World war 3 now imminent

[scooterscot]

That's because they both believe in a different flavour of the same sky fairy. They're at war* with most of the rest of the Middle East as well, for the same reason.

As opposed to the 'we love Jesus bible bashing republican voting belt of the midwest' starting wars and killing over a million Iraqis?

[AtW]

How is Iranian backing any different to UK/US backing Saudi terrorism? We've utterly no moral ground here.

"Every lie we tell is a debt to the truth. Sooner or later that debt is paid."

If you are too stupid to see the difference then visit first Saudi Arabia and only after Iran.

[BlasterBates]

Apparently taking the General out with an air attack was one of the options presented to Trump. This was the token "stupid option", they always put in to get the president to do something sensible.

So now the US will be trapped into a war they can't win. US carpet bombed Vietnam and they still lost, Iran won't back down.

[AtW]

If it wasn't for US we would not have South Korea now, and most of Europe if not all would still be occupied by Soviet Nazies

Next missile (with tactical low yield nuke) might get ayatollah(s) if they don’t get the message.

[meridian]

If it wasn't for US we would not have South Korea now, and most of Europe if not all would still be occupied by Soviet Nazies.

Irrelevant to the current dispute.

You do know it’s quite possible to understand all the “good”* things they’ve done, and yet still be able to be critical of the “bad”*?



*opinions may be subjective

[AtW]

My comment was about Us loss in Vietnam, which only happened due to USSR supplying not just AA equipment but also manning it, including fighter jets. There is no such factor now.

[Martin Bank Holiday]

Like poking a stick in a hornet's nest is the simile that leaps to mind.

[Zigenare]

The bastard needed taking out - before he caused any more "problems". The US were well within their rights to do this, legally and morally.

No US troops were injured in the operation. No helicopters were left burning in the desert. Win win.

[meridian]

World war 3 now imminent

The bastard needed taking out - before he caused any more "problems". The US were well within their rights to do this, legally and morally.

No US troops were injured in the operation. No helicopters were left burning in the desert. Win win.

You appear to be more certain of this than a Yale law professor, but who needs experts when you can simply state your opinion as fact?

Oona Hathaway on Twitter: "The Department of Defense has issued a short statement that makes clear that the basis of the U.S. strike on Soleimani is self defense, though it does not use the term. Here are a few thoughts on the legal basis of the strike. 1/ https://t.co/jZ2bhGgG64"

In sum, based on what we currently know, the U.S. strike on Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani is legally tenuous under both domestic and international law. Congress should begin hearings and demand answers about the legal basis and the plan for handling the inevitable fallout. 15/

[darmstadt]

According to reports the USA were thinking of taking him out some months ago. It's interesting that Trump only gave the order now when he is facing impeachment and re-election....