View Full Version : Trump said Iran will pay...no bluff
hollohas
01-02-2020, 20:38
He said they'd pay. He wasn't bluffing.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-u-s-kills-two-top-iranian-military-leaders-bigger-than-bin-laden-al-baghdadi-reports-say
BREAKING: U.S. Kills Two Top Iranian Military Leaders, Bigger Than Bin Laden, Al-Baghdadi, Reports Say
U.S. military forces have reportedly killed two top Iranian military commanders involved in terrorism on Thursday night in Iraq in an airstrike in what analysts said was a significantly bigger deal than the killing of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
Iranian Major-General Qassem Soleimani, head of the Quds Force, and Iraqi militia commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis were the two Iranian military leaders who were killed.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200103/a777ad2d7e3eaeaa6ac3a4ba4f8d1b16.jpg
Yeah. Come to Iraq and stir up shit by attacking our embassy? BOOM!!!
Shadowy Iranian general behind elite Quds force among 7 killed in Baghdad, officials say (https://www.foxnews.com/world/rockets-baghdad-airport-injuries-reported)Donald Trump on Twitter:
79798
spqrzilla
01-02-2020, 21:06
Soleimani is a POS who should have been killed decades ago.
Time for deck of cards with supreme pizza and supreme leader's face on it.
Recycle those old Iraq cards with iranian supreme leader and associates face. While at it,let's put former iranian president Ahmadinejad and supreme pizza with lots of pork toppings on as JOKER cards.
Just like the good old days.
[LOL]https://assets.rbl.ms/18987810/origin.jpg
Full Pentagon statement on US strike that killed Soleimani
The Department of Defense sent the following statement to DailyMail.com:
'At the direction of the President, the U.S. military has taken decisive defensive action to protect U.S. personnel abroad by killing Qasem Soleimani, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force, a U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization.
'General Soleimani was actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region. General Soleimani and his Quds Force were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American and coalition service members and the wounding of thousands more. He had orchestrated attacks on coalition bases in Iraq over the last several months - including the attack on December 27th - culminating in the death and wounding of additional American and Iraqi personnel. General Soleimani also approved the attacks on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad that took place this week.
'This strike was aimed at deterring future Iranian attack plans. The United States will continue to take all necessary action to protect our people and our interests wherever they are around the world.'
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1cb720a3e5a4c1ce0a2ab042d2aa0dcab4733ab3fb5eb38fbd c85caa8552ae2f.jpg?w=600&h=464
Not sure if this is real, but I like it either way.
hollohas
01-02-2020, 23:09
And then there's thishttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200103/673629d0f6ceb862738019802f4f0571.jpg
Bailey Guns
01-02-2020, 23:39
Lesson #1: There's a cost if you wanna play with the big boys.
Trump just did what George Bush didn't have the balls to do. A major factor of U.S. casualties in Iraq was due to Iranian IED attacks coordinated by Soleimani. Bush should have wiped out the ayatollahs when we had the men and equipment there. Instead he let the killing of U.S. soldiers continue and the war languish only for the bastard traitor Obama to pull the troops out and give the Iranians the $billions needed to fully occupy and control Iraq. That was Obama's Russian collusion.
In April 2019, the State Department announced Iran was responsible for killing 608 U.S. troops during the Iraq War. Soleimani was the head of the Iranian and Iranian-backed forces carrying out those operations killing American troops. According to the State Department, 17 percent of all deaths of U.S. personnel in Iraq from 2003 to 2011 were orchestrated by Soleimani.
War with Iran is not what this country, or Trump, wants. But Trump is in a quandary and sometimes leaders have to act in spite of the difficulties.
hollohas
01-03-2020, 07:08
This is a pretty good piece on this event.
https://freebeacon.com/columns/trump-calls-the-ayatollahs-bluff/
The successful operation against Qassem Soleimani, head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard, is a stunning blow to international terrorism and a reassertion of American might. It will also test President Trump's Iran strategy. It is now Trump, not Ayatollah Khamenei, who has ascended a rung on the ladder of escalation by killing the military architect of Iran's Shiite empire. For years, Iran has set the rules. It was Iran that picked the time and place of confrontation. No more.
