out about that warranted immediate action?

Ok, let’s just cut through the crap and lay out what I think is obvious.

Trump was presented with many options on ways we could respond to the embassy attack. This hit on Soleimani was one of the options and was the one Trump went with. They then messed up by calling it an imminent attack which they said to try and excuse the fact that Trump acted without consulting congress.

Now the admin is in cover our ass mode which is why the story keeps changing. They aren’t being honest and straight forward about actions that are escalating armed conflict and risking lives.

do you have any proof they messed up by calling it an imminent attack???
in other words do you have proof there wasnt one??

and when did the story change??

and how have things escalated??? so far they have gone the other direction,,,

Escalation was reacting to an embassy attack with a drone bomb double kill involving a high ranking Iranian official which then prompted 4000 troops to be deployed, a stampede funeral where dozens died, the risk of losing our strategic position in the fight against ISIS, Missile strikes on our military bases wherein a commercial flight was shot down and nearly 200 innocent people died.

that’s the escalation and there are promises of more to come. Pay better attention

thats a small part of why,,,my question is why do you ignore so much of the rest of it???

No, your question was literally “how have things escalated” and I told you how. It’s called giving a direct answer. Try it sometime.

but your explanation is lacking in facts,,,

no it’s not, it’s all there

 

[Slade3200]

That’s all I do

Support terrorists?

Yes, we know.

Grow up

 

[Uncensored2008]

That’s all I do

Support terrorists?

Yes, we know.

Grow up

At 61? Unlikely.

But you DO support terrorists.

 

[progressive hunter]

do you have any proof they messed up by calling it an imminent attack???
in other words do you have proof there wasnt one??

and when did the story change??

and how have things escalated??? so far they have gone the other direction,,,

Escalation was reacting to an embassy attack with a drone bomb double kill involving a high ranking Iranian official which then prompted 4000 troops to be deployed, a stampede funeral where dozens died, the risk of losing our strategic position in the fight against ISIS, Missile strikes on our military bases wherein a commercial flight was shot down and nearly 200 innocent people died.

that’s the escalation and there are promises of more to come. Pay better attention

thats a small part of why,,,my question is why do you ignore so much of the rest of it???

No, your question was literally “how have things escalated” and I told you how. It’s called giving a direct answer. Try it sometime.

but your explanation is lacking in facts,,,

no it’s not, it’s all there

your opinion is there,,thats about it,,

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Liberals weep tonight. Their planned Benghazi II plot failed.

Boo-Hoo.

Not.

You sound like a retard.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Liberals weep tonight. Their planned Benghazi II plot failed.

Boo-Hoo.

Not.

You sound like a retard.

You are an expert on being retarded, overwhelming experience.....

 

[progressive hunter]

Liberals weep tonight. Their planned Benghazi II plot failed.

Boo-Hoo.

Not.

You sound like a retard.

you are the retard,,,

 

[Butch_Coolidge]

Random sources... how about yourself? Can you send a link to the report you saw on the night it was happening?

The news was Solemini had plans to hit multiple targets now and in the future and had done so in the past. He is responsible for the killing of an American. How did you miss this? I also used 'random sources' just like you. Get your own link and stop being arrogant. All you care about is playing gotcha. Your reputation on this board is clear, you are a TDSer who will do anything to degrade this President. Frankly I don't give a **** what Solemini (or however you spell it) was going to do. Our President was briefed and he told US the reasoning. Everyone agrees the guy was a mother ****** who reveled in torturing his victims as well. But I know, to you and your ilk think Trump is worse. You're a bunch of deranged morons.

Unfortunately, Hitler wasn’t taken care of as quickly. Donnie did the world a public service. That asshole was never going to do anything less than he did. It’s called being proactive. If salami would have created further destruction, Don would have been blamed for that too. No one questioned oboe on his every move and reasoning. Because they were afraid to be called racist. All that gutless asshole did was pay off terrorists, and create ISIS. Dims will soon be rejoicing over whatever geriatric loser they put up for president.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[miketx]

Free today only.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Well, I'll be. I knew it. In fact, I have said it several times in the past few days. Trump's Senate trial is imminent and suddenly he decides to take out an Iranian general responsible for killing American troops in a was ten to fifteen years ago. On top of that, he and his SecState are struggling to keep their stories straight.

Well, here is why.

According to two separate reports this week, President Donald Trump had the impeachment process on his mind when giving the go-ahead for the drone strike that assassinated Iranian military and intelligence official Qasem Soleimani last week.


On Friday, the Wall Street Journal reported: “Mr. Trump, after the strike, told associates he was under pressure to deal with Gen. Soleimani from GOP senators he views as important supporters in his coming impeachment trial in the Senate, associates said.”


The Journal does not name any of the senators in question, but it does follow a similar report from the New York Times on Tuesday that said the president has been “pressured to take a harder line on Iran by some Republican senators whose support he needs now more than ever amid an impeachment battle.”

https://www.rollingstone.com/politi...whose-support-he-needs-on-impeachment-936180/

 

[Butch_Coolidge]

Random sources... how about yourself? Can you send a link to the report you saw on the night it was happening?

The news was Solemini had plans to hit multiple targets now and in the future and had done so in the past. He is responsible for the killing of an American. How did you miss this? I also used 'random sources' just like you. Get your own link and stop being arrogant. All you care about is playing gotcha. Your reputation on this board is clear, you are a TDSer who will do anything to degrade this President. Frankly I don't give a **** what Solemini (or however you spell it) was going to do. Our President was briefed and he told US the reasoning. Everyone agrees the guy was a mother ****** who reveled in torturing his victims as well. But I know, to you and your ilk think Trump is worse. You're a bunch of deranged morons.

i did hear that... it was super vague and didn’t make sense given the situation... was the strike on Soleimani a planned response to counter Iran’s raid of our embassy? Or Was it an imminent attack our intel agencies found out about that warranted immediate action?

