So referring to his actual rank is being a "Terrorist apologist" and is the "downfall of America"? The Right frequently criticizes the Left for getting worked up about what language to use yet they get hyperbolic and offended when people don't use their approved language.
a longer interview with Patraeus in Foreign Policy: https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/0...ling-says-trump-helped-reestablish-deterrence
Here’s my White privilege moment. The fact that I get the benefit of Trump fans thinking I must be a Trump supporter as well because I’m a white dude. It’s amazing what gets said to me thinking they are in the safe zone to say whatever they want that they would never say if I was brown or black. If there was a way to identify Democrats on the street it might get ugly but the fact is, it’s America ... it’s a melting pot and we see now why that’s a good thing. It can keep us safe in times of incredible divisions.
Plus: Operations against ISIS halted. Iran has declared it will no longer recognize any restrictions on nuclear weapon development. (cool strategically desired side effects - regional Nuke arm race in ... ) Trump tweetings out war crimes threats against Iran.* Iraq is about to expel all American forces (5k troops). Trump tweetings out crushing sanctions threats against Iraq if they expel American forces (without paying up).* (if Iraq does expel all American troops and/or Iraq turn very negative against the US due to Trump sanction threat against them, Iran will expand its influence in Iraq and the region). Taking out one of the Iranian generals didn't take out Iran, their forces, or their plans. Without American forces in Iraq and/or deteriorating relationships between US and Iraq, it sure looks like Iran will become regionally more influential and powerful. How does a more influential and now-i-am-going-to-have-nuke Iran make Americans safer? Seems the only possible way it does makes Americans safer is if there was indeed an imminent attack Soleimani was planning (thin intel) that was canceled, and Iran has been deterred and will be less aggressive (so far, publicly that doesn't look like so). Yes, possible but unlikely. Maybe our fearless stable genius leader is playing 9D chess and has foreseen all of these predictable outcomes including his own reactions(*), something only his supporters is capable of understanding. Or maybe he's simply a victim of his own erratic and reckless behaviors. BTW, while Trump is telling the whole world the US will commit war crimes, Iran is publicly saying the American civilians are not to be touched. Not sure if this political message will work, but wow, could anyone have imagined Iran publicly taking a higher legal and moral position than the US?
this seems unlikely from what I'm reading. The Iraqi Parliamentary vote has been described as primarily "symbolic": https://time.com/5759101/iraqi-parliament-vote-for-us-withdrawal/
"Why the Death of an Iranian Commander Won’t Mean World War III: The U.S. dealt a major blow in taking out Iran’s imperial strategist. But the mullahs’ next move likely won’t be a dramatic escalation." worth a look: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/01/03/iran-loses-its-imperial-strategist-093175
This is what you get with Trump, someone who do not think about the consequences of his actions. This applies to many of his supporters as well. Trump would order a nuke strike before he think about the consequence of such an action.
I'd prefer my terrorist organizations to not have access to state resources nor get legitimized which is why ISIS still persists.
This is about what I feel will happen. Iran leadership isn’t stupid...they saw what happened to Iraq and know that any type of full-scale war will end with their removal from power (and likely execution) and a destabilized country. Even if Russia and China back the Iranians, it’s doubtful that those countries would want to start World War 3 over this...that’s not how they operate these days. instead, Iran will continue to be a nuisance for us in the region by continuing to support militias and attempting to continue to exert influence. They’ll see how things play out in Iraq and hope that we eventually leave...possibly making a move to takeover Iraq if we do. Otherwise, not much will change. The big thing that will change is that Iran will go back to being full committed to their nuclear program. Our chances, at least under the Trump administration, of getting control of this are basically gone now. However, I’m not sure the killing of Solemaini changed much on that front...that was basically solidified when they tore up the agreement that Obama had made. tl;dr: In my opinion, nothing’s really changed with Iran over this action from a foreign policy standpoint (from a legality standpoint...that’s where things get murky).
It's non-binding, but the outrage toward American use of unauthorized force on their soil is more than symbolic. Trump doesn't help with his crushing sanction threats (while diplomats work behind the scene to prevent the Iraqi executive to make that decision). I'm sure there is on-going multi-side negotiation going on now (Iran taking a more active role possibly with the US not allowed to be on the ground or use their airspace for example) and some compromise is likely to be the result. The Iraqi government not doing anything is probably political suicide - again, thx Trump for his latest threat. What's not arguable is we are much weaker now diplomatically. The relationship between Iraq and the US has weakened (and the effect of that is strengthened Iranian influence), to what point... we will know later.
So you are basically calling Blacks and other brown skin people uneducated!!!! Very subtle move on your part... T_Man
No, I am calling people who follow Colin K and hate killing terrorist leaders to prevent war uneducated. Brown skin people have done very well in intelligence related fields ... Very revealing lack of intelligence on your part to not get it...
You're not smart enough to get it so you're playing the racism card. Intelligent minorities do not want to be represented by him.
