Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, January 06, 2020

President Trump's order to take out Qasem Soleimani was morally, constitutionally and strategically correct. It deserves more bipartisan support than the begrudging or negative reactions it has received thus far from my fellow Democrats.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Yawn.

#1 | Posted by jpw at 2020-01-06 01:17 PM | Reply

Why can't Joe Lieberman admit he was wrong about Iraq, and why in the hell is he asking anyone why they can't admit they are wrong? Most Democrats are absolutely right about the assasination of Soleimani. Joe Lieberman is, was and always will be a DINO.

#2 | Posted by danni at 2020-01-06 01:19 PM | Reply

"Joe Lieberman is, was and always will be a DINO."

So? He's from Hartford, CT. The insurance capital of the US.

#3 | Posted by eberly at 2020-01-06 01:26 PM | Reply

What a Bullschitter Joe is. He's a member of CNAS.

#4 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2020-01-06 01:31 PM | Reply

Boaz, here is a question for you:

Can you admit that the assassination of Suluemani is troubling?

#5 | Posted by truthhurts at 2020-01-06 01:32 PM | Reply

5

Of course, it's troubling.

But I don't know what he was up to and where things were going.

Was this a good decision? Based on the info I have.....I have no clue.

but it is troubling and if it was a bad decision (to kill him at all or the way it was carried out, etc) then it's going to probably have negative repercussions for many Americans and their allies.

#6 | Posted by eberly at 2020-01-06 01:41 PM | Reply

#5 Truth, here's the deal...I take no more, if somewhat less, umbrage at the killing of Suliemani than I took at the 563 drone assassinations Obama conducted outside of active war zones. Those strikes killed up to 800 civilians. Were you "troubled" then? I wonder if Touchy Joe was troubled?

#7 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2020-01-06 01:45 PM | Reply

Posted by boaz at

The basic objection is that Trump is like a kid playing with fire. Or a kid playing with his dad's shotgun.

The man is feeble-witted, factually ignorant, and emotionally-challenged.

He's a worse president than George W. Bush was and look what Bush did to us.

#8 | Posted by Zed at 2020-01-06 01:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Eb, the problems as I see it are numerous, we can't trust anything the WH tells us about the situation, killing a foreign nation's top general is a bad idea, the "crimes" he is accused of supposedly occurred when we were fighting in Iraq, killing him is way beyond proportion to the recent actions, there is zero evidence of an imminent threat, Iraq and Iran are spinning his presence in Iraq as being on a peace mission, we attacked him in Iraq-against Iraq's wishes, targeted assassination is illegal and immoral, the current administration cannot be trusted to manage the situation responsibly, it is stupid to paint a country into a corner like this action does, Iran is restarting their nuke program, Iran can take many actions that will not justify further retaliation but will make our lives more difficult i.e. removing their efforts at fighting ISIS allowing their resurgence, Iraq may request us to leave-resulting in a highly embarrassing and difficult situation-we either end up fighting Iraqis or make our involvement against ISIS that much more difficult.

SO No, I will not admit what IPBoS did was right

#9 | Posted by truthhurts at 2020-01-06 01:57 PM | Reply

Can you admit that the assassination of Suluemani is troubling?

I dont agree that it is. I think it was the right thing to do.

Regardless if Trump is self centered and only about himself, he still deserves congratulations for this, he did a good job.

Only partisan hate cant see through that, which is the problem of the Democrats right now.

#10 | Posted by boaz at 2020-01-06 01:57 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

#5 Truth, here's the deal...I take no more, if somewhat less, umbrage at the killing of Suliemani than I took at the 563 drone assassinations Obama conducted outside of active war zones. Those strikes killed up to 800 civilians. Were you "troubled" then? I wonder if Touchy Joe was troubled?
#7 | Posted by MUSTANG

Yes I was troubled and made my concerns known and did not vote for Obama for a second term as a result. Look at the DR history if you want to see for yourself

#11 | Posted by truthhurts at 2020-01-06 01:58 PM | Reply

Why was it the right thing to do?

