I am concerned about Democratic pundits soft-peddling Trump’s murder of Qasem Soleimani and others. His claim that the general was vamping up plans to attack Americans is, like everything else out of his mouth, almost certainly a lie.

His real reason is blatantly obvious. As more evidence of his many crimes poured in, he became more worried about his re-election possibilities. Starting another war was just the thing to boost his ratings. The fact that this will probably cost many innocent lives and further destabilize the entire Mideast doesn’t concern him. He’ll gloat about it and his base will cheer; that’s to be expected.

But Democratic spokespeople should start calling it like it is. He’s a grave danger to this country and the rest of the world. This fact should be emphasized at every opportunity while freedom of speech exists.

 

(14) comments

retired

Terry Painter, this is a ridiculous statement. Are you worried that the POTUS will be re-elected? I think you are. Why else would you be making comments like you did? He will be re-elected and I believe Pelosi is making it a landslide. Soleimani needed to go. He killed so many Americans. How can you justify that he should not have been taken out. Maybe you should ask a soldier who is missing a limb.

DLJohnson

Based on your point of view I need to ask, was Qasem Soleimani a close personal friend of yours? Your distress over his death seems to be a personal affront to the Americans whose deaths were on his hands.

Ar223

Short of the impeachment, you describe things the last 2 presidents did while in office. So your point is what realy?

Jolly Roger

These are all nice talking points, but you History-challenged armchair warriors apparently don’t know that this is America’s first open assassination, targeting an official of a sovereign state since we assasinated Japanese General Yamamoto during WWII.

But that was a war declared by Congress. The real danger here is establishing the President's sole right to take us to war. As Tucker Carlson says - there are too many bad guys out there for us to kill all of them.

I’m not surprised at Sergeant DLJ POG’s opinion. POG’s always talk tough and let others do the fighting. But do the rest of you REALLY want the next Democratic President to take us to war on a whim based on Trump’s precedent?

DLJohnson

JR: Do you think it was a crime to take out the architect of death to many Americans?

Jolly Roger

★ Cool! A straightforward question! No insults! Here’s my straightforward answer. No insults.

I don’t wish to be callous, but I’m not so concerned about whether this is a “crime.” I’m more concerned whether it’s smart foreign policy. Both Obama and Bush “W” passed up opportunities to waste this murderer of Americans. Like Tucker Carson says, “There are too many bad guys out there for us to kill them all.”

So let me copy E pluribus’ question that you’ve left unanswered: “which of the three next moves is best: 1) Invade and occupy. 2) Nuke them off the face of the earth. 3) Just accept they’ll become a nuclear power like North Korea.” ★

E pluribus

The Iranians are now hard at work building their own nuclear bomb. And why not? We walked away from an agreement we crafted with our allies to stop them for at least 10 years. If they didn’t already think these nukes were essential to their survival, they sure think so now. So instead of this foolish puffery, maybe you military strategists can suggest which of the three next moves is best: 1) Invade and occupy. 2) Nuke them off the face of the earth. 3) Just accept they’ll become a nuclear power like Trump has with North Korea.

Really, instead of this silly schoolyard bravado, we need some realistic strategic thinking.

OnTheFence2020

Hi, Retired. I think you and Mr. Painter are BOTH wrong that this impetuous assassination will help Mr. Trump get elected. He may get re-elected, but it won’t be because of this. By a margin of 2 to 1, the American People think his recklessness has made us LESS safe. Maybe you should ask your grandkids if they’re ready to go fight, and die and nationbuild in yet another Mid East War. You are acting as though exacting revenge on someone will have no consequences just because he deserved it. And maybe there will be no consequences for YOU. Thanks, Pops.

DLJohnson

JR: You only give three options??? None of them is correct at this time. Monitor and be prepared to respond to their conduct is the best position to take. Let them worry about what your response might be. And don't be stupid and announce to the House or CNN because of their direct pipeline to Iran. It is quite possible that Israel may come up with their own option and take care of the problem.

Jolly Roger

★ You’re describing a t*t-for-tat game of “whack-a-mole.” But isn’t the ultimate goal to prevent Iran from getting nukes? This and Trump's sanctions have just made them double-down. Of course we need to monitor them, but we already know they have left the agreement we had with them. And at this rate they’ll have the Bomb well before the 10 year minimum required by the deal Trump abandoned (the one we and our allies had negotiated). And why would they trust us now to honor a new agreement?

So, again, what other options do you see? The ones E Pluribus listed are the same options the Israelis have, but they don’t have anywhere near the military capability we have. They can’t prevent the Iranians from getting nukes. They can’t fight our battle, even if they want to.

Looks to me like Trump has put us in a box. I agree any options shouldn’t be telegraphed ahead, but I doubt if the Iranians get the Press & Dakotan and are watching your and my conversations and taking any clues from us. So please, tell me how do we get out of Trumps box? ★

DLJohnson

JR: "listed are the same options the Israelis have, but they don’t have anywhere near the military capability we have". True, but they do not have the inept Democrat party to deal with. If you want something screwed up, just add a Democrat. You claim we had an agreement with Iran. Obama just gave them a wind fall with help of Dumb A** John Kerry.

E pluribus

DLJohnson, I appreciate the new tenor of this discussion of an issue which may ultimately spiral into a life-or-death matter for us and our young warriors.

This is more than a “bad deal” made by Obama and Kerry, giving Iran “a windfall.” As a matter of history, it was an international agreement between Iran and the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council - China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States, plus Germany together with the entire European Union.

Whether it was a bad deal or not or whether the Democrats are “inept” is beside the point now, since we have unilaterally withdrawn from it. The wisdom or stupidity of this move is academic. What happens next is NOT.

The Critical question is “what now?” As a military man you might agree that leadership under fire is more than blaming your predecessors. Under the agreement, Iran had verifiably halted their Nuclear Development. Now they’re racing ahead to get their own Bomb. What options other than the ones I’ve posited do we have? This question is not academic.

DLJohnson

E pluribus: You say," Under the agreement, Iran had verifiably halted their Nuclear Development". How true is that statement when they so quickly ramp up their nuclear development? What you call verification seems to be flawed. While you were sucked in by their fantasy they continued to work behind the scenes continuing nuclear development. Take off you blinders.

E pluribus

DLJohnson: In compliance with the agreement, Iran gave access to inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN's nuclear watchdog agency, to its nuclear facilities, Before Trump defied his military advisors and unilaterally withdrew from the agreement, IAEA repeatedly found Iran to be complying with the terms of the pact.

But regardless of your dismissal of these facts, the wisdom or stupidity of Trump's move is now purely academic. What happens next is NOT. You and I seem to be in agreement that Iran is now working at top speed to get its Bomb.

So again, can you suggest which of the three next moves is best: 1) Invade and occupy. 2) Nuke them off the face of the earth. 3) Just accept they’ll become a nuclear power like Trump has with North Korea.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.