U.S. strike kills Iran Quds Force commander Soleimani - Pentagon

[Bluespunk]

10 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

No evidence available to you or me, correct. Read my comment again. 

I have and I do not trust those making claims about why he was in Iraq and therefore do not believe them. 
 

Just as I didn’t believe GW Bush and Blair back in the past. 

Edited January 4, 2020 by Bluespunk
Spelling

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, rhyddid said:

US committed a clear terrorist attack in a foreign land, proving that is on the path in make all middle east an inferno and being on the step of igniting real 3rd world war, all for oil.

Despite few fanatic around the globe that party for the tragic event, what we all clearly see a very provocative act that will scatter another OIL WAR, as in Iraq.
 

The huge difference is that Iran got no the talco powder Mr Powell was lying as fake evidence at the UN Meeting.
Iran got top and well trained intelligence teams, nuclear weapons, and it very clear when it start they will be used scattering a global war as China and Russia will intervene too, they can not leave all oil control in US and their master the very powerful Zionist segment of Israel.

 

It wasn't a terrorist act. It was an act of war. 

You're kind of obsessed with spreading global Jewish control propaganda. You know, that's total B.S.

[JHolmesJr]

Not an act of war.....the US has a right to be in that region and has been for some years.

Merely a pre-emptive strike against a known terrorist and lifelong bad actor.

All the pro Soleimani libs here are simply providing aid and comfort to the enemy.

 

[CG1 Blue]

14 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I have and I do not trust those making claims about why he was in Iraq and therefore do not believe them. 
 

Just as I didn’t believe GW Bush and Blair back in the past. 

That's a completely different matter, whether or not you trust them. Bush and Blair did enormous damage to public confidence in intelligence services.

 

The point I'm making is that they're not going to make sensitive intelligence based information available to the public while a situation is ongoing. No country would. So it's pointless for people to ask for that information. 

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

Not an act of war.....the US has a right to be in that region and has been for some years.

Merely a pre-emptive strike against a known terrorist and lifelong bad actor.

All the pro Soleimani libs here are simply providing aid and comfort to the enemy.

 

If the Iranians killed the U.S. secretary of state or secretary of defense I think even 45 fans would correctly see that as an extremely serious of act of war. The Iranians correctly see this assassination as an act of war as well. I know the 45 cult of personality is allergic to facts and reality but facts and reality still have a place in this world. 

[Bluespunk]

11 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

That's a completely different matter, whether or not you trust them. Bush and Blair did enormous damage to public confidence in intelligence services.

 

The point I'm making is that they're not going to make sensitive intelligence based information available to the public while a situation is ongoing. No country would. So it's pointless for people to ask for that information. 

Nonetheless, I will continue to ask those who try to negate my posts by insisting he was in Iraq to plan an attack on Americans to prove such claims. 
 

That is the only reason I have asked for evidence. 

Edited January 4, 2020 by Bluespunk
Clarification

[rabas]

1 hour ago, Bluespunk said:

So there is no evidence available to support the claims being made about why this man was in Iraq...

Your claim lacks any supporting evidence.

 

On the other hand, Soleimani was exceedingly elusive because of his sordid occupation. The drone that hit him came from Qatar 1131 km away. Since US intelligence and military could predict precisely where and when he would arrive in Iraq, well in advance, surely they know what he was doing.  They have been watching him and the Quds for years.

 

Of course they know what he is up too. Only spin dizzy MSM thinks otherwise.

 

If you have solid evidence otherwise, please post. It's a forum so no one expects state secrets, but at least something reasonable.

Edited January 4, 2020 by rabas

[Bluespunk]

5 minutes ago, rabas said:

Your claim lacks any supporting evidence.

 

On the other hand, Soleimani was exceedingly elusive because of his sordid occupation. The drone that hit him came from Qatar 1131 km away. Since US intelligence and military could predict precisely where and when he would arrive in Iraq, well in advance, surely they know what he was doing.  They have been watching him and the Quds for years.