#12 | Posted by truthhurts at 2020-01-06 01:59 PM | Reply

www.antiwar.com

Did Iran Kill 600 Americans in Iraq War II? No.

#13 | Posted by truthhurts at 2020-01-06 02:00 PM | Reply

SO No, I will not admit what IPBoS did was right

Ok, dont then..

He is still President and doing the things I think are right. So I and others like me will keep electing him until you Democrats get a better candidate, which doesnt seem to be any time soon.

#14 | Posted by boaz at 2020-01-06 02:00 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Why was it the right thing to do?

Stupid question, even answered on MSLSD. This guy was a bad actor. Period. End of Story.

The world is a better place without him.

#15 | Posted by boaz at 2020-01-06 02:01 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Face it Boaz, until a few days ago you had no idea Suluemani existed. Now he was the worst person in the world.

Former Marine Corps Captain Matthew Hoh writes: "Yes the EFPs were all made in Iraq, in workshops by Iraqis. I was at JIEDDO (joint IED defeat organization) in 2008. ... I can confirm the intelligence on all that."

#16 | Posted by truthhurts at 2020-01-06 02:01 PM | Reply

Yes I was troubled and made my concerns known and did not vote for Obama for a second term as a result. Look at the DR history if you want to see for yourself

#11 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS

I don't recall that but I do believe you.

This is an issue you've been remarkably consistent about since I started posting here in 2004 (although you were posting under a different name when I first arrived on this site).

#17 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-01-06 02:03 PM | Reply

Why was it the right thing to do?
Stupid question, even answered on MSLSD. This guy was a bad actor. Period. End of Story.
The world is a better place without him.
#15 | Posted by boaz a

you don't answer the question.

Why was it the right thing to do?

He was a bad actor? I guess we should kill Nicholas Cage if that is the criteria.

Please be specific, cause the ramifications are pretty big.

I have given you several concerns I have, time for you to justify your position.

#18 | Posted by truthhurts at 2020-01-06 02:04 PM | Reply

He is still President and doing the things I think are right. So I and others like me will keep electing him until you Democrats get a better candidate, which doesnt seem to be any time soon.
#14 | Posted by boaz a

Why do you think they are right? Please be specific.

#19 | Posted by truthhurts at 2020-01-06 02:05 PM | Reply

You constantly harp on the divide in our country, I am trying to be as respectful as possible. This is a pretty big issue here. I want to find common ground on this. I have given you some of my concerns. Try to justify your position.

#20 | Posted by truthhurts at 2020-01-06 02:07 PM | Reply

Face it Boaz, until a few days ago you had no idea Suluemani existed.

I knew who he was. I was a senior staff Officer in the Army, of course I knew who he was.

Please be specific.

Liberals love to "be specific" when they have lost an argument. You only say "be specific" when you lack anything to beat an argument with, so you want to nickpick.

Why do you think they are right? Please be specific.

I dont like repeating myself. He was a threat to our military and allies. He was constantly planning attacks, a couple of which were foiled right here on U.S. soil.

This is a pretty big issue here. I want to find common ground on this.

Quite frankly, there is no common ground on this issue. Either we dont kill him and leave him free to continue to kill soldiers or we kill him and eliminate the threat.

#21 | Posted by boaz at 2020-01-06 02:12 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Liberals love to "be specific" when they have lost an argument. You only say "be specific" when you lack anything to beat an argument with, so you want to nickpick.
Why do you think they are right? Please be specific.
I dont like repeating myself. He was a threat to our military and allies. He was constantly planning attacks, a couple of which were foiled right here on U.S. soil.
This is a pretty big issue here. I want to find common ground on this.
Quite frankly, there is no common ground on this issue. Either we dont kill him and leave him free to continue to kill soldiers or we kill him and eliminate the threat.
#21 | Posted by boaz

Boaz, respectfully, you aren't answering the question. I find no evidence of planning for attacks on our soil. You provide no justification for the disproportunate dangers resulting from the assassination. Nor do I see any evidence of the supposed threats or plans you are talking about.