Ok, let’s just cut through the crap and lay out what I think is obvious.

Trump was presented with many options on ways we could respond to the embassy attack. This hit on Soleimani was one of the options and was the one Trump went with. They then messed up by calling it an imminent attack which they said to try and excuse the fact that Trump acted without consulting congress.

Now the admin is in cover our ass mode which is why the story keeps changing. They aren’t being honest and straight forward about actions that are escalating armed conflict and risking lives.

Thanks General.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Butch_Coolidge]

Geee - revealing covert information can be tricky. Maybe the President had to wait until it was safe to reveal that information --- ya think?

Or maybe a known pathological liar lied again...ya think?

You should know. You are one. Now put your head back up Nancy’s ass, and STFU.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You should know. You are one.

Your wit is sharp as a marble, old man.

 

[DOTR]

How many times does it take for some Americans to realize their government lies, after it commits a heinous crime?

Apparently for some, there is no limit.

Killing a terrorist is a heinous crime? In whose book (besides Iran’s)?

 

[JWBooth]

Soleimani was going to blow up our Embassy.........................




Not only one embassy, not only our Embassy but four Embassies

Good riddance !!!! criminal disgusting terrorist!

Breaking911‏ @Breaking911

FOUR US EMBASSIES WERE TARGETED: President Trump told Fox News’ Laura Ingraham in an interview that the imminent threat from Iran that provoked the United States to kill Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani involved planned attacks on four US embassies.

12:13 PM - 10 Jan 2020

Evidence? None has yet been presented. All we have to go on is the word of a group of known liars and merchants of deceit and death

 

[Leo123]

Well, I'll be. I knew it. In fact, I have said it several times in the past few days. Trump's Senate trial is imminent and suddenly he decides to take out an Iranian general responsible for killing American troops in a was ten to fifteen years ago. On top of that, he and his SecState are struggling to keep their stories straight.

Well, here is why.

According to two separate reports this week, President Donald Trump had the impeachment process on his mind when giving the go-ahead for the drone strike that assassinated Iranian military and intelligence official Qasem Soleimani last week.


On Friday, the Wall Street Journal reported: “Mr. Trump, after the strike, told associates he was under pressure to deal with Gen. Soleimani from GOP senators he views as important supporters in his coming impeachment trial in the Senate, associates said.”


The Journal does not name any of the senators in question, but it does follow a similar report from the New York Times on Tuesday that said the president has been “pressured to take a harder line on Iran by some Republican senators whose support he needs now more than ever amid an impeachment battle.”

https://www.rollingstone.com/politi...whose-support-he-needs-on-impeachment-936180/

Total bullshit ^^^^^^

 

[Leo123]

i did hear that... it was super vague and didn’t make sense given the situation... was the strike on Soleimani a planned response to counter Iran’s raid of our embassy? Or Was it an imminent attack our intel agencies found out about that warranted immediate action?

Ok, let’s just cut through the crap and lay out what I think is obvious.

Trump was presented with many options on ways we could respond to the embassy attack. This hit on Soleimani was one of the options and was the one Trump went with. They then messed up by calling it an imminent attack which they said to try and excuse the fact that Trump acted without consulting congress.

Now the admin is in cover our ass mode which is why the story keeps changing. They aren’t being honest and straight forward about actions that are escalating armed conflict and risking lives.

No one cares if you thought anything was 'vague', moron. Everyone agrees that a bad guy is room temperature. You just hate Trump, don't try to pretend you are some kind of objective intellectual. BTW why should Trump trust the House when the leadership has been trying to stab him in the back? Pelosi owns this, not Trump. Trump did the best he could when faced with a bunch of Democrat lying snakes that he can't (and should never) trust.

 

[Butch_Coolidge]

Hopefully you will be just as happy [emoji2], when you vote for whatever unqualified geriatric candidate you’re tard party puts up? Just be a good little loser, and do as your told. Because we all know the track record of the dim party, and how truthful they are. They never “make shit up”. Perhaps a nice big tattoo to commentate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're still deflecting, even after having been called on it.

You know I'm right, tRump can't be trusted.

Poor little brainwashing victim just can't admit it.

tRump supporters aren't allowed to think for themselves.

I’m not deflecting, I’m swatting you away like an annoying fly. I voted for Trump, and will do it again this year. You and the rest of your ilk, have been doing nothing but whining like little bitches since before he was elected to office. I was voting for him, since he announced he was running. He destroyed that phony **** in the debates, and swept [emoji3472] her in the election. You and your queer community can’t give it up, four years later. We are not complaining, you are. I didn’t like oboe, but he didn’t take over my head. I attempted to vote him out, and it didn’t work. I didn’t cry about it, like a little *****. No stop copying your same lame posts. It’s boring. Get your med refills and get over it.

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

Really? You post the same lame rhetoric and act like a *****, because Trump is president and allegedly ruined your life. And that’s your response. Who’s deflecting and projecting now. I sleep fine. If I ever have trouble I could always watch some late night no talent TV hack, who like you also doesn’t have an original thought in his head.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not me. This a started with your deflection.

[emoji1781]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Leo123]

*****


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

??????

 

[Coyote]

Maybe this was the real reason Trump went after him: a pissing contest and a war of memes.

Iranian commander and Trump fought each other with 'Game of Thrones' memes before airstrike on General Soleimani