That’s after we invaded a whole country to get rid of him. And act of which Obama approved.
The only government officials upset about this global terrorist’s death are American Democrats and their cohorts in sedition the MSM.
Bibi, Saudi Arabia and all our allies say Hi.
At some point it has to become clear that the President ■■■■■■ up.
Right?
But lets jump in there and attack before it is clear as to whether this was a mistake or a benefit. I mean, after all, Trump. You don’t need any more than that.
Right?
That’s after we invaded a whole country to get rid of him. And act of which Obama approved.
We invaded Afghanistan because they were harboring Al Qaeda. Come on man.
There was a leftist lunatic on a MSM show who said “it was the right move by the wrong President”
No there wasn’t. You most likely heard someone on Fox say that is what liberals are saying
Yes. There has been.
But its more strategic. Irans goals was to get the US out of Iraq so they can fill the power gap and have more influence.
So they have been trying to provoke us to trigger this.
Now - Im not against the attack. No tears are shed for a guy who was attacking Americans. My concern is there didnt seem to be a plan. Everything that has happened since (Iraq voting to have us leave, Iran playing the victim card with its own citizens, Iran pulling out of the Nuke deal with EU) was obviously going to happen, yet we seemed to have no unified responses.
That is my concern.
DougBH:That’s after we invaded a whole country to get rid of him. And act of which Obama approved.
We invaded Afghanistan because they were harboring Al Qaeda. Come on man.
Who was head of Al Quaeda? The claim just made was that an attack on bin Laden was an attack on Al Quaeda. They are not different things.
JayJay: DougBH: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.
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.
If the only reason to kill him was retribution for the hundreds of Americans he killed, we would have weighed in other factors before doing it.
It’s more complex than you’re making it out to be, making your analogy hopelessly bad.
But lets jump in there and attack before it is clear as to whether this was a mistake or a benefit. I mean, after all, Trump. You don’t need any more than that.
Right?
Already obviously a mistake…
1- it caused Iraq to vote to eject our military presence.
2- It is causing Iraq to develop even closer relations with Iran.
3- It allows us no diplomatic off ramp if Iran retaliates. The only next stop is war.
4- none of our allies, even hardliners like Netanyahu support this.
Huge…mistake.
Who was head of Al Quaeda? The claim just made was that an attack on bin Laden was an attack on Al Quaeda. They are not different things.
Look if you are arguing if it was warranted to kill Soleimani you are arguing the wrong issue. It was strategically a really stupid move.
DougBH: JayJay: DougBH: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.
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.If the only reason to kill him was retribution for the hundreds of Americans he killed, we would have weighed in other factors before doing it.
It’s more complex than you’re making it out to be, making your analogy hopelessly bad.
General S was allegedly killed because our intelligence agencies, once beloved by the Democrats, warned that he was planning future attacks to kill Americans. That is not retribution.
Another straw man, in fact after 2003 everyone has been skeptical of our intelligence agencies being used to justify armed conflict…
General S was allegedly killed because our intelligence agencies, once beloved by the Democrats, warned that he was planning future attacks to kill Americans. That is not retribution.
And this stopped them…how?
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.
If not for double standards and all that.
DougBH:But lets jump in there and attack before it is clear as to whether this was a mistake or a benefit. I mean, after all, Trump. You don’t need any more than that.
Right?
Already obviously a mistake…
1- it caused Iraq to vote to eject our military presence.
2- It is causing Iraq to develop even closer relations with Iran.
3- It allows us no diplomatic off ramp if Iran retaliates. The only next stop is war.
4- none of our allies, even hardliners like Netanyahu support this.Huge…mistake.
Alternative…allow more Americans to be killed by Iran.
No, the US did not make a new enemy of Iran. It has always been such, in recent history.
It surprises me that American retaliation for the killing of Americans and the prevention of future planned killings is seen as a provocative action by some Americans.
If not for double standards and all that.
Notice that almost ALL our allies, including hardliners like Netanyahu, want no part of this. Because…it was supah dupah dumb.
JayJay: DougBH: JayJay: DougBH: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.
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.If the only reason to kill him was retribution for the hundreds of Americans he killed, we would have weighed in other factors before doing it.
It’s more complex than you’re making it out to be, making your analogy hopelessly bad.
General S was allegedly killed because our intelligence agencies, once beloved by the Democrats, warned that he was planning future attacks to kill Americans. That is not retribution.
Has killing him lessened the possibility of such attacks?
DougBH:General S was allegedly killed because our intelligence agencies, once beloved by the Democrats, warned that he was planning future attacks to kill Americans. That is not retribution.
And this stopped them…how?
Because of course the general was the only person with the details of the immanent attacks or able to carry them out. Im totally sure all plans have been since scrapped
Has killing him lessened the possibility of such attacks?
That remains to be seen.
When Obama killed Bin Laden the left gushed over him endlessly.
Didn’t matter what anyone overseas thought.
If not for double standards.