Reciprocity has been the key to understanding Donald Trump. Whether you are a media figure or a mullah, a prime minister or a pope, he will be good to you if you are good to him. Say something mean, though, or work against his interests, and he will respond in force. It won't be pretty. It won't be polite. There will be fallout. But you may think twice before crossing him again.
That has been the case with Iran. President Trump has conditioned his policies on Iranian behavior. When Iran spread its malign influence, Trump acted to check it. When Iran struck, Trump hit back: never disproportionately, never definitively. He left open the possibility of negotiations. He doesn't want to have the Greater Middle East?whether Libya, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, or Afghanistan?dominate his presidency the way it dominated those of Barack Obama and George W. Bush. America no longer needs Middle Eastern oil. Best keep the region on the back burner. Watch it so it doesn't boil over. Do not overcommit resources to this underdeveloped, war-torn, sectarian land.
The result was reciprocal antagonism. In 2018, Trump withdrew the United States from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action negotiated by his predecessor. He began jacking up sanctions. The Iranian economy turned to shambles. This "maximum pressure" campaign of economic warfare deprived the Iranian war machine of revenue and drove a wedge between the Iranian public and the Iranian government. Trump offered the opportunity to negotiate a new agreement. Iran refused.
And began to lash out.
Last June, Iran's fingerprints were all over two oil tankers that exploded in the Persian Gulf. Trump tightened the screws. Iran downed a U.S. drone. Trump called off a military strike at the last minute and responded indirectly, with more sanctions, cyber attacks, and additional troop deployments to the region. Last September a drone fleet launched by Iranian proxies in Yemen devastated the Aramco oil facility in Abqaiq, Saudi Arabia. Trump responded as he had to previous incidents: nonviolently.
(Continues...)
FLASHBACK
https://www.hudson.org/research/11436-obama-strikes-a-deal-with-qassem-suleimani?fbclid=IwAR0AANOk3ul4AbA74AJFj_UNpxVwfN-YPDHZLlbI7ZSeYutgR5_QU_ahTIo
Obama Strikes a Deal--With Qassem Suleimani
Lee Smith
July 14, 2015
Weekly Standard Online
According to the terms of the Iran deal announced in Vienna on Tuesday, U.N. Security Council sanctions regarding nuclear-related issues will be lifted on a number of entities and individuals?from Iranian banks to Lebanese assassins, like Anis Nacacche. The name that most sticks out is IRGC-Quds Force commander Qassem Suleimani. Administration officials counsel calm, and explain that Suleimani is still on the U.S. terror list and will remain on the terror list. But that?s irrelevant. The reality is that Suleimani is the key to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
...
The administration argues that Tehran will spend most of the money from sanctions relief on rescuing the economy, or fixing street lamps and potholes, and not so much on terrorism and other foreign adventures. But there can be no similar argument about buying and selling and smuggling arms since ending the embargo can only help the hardliners. Combining the two?tens of billions of dollars in immediate sanctions relief and an end to the embargo?is like loading a gun and handing it over to Qassem Suleimani. And that?s precisely what Obama intended: The way he sees it, he?s arming an American ally.
FLASHBACK
The last time Iran poked at a President with a pair, it did not work out well for them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Praying_Mantis
The Democrats still can't get on-board with the country and are whining about how this was handled. I guess they just can't stand not being able to control the entire government.
Aloha_Shooter
01-03-2020, 11:53
LOL. Iran calling it an act of war when they've been waging active war against us in the region for over a decade. It's about time they got their noses rubbed in it.
Add Rand Paul to the jackwagons complaining about how this was handled. Suleimani was a known terrorist, and demanding that the President should have obtained a declaration of war from Congress is utter stupidity.
Do they really want us to engage in a full-scale war with the nation of Iran to remove individual terrorists that are targeting and killing Americans outside of Iran?
