Iranian General killed by US Drone.

[west didsblue]

but remain dry eyed at the comment the president of the U.S has the same vocabulary as a nine year old child

do’h I’ve done it again and engaged the moron

Sorry mate, there's only one poster in your exchange coming across as a moron and it isn't @domalino

 

[Fame Monster]

It's not the timing that's in question, it's the location and the ill-considered consequences. If it was done at Heathrow Airport without informing the UK government we'd rightly be apoplectic about it like the Iraqis are.

Where else can you take him out though? There's no perfect place but of all the places in that region, Iraq is where Solemaini caused the deaths of so many people and its where he was meeting with militia leaders, possibly to carry out more.

I think there's a broader question of whether the assassination was the right thing to do at this particular time but if you accept that it is then given the number of high-value military targets who were also killed in a country that the US military had been invited to fight in (maybe not in these circumstances) then in many ways, it was the perfect attack.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Where else can you take him out though? There's no perfect place but of all the places in that region, Iraq is where Solemaini caused the deaths of so many people and its where he was meeting with militia leaders, possibly to carry out more.

I think there's a broader question of whether the assassination was the right thing to do at this particular time but if you accept that it is then given the number of high-value military targets who were also killed in a country that the US military had been invited to fight in (maybe not in these circumstances) then in many ways, it was the perfect attack.

The attack was perfect, the timing however was abysmal.

Or was it?

 

[Ban-jani]

Sorry mate, there's only one poster in your exchange coming across as a moron and it isn't @domalino

He did well to come across as one last night.

 

[domalino]

Where else can you take him out though? There's no perfect place but of all the places in that region, Iraq is where Solemaini caused the deaths of so many people and its where he was meeting with militia leaders, possibly to carry out more.

I think there's a broader question of whether the assassination was the right thing to do at this particular time but if you accept that it is then given the number of high-value military targets who were also killed in a country that the US military had been invited to fight in (maybe not in these circumstances) then in many ways, it was the perfect attack.

It's not hard, you don't take him out when he's been invited to your host country to mediate peace talks between Iraq and Saudi.

The USA could probably have killed this guy ages ago, but they've always known that doing so would do far more harm to the US than good. Martyring the man, turning Iraq against the US, completely destroying any kind of nuclear deal with Iran, delivering a massive victory for ISIS and giving reason for every terrorist group aligned with Iran to get new focus, members and money to retaliate was not worth it. That's why Obama didn't try to kill him, that's why Bush didn't try to kill him.

And of course that's why Trump & co. tried to come up with this "imminent threat" claim, which fell apart under scrutiny, because even they knew that simply saying "he's a bad guy and the world's a better place without him" isn't enough.

 

[west didsblue]

Where else can you take him out though? There's no perfect place but of all the places in that region, Iraq is where Solemaini caused the deaths of so many people and its where he was meeting with militia leaders, possibly to carry out more.

I think there's a broader question of whether the assassination was the right thing to do at this particular time but if you accept that it is then given the number of high-value military targets who were also killed in a country that the US military had been invited to fight in (maybe not in these circumstances) then in many ways, it was the perfect attack.

You're making the assumption that it was a good idea to take him out. When it was Donald Trump who made that decision without telling congress and apparently without consideration of the consequences your assumption is certainly questionable.

 

[Gelsons Dad]

It's not hard, you don't take him out when he's been invited to your host country to mediate peace talks between Iraq and Saudi.

You don’t imagine the invitation was all part of the wheeze do you? And Iraq are now making all the right noises to cover their involvement

 

[Fame Monster]

It's not hard, you don't take him out when he's been invited to your host country to mediate peace talks between Iraq and Saudi.

If that's true then I'm sure more people would be critical of the attack but looking at the people who died alongside him, I think there will be doubts.

 

[nmc]

Don't think it is.

Can I not say I think Netanyahu is one corrupt, son of a woman without being accused of antisemitism?

You can dislike the Israeli PM without hating Israel just as you can hate Trump but not the USA or Boris and not the UK.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Look while it was terrible, and I know firsthand as my Dad was flying a Lancaster that night, it was quite possibly the right thing to do.

Just read Anthony Beevor's History Of The Second World War and he's scathing about Harris and the Bomber Command offensive. These raids were dressed up as "strategic" looking to destroy key military facilities and enemy lines of communication but bombing accuracy was never remotely close to being able to pinpoint targets. It was terror bombing pure and simple, designed ot crush the morale of the enemy. Given everything else that went on in WW2, you can argue all day about whether it was morally right or wrong. Harris genuinely believed it could shorten or even win the war on its own but that claim was proved to be extremely dubious, if not outright mistaken.