Airstrike kills Qassim Soleimani, head of Iran's elite Quds Force, at Baghdad airportI hi

[ArmenianJohn]

But has nothing to do with Soleimani. A murderer of 600 of our troops is hardly innocent. Here's some information about this so-called "innocent": I Saw Qasem Soleimani’s Brand of Evil Firsthand — It’s Worse Than You Could Possibly Imagine

Which is it - is he an "enemy" or a "murderer"? Everyone is saying we killed him because he's an "enemy" so it's not "murder". Now you're saying that when he killed our troops he was a "murderer", not an "enemy". Which is it? Can you get your story straight?

And why was he able to kill 600 of our troops? I would think 2 or 3 of our guys could take just one guy. Are you saying US troops are so weak that 600 of them can't take on 1 guy? Wow.

Did we aid Al Qaueda by killing Bin Laden?

No, we aided them the way we always aid terrorists - money, military training, and weapons so they could kill Christians. Same old USA method.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

Seems bent on condemning and arguing. Not what is righteous or good. I think I sm done here.

What you don't like is that what is righteous and good is not necessarily aligned with America's side. I guess you'll be "unwatching" yet again, until you watch and comment yet again.

I'll leave you with this: America is not the same as The Lord God, therefore America's "side" is not the same as The Lord's "side".

 

[Mountainmanbob]

Everyone winds up blind that way.




That's what you want - to wind up blind? Maybe you're already blind and don't have an eye to lose anyway? And/or maybe you're very "brave" with other people losing their eyes?

Wrong -- more study maybe?
M-Bob

 

[Aldebaran]

Which is it - is he an "enemy" or a "murderer"? Everyone is saying we killed him because he's an "enemy" so it's not "murder". Now you're saying that when he killed our troops he was a "murderer", not an "enemy". Which is it? Can you get your story straight?

Can you at least get your question straight? You start out by claiming people say one thing, and then you change it before you finish. But to answer what your question seems to be, a murderer is an enemy.

And why was he able to kill 600 of our troops? I would think 2 or 3 of our guys could take just one guy. Are you saying US troops are so weak that 600 of them can't take on 1 guy? Wow.

Wow indeed that you don't understand how warfare works through organization. How do you think Hitler killed 6 million Jews? Do you think people are claiming that he did it all on his own? Or is it quite possible that it was done through organization with the people under him? That should answer your question.

No, we aided them the way we always aid terrorists - money, military training, and weapons so they could kill Christians. Same old USA method.

Is Qassim Soleimani one of those "Christians" you're referring to? Does Saddam Hussein count as another? How about Abu Musab al-Zarqawi? Or Osama Bin Laden?

 

[pescador]

Proverbs 6:16 There are six things the LORD hates, seven that are detestable to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, a false witness who pours out lies and a person who stirs up conflict in the community.

Murder is defined as taking the life of an innocent person. Soleimani was not an innocent. He was a schemer responsible for the deaths of thousands and quick to rush toward evil in the eyes of God. Furthermore, the other person with Soleimani, Jamal Jaafar Ebrahimi who was the founder of Kataib Hezbollah was still under a sentence of death in absentia by Kuwaiti court from years earlier. By the reaction of some here and in Washington it would seem that the White Settlement shooter should have been allowed to continue his rampage and Soleimani should have been allowed to continue working with Hezbollah until their plan to kill other innocents was executed and nobody should have stopped them. Or am I missing some point?

I dare say toward some, if Obama had done with Soleimani as he did with Osama Bin Laden, there would not be as much condemnation.

And when George Washington commanded an army when he fought against the British, how was that different?

 

[pescador]

Seems bent on condemning and arguing. Not what is righteous or good. I think I sm done here.

Bye bye.