Jump to content

Longhorn_Fan68

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    21265
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    12

Posts posted by Longhorn_Fan68

  1. 1 minute ago, SquishMitten said:

    Maybe this was lost in my longcat post, or maybe it's so dumb that nobody bothered to refute me, but I'll say it again because I'm curious as to how others view it.

    Is it fair to call it an "assassination" when the target was a soldier? I realize he wielded a far greater role in strategic decision making than any of our generals are capable of wielding, but I just see it as fundamentally different than killing a purely political official. Yes, there are significantly greater ramifications than the killing of a grunt, but that's an entirely separate debate. Maybe I'm just being nitpicky, but calling it an assassination seems inaccurate. To use my prior analogy, wouldn't we expect the Iranian/international response to be significantly worse if we had done the exact same thing to the Iranian President? All indications are that he was less powerful than Soleimani, but it seems to me like that would be a much more clear act of war.

    Am I making any sense? Or do I just sound like a crazy person? Not sure why this point is annoying me so much.

    If validation is what you seek, then yes, it's a stretch to call it an assassination.

  2. 4 minutes ago, Lurch said:

    I’d bet there are now over 1000 accounts that he’s retweeted only to have them deleted by Twitter as violating rules. He’s proven to be very susceptible to their scams.

    makes you wonder if he'll announce any deals with Nigerian princes in the coming days

    • Like 4
  3. 23 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

    I see zero problem if any church, business, whatever decides on which people should be armed whether through paid security or selected volunteers. However when random people decide for themselves to be the armed security, it increases the likelihood of morons shooting each other.

     

    [Darwin]And?[/Darwin]

×
×
  • Create New...