I assume you accept as truth the plane they admitted to shooting downLink us up.
That's not what you said. You said it was in response to the death of Soleimani, it wasn't.I assume you accept as truth the plane they admitted to shooting down
True, but Iran’s regime also killed a bunch of their own people in response to the death of a leader who wasn’t exactly a friend to the opposition. It could fizzle out.
I appreciate your disingenuous concern and lame passive aggressive attempt at an ad hominem.
I assume you accept as truth the plane they admitted to shooting down
They mobilized militarily in response to Soleimani’s death, and shooting down of the plane was an error they made as part of that mobilization.That's not what you said. You said it was in response to the death of Soleimani, it wasn't.
Wait... you're saying they lied?So much for Trump's excuse of imminent threat required him to assassinate soleimani:
Trump authorized Soleimani's killing 7 months ago, with conditions
The timing raises new questions about the Trump administration's stated justification for taking out the top Iranian general.www.nbcnews.com
Huh? They did accidentally shoot down an airliner. They weren't launching missiles at everything flying overhead. It was either a misidentification or an accidental 'button push' (whatever that term means in the context of launching a SAM).They mobilized militarily in response to Soleimani’s death, and shooting down of the plane was an error they made as part pf that mobilization. I suppose there is a slight chance that they could have accidentally shot down an airliner.
It's telling that your root analysis stops there and doesn't continue back another step.They mobilized militarily in response to Soleimani’s death, and shooting down of the plane was an error they made as part of that mobilization.
Right? I guess the buck stops one step outside Trump's office.It's telling that your root analysis stops there and doesn't continue back another step.
They mobilized militarily in response to Soleimani’s death, and shooting down of the plane was an error they made as part of that mobilization.
Right? I guess the buck stops one step outside Trump's office.
Either the destruction of that airliner was caused by an accidental firing/identification on the part of Iran, OR it was caused by Trump, you don't get to choose the convenient in-between stuff.
I was agreeing with you.Excuse me, but the missiles wouldn't have been deployed if not for Trump's threats. Yeh, sure, somebody screwed up but they wouldn't have had the opportunity if not for that.
Of course you mean the step that resulted in the deaths and injuries of Americans.It's telling that your root analysis stops there and doesn't continue back another step.
If we want to truly get to root cause, there’s a few more steps that predate Trump.Huh? They did accidentally shoot down an airliner. They weren't launching missiles at everything flying overhead. It was either a misidentification or an accidental 'button push' (whatever that term means in the context of launching a SAM).
If you're going to blame the shoot down on the mobilization, go ahead and take it one step further back and blame the cause of the mobilization, Trump's assassination of Soleimani.
Trump's was the overt action. He authorized the killing of an Iranian general and 9 innocents. For all intents and purposes that is the root cause of each event over the next 48-72 hours.If we want to truly get to root cause, there’s a few more steps that predate Trump.
Could blame Jesus, if it weren't for him being so divisive we wouldn't even be having conversations about the ME.Jeez guys. You can go back much further in time here. That blame game only going a couple iterations back is weak sauce. Hell, we're not even to "but Obama" yet much less Iran Contra or the hostage crisis...
Could blame Jesus, if it weren't for him being so divisive we wouldn't even be having conversations about the ME.
Trump’s overt act was to strike a legitimate military target. The only thing in question for that decision was the risk assessment of it.Trump's was the overt action. He authorized the killing of an Iranian general and 9 innocents. For all intents and purposes that is the root cause of each event over the next 48-72 hours.
Mind you I'm not personally blaming Trump for the airliner going down (although some might), I'm just stating that it was an accident, not caused by Iranians getting 'revenge' or whatever. I was refuting your point that Iran killed its own people 'in response to' the killing.
The fuck it was, we're not at war with Iran. It was an assassination, and it killed 9 innocents as well. It was very probably a war crime, or at least we'd charge Iran with war crimes if they assassinated one of ours, like say Gen Funk II (US Army Training and Doctrine command).Trump’s overt act was to strike a legitimate military target. The only thing in question for that decision was the risk assessment of it.
Agreed, the abdication of responsibility from Congress should be dealt with, swiftly. Like within this administration swiftly.Independent of Trump, we should be questioning why any President should have the authority to exercise the use of such force without any oversight.
Trump’s overt act was to strike a legitimate military target. The only thing in question for that decision was the risk assessment of it.
Independent of Trump, we should be questioning why any President should have the authority to exercise the use of such force without any oversight.
They mobilized militarily in response to Soleimani’s death, and shooting down of the plane was an error they made as part of that mobilization.
We live in an age of asymmetrical warfare. We weren’t at war with Somalia, Serbia, Iraq, Libya or Syria, yet we’ve decisively engaged each. We didn’t assasinate anyone. We decisively took out the mastermind of Iran’s proxy wars across the region, and someone directly responsible for American combatant deaths. If we took him out at a restaurant on Iranian soil, different story. But if Gen Funk II was responsible for the deaths of Shia militia, and someone took him out in Bagdad, that would be a combat death, not an assasination.The fuck it was, we're not at war with Iran. It was an assassination, and it killed 9 innocents as well. It was very probably a war crime, or at least we'd charge Iran with war crimes if they assassinated one of ours, like say Gen Funk II (US Army Training and Doctrine command).
Agreed, the abdication of responsibility from Congress should be dealt with, swiftly. Like within this administration swiftly.
Yes really. We’ve been thugs the moment our gaze turned westward..
Really? Fucking really? I thought our mission in Iraq was to defeat ISIS in aid of our strategic partner & to train their troops. Waging war on Iran isn't something they signed up for, obviously. Fuck them. We'll do anything we want in their country, including killing their people. If they throw us out, we'll fuck with their money. We be thugs.