Rooting for the Underdog.

One “out there” theory that I keep seeing is that the intel came from a rival. This actually makes some sense and truth may have been ignored in favor of an opportunity at taking a shot at Iran to “teach them a lesson.” This would explain why the intel won’t be shared.

koobookie wrote:

ramage wrote: That's the American way. Root for the Underdog!
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) proclaimed, “there was no raw evidence” of an “imminent threat” to warrant the elimination of Iran’s top terror chief, declaring that Trump “recklessly assassinated” Qasem Soleimani.
Just one of many democrat responses to the elimination of Soleimani . God forbid, oops I shouldn't mention Him, that a democrat would call Soleimani a terrorist.

Can you provide that evidence? From what I've read, he was not an imminent threat, and even Republicans are doubting the briefing that Trump provided to Congress. Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah called it “insulting” and “probably the worst briefing I’ve seen, at least on a military issue, in the nine years I’ve served in the United States Senate.”

Mike Lee walked that back. Damage control...

www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/09/ex...a-benghazi-briefing/

Again, what is your definition of imminent threat? The President has explained the action to my satisfaction, evidently not yours. So please tell us why you do not feel that this action should not have been undertaken?

I think Trump did what he should have done based on what he was told. I’m not sure I trust the intel community any more enough to give him the truth though. See Brennan....

ramage wrote: Again, what is your definition of imminent threat? The President has explained the action to my satisfaction, evidently not yours. So please tell us why you do not feel that this action should not have been undertaken?

Tell me what the imminent thread was. I have not seen anything credible that explains the haste.

" I have not seen anything credible that explains the haste."

As to the imminent threat I would refer you to the whitehouse.gov. President Trump does not need my interpretation of his remarks.

In your opinion nothing you have seen is credible. Well open your eyes, start with Nawres Hamid, visit Walter Reed Hospital, perhaps a military cemetery, lots of Soleimani's work can be found there.

"Haste" where ever did you get the idea that this action was done in haste?

Finally, not to be snarky, yet I would like to know the imminent threat of and the" haste" in the following: the drone strike killing of Abdulraman Al-Awaki, a 16 y.o.. Denver native and U.S. citizen. A strike authorized by Obama..
**** Trump Derangement Syndrome is in need of medication.

Obama should be in prison for that.

koobookie wrote:

ramage wrote: Again, what is your definition of imminent threat? The President has explained the action to my satisfaction, evidently not yours. So please tell us why you do not feel that this action should not have been undertaken?

Tell me what the imminent thread was. I have not seen anything credible that explains the haste.

When Obama bypassed Congress and decided to take out the #1 leader of Libya, was that an imminent threat? Did you complain about that?

The fact is, Soleimani was a much bigger threat than Bin Laden when we killed him. The Obama strategy to deal with Iran's continuous threats of destruction and death was to pay them off with a mountain of cash which was obviously not used to make the lives of Iranians better.

The entire world is better off with that scumbag vaporized and now Iran knows this president isn't going to bend over or bow like our last worthless president did.

Trump's Approval Rating Among Terrorists Hits All-Time Low
Babylonbee.com 1/10/2020

—President Trump’s approval rating among terrorists hit an all-time low today according to a CNN poll. This comes just days after he killed several of them.


Of those surveyed, only six percent of terrorists–mostly white nationalists–said they approve of Trump's performance. Of the 94 percent who disapproved, just half said they would like to see the president dead. The others claimed they would be perfectly happy with a pallet full of cash.

koobookie wrote:

ramage wrote: Again, what is your definition of imminent threat? The President has explained the action to my satisfaction, evidently not yours. So please tell us why you do not feel that this action should not have been undertaken?

Tell me what the imminent thread was. I have not seen anything credible that explains the haste.

LOL. You seem quite hung up on that. Who cares? Osama Bin Laden wasn't an imminent threat, he was hiding out and mostly retired but Obama still risked dozens of troops taking him out in a raid without the permission of Pakistan. The man has been killing innocents for decades, and they finally had good intel on him and could hit his team in a way where we didn't have to invade Iran, so they went for it. Or would you prefer we wait a few more years, let him kill that many more innocents, and then take him out?