 

Of course they know what he is up too. Only spin dizzy MSM thinks otherwise.

 

If you have solid evidence otherwise, please post. It's a forum so no one expects state secrets, but at least something reasonable.

Your claim lacks any supporting evidence as to why he was in Iraq. 

[gamb00ler]

2 hours ago, rabas said:

On the other hand, Soleimani was exceedingly elusive because of his sordid occupation. The drone that hit him came from Qatar 1131 km away. Since US intelligence and military could predict precisely where and when he would arrive in Iraq, well in advance, surely they know what he was doing.  They have been watching him and the Quds for years.

 

Of course they know what he is up too. Only spin dizzy MSM thinks otherwise.

 

If you have solid evidence otherwise, please post. It's a forum so no one expects state secrets, but at least something reasonable.

Assuming the USA military is capable of strategic planning, they probably constantly have armed drones in the air over a lot of potential targets in that part of the world.  In which case the actual time to target is only minutes and the distance from Qatar would be irrelevant.

 

I doubt that USA intelligence knew the precise topics discussed by Soliemani but could certainly deduce he was planning some action against US personnel.  If they had intercepted his communications then he was just too careless and he suffered the consequences.

 

If US has penetrated what Iran considers secure communications of course that must not be outed.

 

A non-lethal attack would almost certainly not have deterred him and only alerted him to the weakness of his security methods.

[mike787]

4 hours ago, rhyddid said:

US committed a clear terrorist attack in a foreign land, proving that is on the path in make all middle east an inferno and being on the step of igniting real 3rd world war, all for oil.

Despite few fanatic around the globe that party for the tragic event, what we all clearly see a very provocative act that will scatter another OIL WAR, as in Iraq.
 

The huge difference is that Iran got no the talco powder Mr Powell was lying as fake evidence at the UN Meeting.
Iran got top and well trained intelligence teams, nuclear weapons, and it very clear when it start they will be used scattering a global war as China and Russia will intervene too, they can not leave all oil control in US and their master the very powerful Zionist segment of Israel.

 

the US removed a useless individual that contributed nothing beneficial to the world.  If it means war then so be it - bring it on!!!  I will be happy to die for freedom because its not free.

[Scott]

Troll posts removed.   Continue and face a suspension.   You have been warned.  

 

[tlandtday]

8 hours ago, tlandtday said:

Absolute lunacy by Trump displaying a real gullibility as this entire fiasco was probably set up by Mossad, CIA and the military industrial complex - the usual suspects.

Nothing to laugh about does the term "weapons of mass destruction" ring a bell?  And who do you think may possibly have been giving Trump information about proposed terror attacks from the assassinated individual?

[bristolboy]

5 hours ago, JHolmesJr said:

Not an act of war.....the US has a right to be in that region and has been for some years.

Merely a pre-emptive strike against a known terrorist and lifelong bad actor.

All the pro Soleimani libs here are simply providing aid and comfort to the enemy.

 

Can you provide more information concerning that right?

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, mike787 said:

the US removed a useless individual that contributed nothing beneficial to the world.  If it means war then so be it - bring it on!!!  I will be happy to die for freedom because its not free.

When are you enlisting?

[heybruce]

10 hours ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

Looks like someone has downloaded and spewed out today's bulletin from 'the resistance'.

Quoting sun tzu...how deep ????

 

Looks like you are incapable of grasping a simple concept:  Winning a battle is not the same thing as winning a war.  The Confederacy won almost every major battle and lost the war.  The US won everywhere it fought in Vietnam and lost the war.  The US had no trouble toppling Saddam Hussein's government and now can't get out of Iraq.

 

What is Trump's endgame?  How will this assassination make things better for the US?  Trump has no answer to either of these questions.

[Kelsall]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

Looks like you are incapable of grasping a simple concept:  Winning a battle is not the same thing as winning a war.  The Confederacy won almost every major battle and lost the war.  The US won everywhere it fought in Vietnam and lost the war.  The US had no trouble toppling Saddam Hussein's government and now can't get out of Iraq.