The time-sensitive action was taken to stop an "imminent attack". Would they prefer that Americans die and then Congress can give approval for action? That is insanity.
SouthPaw
01-03-2020, 13:48
https://i.postimg.cc/Lsdwk4tw/A8-ECD1-D6-EFC4-4-D8-A-9-AA9-B1-ECDDDE41-F5.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
https://i.postimg.cc/Cxn9fnqb/ECD7-C5-AA-6-B3-B-40-DA-94-DB-7-A268-A04-B97-F.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
Add Rand Paul to the jackwagons complaining about how this was handled. Suleimani was a known terrorist, and demanding that the President should have obtained a declaration of war from Congress is utter stupidity.
Do they really want us to engage in a full-scale war with the nation of Iran to remove individual terrorists that are targeting and killing Americans outside of Iran?
The time-sensitive action was taken to stop an "imminent attack". Would they prefer that Americans die and then Congress can give approval for action? That is insanity.
Rand Paul is a libertarian and a strict constructionist. Being upset that the president didn't seek a formal Declaration of War is pretty much completely within his wheelhouse.
Bailey Guns
01-03-2020, 15:31
Maybe... But are we really at war now with Iran? Does the president need to declare war, and get congressional approval, every time he uses the military?
In this day and age, none of that stuff applies, and almost no one cares at all. For better or worse, it's a complete non-issue.
I don't buy the 'strict constructionist' argument for Rand Paul. Did this country get a declaration of war to go after the Barbary Pirates?
spqrzilla
01-03-2020, 16:06
Bad example, "pirates" are not states, one cannot declare war against non state actors. Historically, pirates were always outside of law subject to summary execution. The original 'illegal combatants '.
That said, the boundaries between Congressional war powers and executive powers has been a debate since the Constitution was drafted.
Bad example, "pirates" are not states, one cannot declare war against non state actors. Historically, pirates were always outside of law subject to summary execution. The original 'illegal combatants '.
That said, the boundaries between Congressional war powers and executive powers has been a debate since the Constitution was drafted.
The "pirates" were acting on behalf of the leaders of Morocco, Algiers, Tunis, and Tripoli. I don't think it's a bad example at all.
A coordinated attack on our embassy is no different than an attack on US soil.
April 8, 2019:
http://youtu.be/KApTReUI64I
"The IRGC is a terrorist organization." In regard to Qassem Soleimani - "He's a terrorist."
Air strikes targeting Iraqi militia kill six: army source (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/air-strikes-targeting-iraqi-militia-kill-six-army-source/ar-BBYAUQm)
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Air strikes targeting Iraq's Popular Mobilization Forces umbrella grouping of Iran-backed Shi'ite militias near camp Taji north of Baghdad have killed six people and critically wounded three, an Iraqi army source said late on Friday.
Two of the three vehicles making up a militia convoy were found burned, the source said, as well as six burned corpses. The strikes took place at 1:12 am local time, he said.
It appears that President Trump was well within his powers as defined by the War Powers Act of 1973:
It provides that the U.S. President can send the Armed Forces into action abroad only by declaration of war by Congress, "statutory authorization," or in case of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."
Bold added by me for emphasis. An Embassy is sovereign US territory, ergo, after the attack, no authorization necessary.
https://i.postimg.cc/Lsdwk4tw/A8-ECD1-D6-EFC4-4-D8-A-9-AA9-B1-ECDDDE41-F5.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
https://i.postimg.cc/Cxn9fnqb/ECD7-C5-AA-6-B3-B-40-DA-94-DB-7-A268-A04-B97-F.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
^as funny as Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf "Bagdad Bob"
BPTactical
01-03-2020, 18:58
^as funny as Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf "Bagdad Bob"
Saw that GIF earlier, I laffed.
Aloha_Shooter
01-03-2020, 19:16
Rand Paul is a jack wagon with an early 19th century view of national defense. The President has always had the power to take emergency action; the bombing in question and the limited troop movements to reinforce US territory (embassies) fall within that purview. As a matter of protocol, it would have been good for the President to notify senior members of Congress of that actions he was taking but he is not required to -- and I don't recall any of the Democrats or liberal media getting all bent out of shape when President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton decided to abandon Americans at the US consular compound in Benghazi (not taking any action against a hostile attack is taking action).
mindfold
01-03-2020, 22:47
I see no difference than our forces taking care of Bin Laden and this jackwagon.
Case closed.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If anyone actually read what Rand said they would see that it was words of caution and not a condemnation really. His whole point is if we are to go to war with Iran, Congress should/must declare war.
buffalobo
01-04-2020, 01:35
Rand Paul is a libertarian and a strict constructionist. Being upset that the president didn't seek a formal Declaration of War is pretty much completely within his wheelhouse.As a life long Libertarian I say Rand Paul and most Libertarians need to get their heads out of their azzez.
Libertarianism assumes everyone will behave as Libertarians. That is not the case and they don't have a real world answer for it.
Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk
hollohas
01-04-2020, 09:21
Hahttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200104/fe7ea7aab05f8986f422da2812fbffff.jpg
Fascinating article from 2013 on Soleimani.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/09/30/the-shadow-commander
Seems like he was a capable guy who had cut his teeth in a horrible war, and who was a rather worthy adversary.
LOL. I first thought this was a made up story.
There can't be anyone who is dumber than this sh1t on 1st week of 2020.
After Soleimani death, Colin Kaepernick decries US 'terrorist attacks against Black and Brown people'
By Sam Dorman | Fox News
https://www.foxnews.com/sports/soleimani-colin-kaepernick-us-terrorist-attacks-black-brown-people.amp
Bailey Guns
01-04-2020, 20:21
I don't know... There are a lot of idiots out there:
In an appearance on MSNBC Thursday, Daily Beast columnist Jonathan Alter said that while it may have been the "right decision to take [Soleimani] out," "you have, in that case, right decision-wrong commander-in-chief."
Because, obviously, if a democrat president ordered the strike it would be different.
Circuits
01-04-2020, 20:56
You can't really make anything foolproof, because fools are so ingenious.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/01/04/considering-everything-watch-this-again-a-president-who-believes-in-his-message/
Considering Everything, Watch This Again "A President Who Believes in His Message"...
Posted on January 4, 2020 by sundance
This speech was originally delivered in late November 2012 after the presidential election. Setting aside nuances in the Romney aspect watch this video again... in hindsight... and contrast specifically against current events.
Stay with it, watch it all the way through. Pay attention to the specific subject matter outlined, the details as encapsulated, and contemplate what Bill Whittle says in this video against VERY CURRENT events: "a president who believes in his message"...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=831&v=Wgxlp2UJI5I&feature=emb_logo
His remains were transported through Tehran in a Chevy truck [ROFL1]
https://static.timesofisrael.com/www/uploads/2020/01/000_1NF7N1.jpg
You?d prefer a Ford or Dodge maybe?
mindfold
01-06-2020, 10:17
You?d prefer a Ford or Dodge maybe?
A bit ironic. Taken out by an American made product to then to be hauled around in an American truck. MADE IN AMERICAN PROUD!!!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A bit ironic. Taken out by an American made product to then to be hauled around in an American truck.
Like a rock.
...or maybe... Like Iraq.
Probably a special exchange through Obama's Cash for Clunkers program, without ever having to junk the clunkers.
The Russians offered to provide an old Soviet made hearse but they couldn't get it started.
hollohas
01-06-2020, 22:08
Like a rock.
...or maybe... Like Iraq.Haha.
https://youtu.be/rw2nkoGLhrE
Iran General’s Wake Brings Deadly Stampede and Calls for Revenge (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/iran-generals-wake-brings-deadly-stampede-and-calls-for-revenge/ar-BBYGYwq)
But the masses that met the cortege ahead of his burial overwhelmed his southeastern hometown, leaving more than 50 dead and 213 injured, state TV reported.
The burial was postponed indefinitely, state-run Islamic Republic News Agency said. Some of those hurt as two large crowds merged at an intersection were in a critical condition, emergency officials said.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.