The US just assassinated...

I am no fan of Solimoni, but my observation is that claiming righteousness is usually the last refuge of hypocrites...best avoided.

Don

-

gcomeau wrote:

TFLYTSNBN wrote:You do understand that Trump's decision to kill a known, high ranking terrorist commander was far from unprecedented?

Since the difference between "killing terrorist commander" and "killing second most powerful official member of a nation's government the US is not at war with" has already been repeatedly pointed out to you at this point I'm just going to have to assume your continued ignorance on this is feigned.

Because, well, I'm being charitable since the other option is more insulting.

You once again prove that you are a total jackass.

Under ordinary circumstances, Solonami would not be a legitimate target. However; given his history and the recent attack on the US embassy by a Shiite mob with the complicity of Iraqi troops, it was open season on him.

If you and our Eurotrash and Canadian allies object, fine.
No problem. However; if the US is going to have it's hands tied in opposing Iran then the US should disengage from the Middle East completely. As President Trump intentionally pointed out, the US doesn't need Middle East oil. China, Japan and Europe need the oil. Let them deal with all the problems. The US should also cease efforts to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Since Iranian missiles can threaten Europe, the US should withdraw from NATO so that we don't get sucked into another European war.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:If you and our Eurotrash and Canadian allies object, fine.
No problem. However; if the US is going to have it's hands tied in opposing Iran then the US should disengage from the Middle East completely. As President Trump intentionally pointed out, the US doesn't need Middle East oil. China, Japan and Europe need the oil. Let them deal with all the problems. The US should also cease efforts to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Since Iranian missiles can threaten Europe, the US should withdraw from NATO so that we don't get sucked into another European war.

There you go again, asserting that the US and Trump very definitely want out of the middle east when your commander in chief just whored out the US military to the Saudis.....

So by Fly's logic the government official behind what appears to be a recent plot to kill a US Ambassador should be taken out by the US military.

The more recent news is that about a dozen troops might have suffered traumatic brain injuries during the missile attacks. It will be interesting to observe President Trump's response.

As for TheE's usual drivel, I somewhat concur. The US military has been "whored out" to the Saudis since the first Persian Gulf war. The entire officer Corp has been conditioned to view this as normal just as being whored out to defend Eurotrash has been normal for over half a century. You might recall that the "experts" persuaded Trump to not withdraw from Afghanistan. My theory is that keeping the Persian Gulf pacified just a bit longer is needed to motivate the Chinese to make trade concessions. Trump will withdraw soon.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:The more recent news is that about a dozen troops might have suffered traumatic brain injuries during the missile attacks. It will be interesting to observe President Trump's response.

I think it's interesting to observe yours.

After Benghazi a momentary uncertainty for a few days in reporting on root cause of the attack as intelligence was still coming in caused you and your ilk to vehemently support a years long rabip outrage peddling inquisition against the Obama administration.

The Trump administration was just revealed as having been lying for almost 2 weeks about far more clearly obtainable information, claiming no casualties US in the missile attack, and not a hint of outrage or even mild annoyance.

gcomeau wrote:

TFLYTSNBN wrote:The more recent news is that about a dozen troops might have suffered traumatic brain injuries during the missile attacks. It will be interesting to observe President Trump's response.

I think it's interesting to observe yours.

After Benghazi a momentary uncertainty for a few days in reporting on root cause of the attack as intelligence was still coming in caused you and your ilk to vehemently support a years long rabip outrage peddling inquisition against the Obama administration.

The Trump administration was just revealed as having been lying for almost 2 weeks about far more clearly obtainable information, claiming no casualties US in the missile attack, and not a hint of outrage or even mild annoyance.

Your home planet must be in an alternate reality. Perhaps you should reserve such drivel for THE GORDIAN PROTOCOL forum?

In the meantime, read this:

https://www.cnn.com/2013/05/06/politics ... index.html

There is a profound moral destination between announcing that there were no casualties prematurely because traumatic brain injuries had not yet been diagnosed, verses refusing to deploy readily available assets to reinforce troops while they were under attack. The Obama administration even made up an excuse to relieve the admiral of the carrier battle group for attempting to intervene. Even more egregious was fabricating BS about an uncomplimentary Mohamed video to cover up a covert operation to arm ISIS terrorists.

n7axw wrote:I am no fan of Solimoni, but my observation is that claiming righteousness is usually the last refuge of hypocrites...best avoided.

Don

-

You are a fan of Solimoni.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:

n7axw wrote:I am no fan of Solimoni, but my observation is that claiming righteousness is usually the last refuge of hypocrites...best avoided.

Don

-

You are a fan of Solimoni.

Translation: I have no rebuttal so I'll just make some shit up.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:

gcomeau wrote:[
I think it's interesting to observe yours.

After Benghazi a momentary uncertainty for a few days in reporting on root cause of the attack as intelligence was still coming in caused you and your ilk to vehemently support a years long rabip outrage peddling inquisition against the Obama administration.

The Trump administration was just revealed as having been lying for almost 2 weeks about far more clearly obtainable information, claiming no casualties US in the missile attack, and not a hint of outrage or even mild annoyance.

Your home planet must be in an alternate reality. Perhaps you should reserve such drivel for THE GORDIAN PROTOCOL forum?

In the meantime, read this:

https://www.cnn.com/2013/05/06/politics ... index.html

There is a profound moral destination between announcing that there were no casualties prematurely because traumatic brain injuries had not yet been diagnosed, verses refusing to deploy readily available assets to reinforce troops while they were under attack. The Obama administration even made up an excuse to relieve the admiral of the carrier battle group for attempting to intervene. Even more egregious was fabricating BS about an uncomplimentary Mohamed video to cover up a covert operation to arm ISIS terrorists.

Now you're just making things up. US assets were not in a position to intervene in time. And as for "arming ISIS terrorists", this is the first I've heard that accusation. They weren't really a thing back then AFAIR.