SkylarkTempest
Active Member
Greetings:
I am not sure I understand. It is logically possible to recognize this man was a terrorist who needed to die, and at the same time recognize his "reverence" which some seem to confuse with "sympathizing with a terrorist". I don't see how that connection is made. I mean the comparison to Richelieu and Machiavelli a isn't a complimentary one. Any to deny they weren't brilliant ... I mean, please explain. He was revered. Iran's population is over 80 million people. It's well known that lots of "regular people" Iranians don't like this dude and aren't crying over his death, but that still doesn't logically preclude describing him as "revered" as far as a general description.
In any case POTUS made a decision to take him out; the decision is his and his alone to make. Action appears to 100% within scope of authority that Congress voted away to the EOP. I don't think these would be covered by extant AUMF but rather authority granted specifically via USC. It doesn't mean Trump has bigger weenor than Obama, it just means he decided to try another path forward on the Iran situation. Give it a chance to work or not work. Time will tell for any net-positives or net-negatives to the U.S.
I choose to remain optimistic.
Well said. I'm not sure why PsyOps refuses to acknowledge this point. Both McConnell and Schumer have denounced this dude as awful and a terrorist. If both Republicans and Democrats are calling him a terrorist, what is your big issue PsyOps?