#22 | Posted by truthhurts at 2020-01-06 02:22 PM | Reply

Either we dont kill him and leave him free to continue to kill soldiers or we kill him and eliminate the threat.
#21 | Posted by boaz

How will killing him prevent Iran from planning attacks against us?

#23 | Posted by truthhurts at 2020-01-06 02:25 PM | Reply

Boaz, respectfully, you aren't answering the question.

Oh, I have answered the question. I dont know what you are looking for.

I find no evidence of planning for attacks on our soil.

Do you have a Top Secret Clearance? Are you a member of our intelligence agencies? If the answer is no, then why would you have specific evidence other than what every other American needs?

#24 | Posted by boaz at 2020-01-06 02:33 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

If the answer is no, then why would you have specific evidence other than what every other American needs?

#24 | Posted by boaz at 2020-01-06 02:33 PM | Reply

We need the evidence because Donald is a Liar, BOAZ.

#25 | Posted by Zed at 2020-01-06 03:11 PM | Reply

>strategically correct

Lol you had me until this one. 10/10 satire.

#26 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2020-01-06 03:12 PM | Reply

"Do you have a Top Secret Clearance?"
Is Boaz sharing Top Secret information with us?

"Are you a member of our intelligence agencies?"
Is Boaz a member of our intelligence agencies?

Boaz is seemingly a Russian asset now, co-opted by the NRA.

#27 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-01-06 03:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I guess we should kill Nicholas Cage if that is the criteria.
#18 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS

This video has me questioning whether he's good or not. He's ambitious, that's for certain.

#28 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2020-01-06 03:15 PM | Reply

BOAZ KNOWS that there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

#29 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2020-01-06 03:17 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

9

Thanks for the candid response, Truth.

I don't blame anybody for not trusting what the WH is reporting on this. I don't trust the WH either.

But it doesn't mean I'm going to automatically take the position it was all wrong. How do I know?

#30 | Posted by eberly at 2020-01-06 03:18 PM | Reply

"President Trump's order to take out Qasem Soleimani was morally, constitutionally and strategically correct."

Then why did it take three years?

#31 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-01-06 03:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

But it doesn't mean I'm going to automatically take the position it was all wrong. How do I know?

#30 | Posted by eberly at 2020-01-06

Moe Howard of the Three Stooges starts a war with Iran. How do you know there's a problem with that?

#32 | Posted by Zed at 2020-01-06 03:23 PM | Reply

Then why did it take three years?

#31 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-01-06

2020 is an election year.

#33 | Posted by Zed at 2020-01-06 03:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

32

You're not to be taken seriously. It's likely you watch the 3 stooges all day.

#34 | Posted by eberly at 2020-01-06 03:27 PM | Reply

Oh, I get it.
Eberly's a wiseguy.
That's pretty funny!

#35 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-01-06 03:31 PM | Reply

You're not to be taken seriously. It's likely you watch the 3 stooges all day.

#34 | Posted by eberly at 2020-01-06 03:27 PM | Reply

You remind me of Larry.

#36 | Posted by Zed at 2020-01-06 03:31 PM | Reply

You're not to be taken seriously.

#34 | Posted by eberly at 2020-01-06 03:27 PM | Reply

Care to rate trump's competence as a warlord with a number between one and ten?

#37 | Posted by Zed at 2020-01-06 03:32 PM | Reply

I'll be specific about my concerns about killing Soleimani, who I don't give a crap about. I don't want another war, I don't want Iran to try to get revenge and then cause us to respond with a larger attack thereby eventually creating a real war. I think his assassination was poorly thought out, he has already been replaced with someone equally bad. It accomplished very little except to kill the anti-Ayatollah movement in Iran and unite Iranians against us, along with the Iraqis. We have gained nothing with this assassination but we have risked many American lives by doing it. Now we are sending more troops (targets) into the area which will just give Iran more opportunities for satisfaction.

