quote:

Originally posted by tsmccull:
I prefer the idea someone suggested of converting their entire naval fleet into underwater reefs for fish. Sends the right message and eliminates continuing harassment of cargo ships transiting the Gulf.

We did that once already, in 1988. Along with wiping out a bunch of oil platforms.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...ation_Praying_Mantis

Many of us here lived through the embassy takeover and hostage crisis of 1979. Friends were involved which made it close to home. I was ashamed then of the weak response from a weak administration, and was convinced at the time that if we had a president with balls it never would have happened. America showed weakness to the world on April 28, 1975 in Saigon, and that set the tone for future attacks on American embassies. In my view when enemies climb the walls onto the sovereign soil of a U.S. embassy there should be bodies piled up like cordwood inside the walls.

We have owed the IRGC their comeuppance since 1979 and our failure to act has allowed them to grow into the menace to the world that they are today. Jim Mattis mentions in his book Call Sign Chaos his disappointment that we were unable to give the IRGC their lesson in humility in 1979; that would have been a game changer. I can't help but think how different the world would be if strong leaders had taken on Hitler in 1933, or if strong leaders had taken on the IRGC in 1979.

Although I don't necessarily agree with Carlson and Paul, I do understand their words of caution. We will not change the Mullahs.

Our best chance of avoiding war is to starve them and wreck their economy. Absent an internal revolution and regime change in Iran, eventually there will be a World War involving Iran. The harbinger is visible; the mullahs have told us their intentions. We have been moving inexorably in that direction for 40 years. The question I my mind is, will it happen in my lifetime, while we militarily still have the ability to crush them, or will they be allowed to grow such military capability that millions will die? I doubt that we will see it in our lifetime, but one never knows what might ignite the conflict. Militarily, I am putting a lot of stock in the capabilities of our Space assets.

Keep the pressure on Mr President, the world needs your strength.

quote:

Originally posted by Sig2340:
Isn't "plausible deniability" the reason the CIA runs the assassin drone program?

Plausible deniability is a management system that allows upper management to give orders without having to take responsibility for the consequences of those orders - good or bad. Drone strikes are extremely well documented.

Trump has everything to gain and nothing to lose by taking credit for the hit.

What people on both the left and the right fail to understand or at least acknowledge is that we are already at war with those people. They would destroy us without a moment’s hesitation if it were possible for them to do that. They can’t destroy us at a blow, though, so they do what they can, such as attacking us through terrorism here and hiring surrogates to kill our people—military and civilian—abroad.

It’s not a war like the ones that involved troops wading ashore on defended beaches, but it’s a war nonetheless, and we don’t win wars, or even keep our enemies from winning, by circling the wagons and hoping they get tired and go home before we are down to eating our shoe leather. Think how World War II would have turned out if we had reacted to Pearl Harbor and German’s declaration of war against us by waiting to fight them until after they had landed troops on our soil. You started it, but we will finish it—on our terms, on your territory.

The same was even true of the Cold War. Not too many people died on either side in that one (except during the hot portions in Korea and Vietnam), but it was our constant reactions and counterpressure to the Soviets’ aggressions and provocations that ultimately led to the Evil Empire’s implosion—not digging trenches along our own shorelines.

As for killing this guy, that’s what wars involve even if they aren’t the attacking defended beaches sort. Who would have objected in the slightest if the British had managed to kill Hermann Göring after his Luftwaffe had started bombing London?

As I recall Malcolm Reynolds, captain of the ship Serenity observing, “Someone ever tries to kill you, you try to kill them right back.” In this case the U.S. didn’t just try, but until the enemy’s will to keep trying to kill us has been destroyed by the means that we have available (no beaches, unfortunately), we must kill them right back for as long as it takes.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sigfreund,

Susan Rice says Obama administration 'didn't have the opportunity' to kill Soleimani

I believe her. The reason is quite simple- Collateral damage- You can't hit Soleimani with a drone strike when Obama is sucking the man's dick 24/7.

Bob on it, Barry! Show some enthusiasm!

OK, lets see if I got this straight..........

1. Donald turns the Iranian general responsible for killing thousands of Americans, and spreading terrorism across the globe; into a crispy critter.
2. The Democrats take sides with Iran.

That sound about right?

Trump eating a new dish, Vanilla auto flambé for desert.

quote:

Originally posted by Ironbutt:
OK, lets see if I got this straight..........

1. Donald turns the Iranian general responsible for killing thousands of Americans, and spreading terrorism across the globe; into a crispy critter.
2. The Democrats take sides with Iran.

That sound about right?

Yep. And Rice tries to hide it with a lot of words, but opening with "The Obama administration wasn’t presented with the opportunity to take out Gen. Qassem Soleimani..." tells me they would have done it if they could have and everything she says after that is sour grapes.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
... tells me they would have done it if they could have ….

Of course—that’s the claim anyway.
As usual, though, it’s a Democrat trying to eat her cake and keep it for their idiot followers too: “Yeah, we would have done it if we could have because we’re as tough as Trump, but we didn’t do it because we’re not bloodthirsty despots like he is.”

“Would have done it if they could have” my ass! So full of shit!
Didn’t Israel have him in the cross hairs and let the U.S. know they were gonna get him and the bozo administration warned him about it?

quote:

Originally posted by Sig2340:
Isn't "plausible deniability" the reason the CIA runs the assassin drone program?

They don’t. What gave you that idea?

I heard that he switched to Vaping....

quote:

Originally posted by ggile:
I heard that he switched to Vaping....

x 10

quote:

Originally posted by Ironbutt:
OK, lets see if I got this straight..........

1. Donald turns the Iranian general responsible for killing thousands of Americans, and spreading terrorism across the globe; into a crispy critter.
2. The Democrats take sides with Iran.

That sound about right?

The simple fact is that Iran has been at war with the US since the Embassy take over in 1979. They lack the capability to attack us directly so they have used every other means necessary.

We've tolerated their crap long enough.

The Democrats want to pretend this isn't true and wring their hands at the prospect of war. It's been here kids... for 40 years.

quote:

Originally posted by kramden:

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
The latest from Joe (satire):
Joe Biden: Commander Soleimani was a tough guy but not as tough as Corn Pop.

LOL. Good one. Biden makes me laugh with his phony macho man crap. A Rambo he ain't.

It's great to have a President that stands up to despots,

instead of one that bends over for them.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
but opening with "The Obama administration wasn’t presented with the opportunity to take out Gen. Qassem Soleimani..." tells me they would have done it if they could have and everything she says after that is sour grapes.

But she can't be saying that. If she's condemning Trump for taking the opportunity (she's "highly doubtful" that Trump did the right thing), then she's saying even if Obama had the opportunity, he wouldn't have taken it. There's no point to claim Obama never had an opportunity.

CNN is such a joke and so is anyone who watches it to hear what Rice thinks.

quote:

Originally posted by Rightwire:
The simple fact is that Iran has been at war with the US since the Embassy take over in 1979.

Thank You for stating the obvious but ignored. The last 40 years of Failed Policy hasn't worked, made Iran stronger and more emboldened. Time to try a different approach.

The Marine Barracks in Lebanon, Cobar Towers, William Francis Buckley- The list is long.