 

What is Trump's endgame?  How will this assassination make things better for the US?  Trump has no answer to either of these questions.

Why is Trump even involved?  I thought he was impeached.  ????

[metisdead]

A troll post has been removed.

 

A post containing content and a link from a Twitter page has been removed as this is not a Twitter site. 

[rabas]

13 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

So there is no evidence available to support the claims being made about why this man was in Iraq...

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-security-soleimani-insight/inside-the-plot-by-irans-soleimani-to-attack-u-s-forces-in-iraq-idUSKBN1Z301Z

 

[Bluespunk]

54 minutes ago, rabas said:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-security-soleimani-insight/inside-the-plot-by-irans-soleimani-to-attack-u-s-forces-in-iraq-idUSKBN1Z301Z

 

Fair enough, two militia leaders say this.
 

It’s repeating claims made by other in the whitehouse saying it but would like to know how close they were to those involved in planning and where the evidence is, otherwise it’s just hearsay. I’m still not convinced. 
 

Interesting article though. 
 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/04/suleimani-assassination-fears-grow-bloody-reprisal-funeral-baghdad-tehran?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Edited January 5, 2020 by Bluespunk

[JHolmesJr]

6 hours ago, heybruce said:

Looks like you are incapable of grasping a simple concept:  Winning a battle is not the same thing as winning a war.  The Confederacy won almost every major battle and lost the war.  The US won everywhere it fought in Vietnam and lost the war.  The US had no trouble toppling Saddam Hussein's government and now can't get out of Iraq.

 

What is Trump's endgame?  How will this assassination make things better for the US?  Trump has no answer to either of these questions.

 

You sound like one of those entitled liberals who needs a nicely printed and bound coffee table book titled

TRUMPS ENDGAME...handwritten by the president. Sorry, you are no one in the chain of command and do not need to know. Just know that his actions are preventing American deaths...not sowing the seeds of some vague appeasement policy that frequently turns the other cheek and makes the enemy more and more brazen. He actually said he would be operating like this in his speeches before 2016....but you and the rest of the MSM tuned it all out because you thought Hillary would win.

 

What was Obama's strategy.....apart from 'dont do stupid S^%$'?

 

 

[rabas]

1 hour ago, Bluespunk said:

Fair enough, two militia leaders say this.
 

It’s repeating claims made by other in the whitehouse saying it but would like to know how close they were to those involved in planning and where the evidence is, otherwise it’s just hearsay. I’m still not convinced. 
 

Interesting article though. 
 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/04/suleimani-assassination-fears-grow-bloody-reprisal-funeral-baghdad-tehran?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

OK, more information, thanks. Distilling the essence of the 'doubt' evidence boils down to a reference to New York Times investigative reporter Rukmini Callimachi who does seem qualified on the subject. If I can I will link to her full comments here:   Rukmini Callimachi ‏comments

 

Note she addresses the question of immediate attack that could kill large numbers of Americans. That Soleimani had been attacking American interests and would continue to do so is pretty clear. To be pedantic, the answer to the first part is a razor thin 'yes'. Aso note that although she has good contacts, they will not normally divulge critical secret information to the press. 

 

Edited January 5, 2020 by rabas

[billd766]

15 hours ago, Jingthing said:

It wasn't a terrorist act. It was an act of war. 

You're kind of obsessed with spreading global Jewish control propaganda. You know, that's total B.S.

Actually it isn't BS no matter how you try to spin it.

 

It cannot be an act of war because that has to be approved by both Congress and the Senate, and certainly NOT by an out of control POTUS.

 

Therefore it must be state sponsored terrorism.

 

14 hours ago, Jingthing said:

If the Iranians killed the U.S. secretary of state or secretary of defense I think even 45 fans would correctly see that as an extremely serious of act of war. The Iranians correctly see this assassination as an act of war as well. I know the 45 cult of personality is allergic to facts and reality but facts and reality still have a place in this world. 