#38 | Posted by danni at 2020-01-06 03:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Like it or not, Zed's point that it is an election year is not going away. Trump accused Obama of planning just such an attack for just the same reasons so it is a little hard to believe it didn't cross his mind when he was considering this attack.

#39 | Posted by danni at 2020-01-06 03:37 PM | Reply

Boazo, why can't you admit to being a lily white racist redneck?

#40 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2020-01-06 04:53 PM | Reply

Quite frankly, there is no common ground on this issue. Either we dont kill him and leave him free to continue to kill soldiers or we kill him and eliminate the threat.

Posted by boaz

Considering reports that Soleimani was in Iraq as part of a negotiation to dampen tensions between Saudi Arabia (Sunni) and Iran (Shia), killing him at this moment was stupid.

#41 | Posted by americanunity at 2020-01-06 07:19 PM | Reply

#41

Considering reports that Soleimani was in Iraq as part of a negotiation to dampen tensions

Before I outright laugh in your face, you do realize that this comes from Adil Abdul-Mahdi, the interim PM of Iraq and a supporter of Iranian involvement in Iraq, 3 days after Soleimani was killed and 2 days after he gave an impassioned speech in Parliament calling the US "the true evil in the Middle East" and calling for ouster of US troops...right? It's not like this would have been topical information for him to impart, like, immediately?

SMFH

#42 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-01-06 08:13 PM | Reply

"gave an impassioned speech in Parliament calling the US "the true evil in the Middle East" "

Wait...

It's not Israel?

New Headline: Israel Seen As Less Threatening To Arab Neighbors After Trump Begins Mideast Peace Process

#43 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-01-06 08:34 PM | Reply

You know this attack was not justified when Israel and Bibi want nothing to do with it.

But the response of Israel's prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, was particularly striking, as he has been one of Trump's staunchest supporters on the world stage.

He told a meeting of his security cabinet on Monday: "The assassination of Suleimani isn't an Israeli event but an American event. We were not involved and should not be dragged into it."

#44 | Posted by truthhurts at 2020-01-06 09:30 PM | Reply

Why did the Pentagon even have him in the list of options?

The Pentagon supposedly knows more than any of us.

If killing him was a mistake, a huge error, it wouldn't have been an option.

So, either the Pentagon screwed up or had no issue with it.

You don't give bad options.

#45 | Posted by Petrous at 2020-01-06 10:00 PM | Reply

I will admit Trump was right. Countries should resolve disputes by assassinating leaders.
Leave grunts and civilians alone.

I am glad Trump knows what he signed up for.

#46 | Posted by bored at 2020-01-06 10:57 PM | Reply

Leave grunts and civilians alone.

I say let the Grunts go for it. Everyone gets to pick their best.

20 from one side, 20 from the other. Everyone gets the same knife.

Winner take all.

#47 | Posted by REDIAL at 2020-01-07 12:15 AM | Reply

"and calling for ouster of US troops...right?"

Isn't that what Trump, his supporters and most of the rest of us have wanted all along? Do you want to keep our troops in the ME? Why? What's in it for Americans?

#48 | Posted by danni at 2020-01-07 08:26 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

maybe we're the ones (one of) who've been terrorizing the ME?

#49 | Posted by ichiro at 2020-01-07 01:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

After being lied to thousands of times, after knowing Trump only does things for personal benefit... we'll admit he was right when he actually does something right.

#50 | Posted by Derek_Wildstar at 2020-01-07 01:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Pure --------. This was a COWARDLY and totally morally and legally WRONG stunt that only Israel would do.clearly Trump has been tainted by his association with netanyahu. This was a war CRIME. Nothing less!

#51 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2020-01-08 03:56 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort