B
BartholomewB
Guest
Okay, so you’re not referring to Iran.
I did refer to Iran.Okay, so you’re not referring to Iran.
I wouldn’t say he’s in the corner, but from a PR/justification perspective, they are on the ropes.I’m not clear how Khamenei is in th corner.
Unfortunately, that seems to be “conventional” wisdom, that the Shiites were favored, the President (Maliki?) that came in was a Shiite. I think Ridge knows this situation better than I would at least. A power vacuum left but by 2011 or 12, the country did become somewhat stable.“After the invasion of Iraq, the US favored the Shiites over the Sunnis.”
And they won’t.You didn’t answer my question.
Poor example though.I’m sincerely embarrassed by the teaspoon intellect depth of our Hollywood elite
But I have. Did you not follow the thread?And they won’t.
I was trying to find out what you meant by “annihilate” in your post that I quoted.Although I am still not clear on what @BartholomewB is after.
The former CIA director concluded that while it is beneficial that Soleimani has been killed, the decision to take the top Iranian leader comes at “an extraordinarily high price."
“That’s why the Bush administration and the Obama administration chose not to do something like this,” he added.
Reduce to nothing.“annihilate”
Killing a leader of a foreign government is an act of war. Trump killed both Iranian and Iraqi officials.That doesn’t change my premise, we did not invade Iran.
I believe this to be true. However, it does not change the fact that both Iran and the US were crucial in defeating ISIS, and both were welcomed into Iraq for this purpose.Some would say Shia militias helped precipitate the coming of ISIS with their brutality.
Thank you. Yes, in the very act of preemptive war we do more to violate moral law than those who plan attacks.Fine, if all you have is always comparing Iran to the US fine.
“Pacified” is not freedom from persecution. The Sunni population was suffering, as you earlier noted.Iraq was largely pacified by 2011.
No. And there s not way that that notion could be reasonably inferred from my posts.Are you referring to
As is an attack on a sovereign embassy.Killing a leader of a foreign government is an act of war.
A response to an attack, however, is not preemptive.Yes, in the very act of preemptive war we do more to violate moral law than those who plan attacks.