Trying to be objective

Recently there has been ample criticism of the president for a pseudo military strike against a purported terrorist. The press and the opposition party have aggressively challenged the actions of the president for a plethora of reasons.

Just one question though. Have we seen any reports of criticism of any Iranian for provoking a military strike by the United States in either Iran or the global media. Has anyone in Iran challenged the behavior of their leadership? Has anyone complained that the Ayatollah may be provoking a response from the United States and causing a war?

WE have seen reports of mass protests in Iran, even reports of many deaths.

Given the response of both governments with respect to protests one question looms large.

would you rather live in Iran or America under Trump?

That’s not the question.

The question is…was it smart to assassinate Iran’s top military leader?

The answer is a pretty obvious…no.


Trump should campaign with that. “Trump 2020, beats living in Iran.”



You are honestly unaware of Iran being criticized for almost 5 decades?

A month ago there were large protests in Iran against their government.

This past weekend they were marching by the hundreds of thousands against the US.


The framing of the OP does not lead me to believe objectivity is the desired result here.

“Would you rather live in Iran or America under Trump*” :roll_eyes:

*3rd Impeached President of the United States

1 Like

Just a short time ago, Iran had one of the largest protests against their own government we had seen in some time.

Now the Iranian people are solidly behind their government.

This is better for us…how, again, exactly?

1 Like

Run it by michael moore and rose mcgowan. Test market it.

Get back to us.

perhaps ten question is was it smart to attack the embassy. But who would dare ask that?


When it was Obama killing Osama, killing Americans mattered.
It was considered justification enough.
No one cared about how some people in the ME might have felt about it.


Saying this in two different threads doesn’t make it any more true.

We didn’t kill Bin Laden solely because he killed Americans.

You can ask the question, but it is irrelevant to the question Covfefe asked.

In fact…it’s a deflection.

Beat me to it

1 Like

Osama Bin Laden was stateless.

He was not representing anyone but himself.

1 Like

At some point it has to become clear that the President â– â– â– â– â– â–  up.



Never. But don’t worry, it’s not a cult.


The only government officials upset about this global terrorist’s death are American Democrats and their cohorts in sedition the MSM. There was a leftist lunatic on a MSM show who said “it was the right move by the wrong President” which obviously is TDS on display as Democrats and leftist lunatics are proud of their mental illness! :roll_eyes:

Iran has been at war with the USA over 40 years ever since that idiot President Carter allowed the Iran revolution to succeed by removing aid to the Shah and then add the other idiot President Obama giving them $$Billions$$ which gave them more opportunity for terror attacks in the ME and Europe and provoking the USA whenever they can so it can’t be said enough that the leftist liberal socialist Democrats are more dangerous to the safety of the nation then any foreign enemy.

1 Like

Saying that in two different threads doesn’t make it true.
If he had not killed hundreds of Americans, we would not have killed him.
Oh, and that goes for both of them.


Osama Bin Laden was the operative leader of a nationless band of Islamic terrorists. Soleimani was the main military leader of a sovereign nation. Why is this complicated?