General Qasem Soleimani, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards' elite Quds Force, has been killed by US forces in Iraq

Nanfeishen

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
7,566
It seems more and more like the threats to the US embassies which led to this assassination were all made up and there is absolutely no evidence to support it. Even the Secretary of Defense said there was no concrete evidence and it was just a belief.


And


So random fears and thoughts are enough to assassinate people on foreign soil. Maybe the police can start arresting us on suspicion that we might drink and drive next weekend.
And to top it all off, the Iraq Prime Minister says Soleimani was there by invitation for talks.

when Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi addressed his country’s parliament, Trump’s justification for killing Soleimani was exposed as a cynical lie.
According to Abdul-Mahdi, he had planned to meet Soleimani on the morning the general was killed to discuss a diplomatic rapproachment that Iraq was brokering between Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Abdul-Mahdi said that Trump personally thanked him for the efforts, even as he was planning the hit on Soleimani – thus creating the impression that the Iranian general was safe to travel to Baghdad.


 

3Gee

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
2,452
Fact is, US troops were/are in Iraq (not Iran @Norrad) fighting ISIS and Soleimani was responsible for actively targeting and killing 600 personal, so in the US' eyes he was a legitimate target.

How they got into Iraq is irrelevant. Should the US leave Iraq, IMO yes they should.
The US " kills " Iranians with sanctions. So killing US soldiers in other countries is fair game.
 

TysonRoux

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
6,623
Don't you think that General Qasem Soleimani, the head of the Islamic Republic of Iran's Revolutionary Guards' elite Quds Force was a devout muslim?
You might not be a Trump supporter , however looking at the questions and statements you making , you fall in exactly the same category as a Trump supporter.
LOL

Still skirting the question.
 

SoldierMan

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2019
Messages
1,205
The US " kills " Iranians with sanctions. So killing US soldiers in other countries is fair game.
Oh is that so, in that case I'm glad you agree Soleimani was a legitimate target.

So I'm sure you will agree then that Japan had every right in attacking America during WWII because America had implemented sanctions on Japan?
 
Last edited:

Norrad

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2004
Messages
809
Fact is, US troops were/are in Iraq (not Iran @Norrad) fighting ISIS and Soleimani was responsible for actively targeting and killing 600 personal, so in the US' eyes he was a legitimate target.

How they got into Iraq is irrelevant. Should the US leave Iraq, IMO yes they should.
Did he pull the trigger? Did Iranians pull the trigger? Or were they simply supplying Iraqi militants with the tools to fight a foreign force? Like I said this is a very slippery slope. Remember Al Qaeda got their start as a militant force fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan and being supplied with training and weapons by the US. Doesn't it all seem a little deja vu?
 

3Gee

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
2,452
Oh is that so, so I guess you agree that Japan well in that case I'm glad you agree Soleimani was a legitimate target.

So I'm sure you will agree then that Japan had every right in attacking America during WWII because America had implemented sanctions on Japan?
For the record. I'm not an Iranian supporter. However the US should take it on the chin when countries avenge US agression.

US political and military interference in that region has gone on for way to long.

Iran will avenge his death in the not to distant future using its proxies. This is in no way over.
 

SoldierMan

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2019
Messages
1,205
Did he pull the trigger? Did Iranians pull the trigger? Or were they simply supplying Iraqi militants with the tools to fight a foreign force? Like I said this is a very slippery slope. Remember Al Qaeda got their start as a militant force fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan and being supplied with training and weapons by the US. Doesn't it all seem a little deja vu?
Did Bin Laden pull the trigger? Was he a legitimate target?

Yeah it's all because of Bush's screw up of invading Iraq. Definitely wasn't justified.
Deja vu, yeah the US has a history of overthrowing legitimate governments and arming rebel groups. Nothing new here.
 

SoldierMan

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2019
Messages
1,205
For the record. I'm not an Iranian supporter. However the US should take it on the chin when countries avenge US agression.

US political and military interference in that region has gone on for way to long.

Iran will avenge his death in the not to distant future using its proxies. This is in no way over.
Then they should get ready for some harsh retribution. Make no mistake, Iran is in no position to attack the US, they fear a war with the US.

I don't fully support the US either. The once great nation has fallen pretty far. They do both good and bad, worthy of both praise and criticism.
 

3Gee

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
2,452
Then they should get ready for some harsh retribution. Make no mistake, Iran is in no position to attack the US, they fear a war with the US.

I don't fully support the US either. The once great nation has fallen pretty far. They do both good and bad, worthy of both praise and criticism.
Iran has no chance against the US , however Iran has the ability to upset the current balance in the Middle East if attacked

The Saudi's who've been begging Trump to bomb Iran were out in full force this time calling on both parties not to escalate any further

Iran might not have the most modern military tech or arms , they have however built up a formidable army using low tech means of effectively attacking the enemy.

Saudi refinery bombing , bombing of oil tankers.
 

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
41,828
Did he pull the trigger? Did Iranians pull the trigger? Or were they simply supplying Iraqi militants with the tools to fight a foreign force? Like I said this is a very slippery slope. Remember Al Qaeda got their start as a militant force fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan and being supplied with training and weapons by the US. Doesn't it all seem a little deja vu?
Worth noting there's no evidence presented for the claim that Soleimani killed 600 US troops.

I'll just go ahead and post this again:

 

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
41,828
Overall, 56 percent of Americans disapprove of Trump’s handling of the situation with Iran, compared with 43 percent of those who approve. As could be expected, there is a clear partisan split in the answers, with 89 percent of Republicans approving of the way Trump is handling Iran, while 90 percent of Democrats disapprove. That is why it is independents who tip the scales, with 57 percent of them saying they disapprove.

Even though Trump’s administration has said the killing was due to an “imminent threat,” 52 percent of Americans said they felt less safe after the drone strike. Only one in four Americans said the strike that killed Soleimani made them feel more safe. Independents once again track the opinion of the general public as a whole, with 51 percent saying the strike made them feel less safe and 28 percent saying they felt more safe as a result.
 

Gordon_R

Executive Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
8,758
So much pointless vitriol in this thread. It makes a refreshing contrast to read a coherent article, by someone who understands both sides of the story:
 
Top