Ifs, whats and maybes from some trying to justify the unjustifiable.

 

quote from your post "If the Iranians killed the U.S. secretary of state or secretary of defense I think even 45 fans would correctly see that as an extremely serious of act of war."

 

But the Iranians did NOT kill the U.S. secretary of state or secretary of defense nor have they even tried to do so. Therefore your post is merely a diversion from Trump's problems in the USA.

 

HE did NOT try to stop a war but pushed the USA closer to starting an undeclared  one.

[samran]

15 hours ago, JHolmesJr said:

Not an act of war.....the US has a right to be in that region and has been for some years.

Merely a pre-emptive strike against a known terrorist and lifelong bad actor.

All the pro Soleimani libs here are simply providing aid and comfort to the enemy.

 

Apparently Bush had chances to take him out too. Is he a pro-Someomani lib as well? 

[billd766]

10 hours ago, mike787 said:

the US removed a useless individual that contributed nothing beneficial to the world.  If it means war then so be it - bring it on!!!  I will be happy to die for freedom because its not free.

So can we assume that you will now join the US military and beg to be in the front line when the USA invades Iran?

 

Just another wannabe keyboard warrior.

[riclag]

On 1/3/2020 at 11:58 AM, spidermike007 said:

This was a stunningly stupid move. How would the US react if the Joint Chief of staff was killed? Dumb and dumber. Trump just does not get it. This could very well be his undoing. 

State sponsor of terror has just tapped a American citizen(contractor) ,invaded America's (sovereign territory (US Embassy  ) again and the Gen was reported to be responsible for many acts of aggression which resulted in the loss of  millions of dollars and  deaths of Americans. This could very well be the POTUS greatest moment.Your country needs your support!!!!!!! 

Edited January 5, 2020 by riclag

[Opl]

12 minutes ago, riclag said:

State sponsor of terror has just tapped a American citizen(contractor) ,invaded America's (sovereign territory (US Embassy  ) again and the Gen was reported to be responsible for many acts of aggression which resulted in the loss of  millions of dollars and  deaths of Americans. This could very well be the POTUS greatest moment.Your country needs your support!!!!!!! 

Jr, Eric, Jared and friends can't wait to enlist.. think "great" 

[metisdead]

 

 

 

Another troll post has been removed. 

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

You sound like one of those entitled liberals who needs a nicely printed and bound coffee table book titled

TRUMPS ENDGAME...handwritten by the president. Sorry, you are no one in the chain of command and do not need to know. Just know that his actions are preventing American deaths...not sowing the seeds of some vague appeasement policy that frequently turns the other cheek and makes the enemy more and more brazen. He actually said he would be operating like this in his speeches before 2016....but you and the rest of the MSM tuned it all out because you thought Hillary would win.

 

What was Obama's strategy.....apart from 'dont do stupid S^%$'?

 

 

You sound like one of those Trump supporters who can't see the obvious--Trump doesn't know what he's doing and doesn't listen to people who could help him.

 

When a President commits an act of war the American people have every right to know what his objective is.  This is especially true with our recent history of getting into conflicts with no endgame or exit strategy. 

 

Obama's strategy was to not get the US any deeper in the messes in Afghanistan and Iraq that he inherited.  However he did not commit the betrayal of pulling out completely and leaving Afghanistan to the Taliban and Iraq to ISIS. 

 

Trump has betrayed our strongest ally on the ground in the region while significantly increasing US troop levels.  I don't know what he has planned, I suspect he doesn't have a plan.  I don't have your faith in the man-child.

[JHolmesJr]

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I don't have your faith in the man-child.

 

I do....he has just announced that 52 Iranian targets have been earmarked (one for every hostage taken by them previously). If they misbehave, those targets will be taken out. I just hope its a mixture of installations and mullahs.

This is how it's done.

[BigA]

From a realist perspective taking out Soleimani was a smart and appropriate use of power.