Why Soleimani Was Killed...

[seanD]

Alarmists Were Wrong about the Soleimani Strike

I suppose the love affair between the leftists and this "beloved general" has gotten lost in all the impeachment hoopla?

I found this line interesting and ironic: "It is not interested in a direct war with the U.S., nor are any of its proxies or allies in the region." Wasn't the claim (before we found out it was an apparent lie or at least filled with inconsistent info) that he would use terrorist proxies to attack US forces?

[Cow Poke]

I found this line interesting and ironic: "It is not interested in a direct war with the U.S., nor are any of its proxies or allies in the region." Wasn't the claim (before we found out it was an apparent lie or at least filled with inconsistent info) that he would use terrorist proxies to attack US forces?

That, too, and word today is that Iran is not ruling out coming back to the negotiating table. Of course, Iran wants it to be conditional on dropping sanctions, so...

[demi-conservative]

Yes, as I've pointed out numerous times, "lying" often seems to be the language of diplomacy.

Not just diplomacy, they'll lie to you to start wars, and lie to stop wars, or for other 'necessary' purposes.

[seanD]

That, too, and word today is that Iran is not ruling out coming back to the negotiating table. Of course, Iran wants it to be conditional on dropping sanctions, so...

So the argument is that since their great mastermind got killed, the proxies are supposed to magically stand down even though they're more ticked off than they were before about us occupying the region, and that they also know they now have the Iraqi parliament on their side? Makes total sense

[demi-conservative]

They're demanding US withdrawal as we speak. Instead Trump threatened them with sanctions. I don't think he did it as an out, I think he did it because he was pressured by the senators like that article reported. That just makes more sense to me. And there's no more reason Trump will order a pullout in Iraq than in Afghanistan. He doesn't have the backbone to go up against the MIC and hawks in Washington that prostitute for them (even less now that they have that impeachment noose around his neck). And now, because tensions are heightened, US troops are even more vulnerable than before. But... no war lol.

The hole in this theory is why would they allow Trump to be Lucy with the football again and deescalate?

So the argument is that since their great mastermind got killed, the proxies are supposed to magically stand down even though they're more ticked off than they were before about us occupying the region, and that they also know they now have the Iraqi parliament on their side? Makes total sense

One Weird Trick to get Iran and Iraq united.

[seanD]

The hole in this theory is why would they allow Trump to be Lucy with the football again and deescalate?

Yeah, that I can't figure out. They were willing to attack Iran over a drone last year, but not attack Iran for firing on our bases and wounding US troops. That's what threw me. Like I said, we'll have to see what comes of this impeachment and what happens with Iran in between. If Trump is exonerated and there's still no incident with Iran, then the report was BS.

[Cow Poke]

Not just diplomacy, they'll lie to you to start wars, and lie to stop wars, or for other 'necessary' purposes.

When you pick up a snake and get bit there's really nothing to be surprised at.

[seanD]

Alarmists Were Wrong about the Soleimani Strike

I suppose the love affair between the leftists and this "beloved general" has gotten lost in all the impeachment hoopla?

Doesn't sound much like a deescalation. Or maybe it's Trump playing 4-d chess

AP