Killing a top general would not stop an imminent attack. Which means we are being lied to again.

[shockey80]

However, it is a very convenient excuse that cannot be proven false.

[Backseat Driver]

1. Anyone? Contrast WH responses to the cases of the journalist, the Kurds, and the general. /eom

[UniteFightBack]

2. Well need the CIA to testify. nt

[dem4decades]

3. As if the General didn't make plans in case of his death? He was a great planner, but he didn't

plan for that?

[shockey80]

4. It is clear they are lying.

This general had a second in command who could easily take over. I am sure Iran has many capable generals who could step right in and continue the imminent attacks. Sometimes you have to use commonsense.

Now on the other hand, if Trump and his disciples from hell believed killing this top general would stop an imminent attack. That would prove they are completely incompetent.

[Kaleva]

5. Nor can your statement be proven false either.

Does that mean you are lying to us?

[Enoki33]

6. Their explanation on the surface makes no military or political

sense as the assassination strengthens the power of the hardliners in Iran and leaves their command structure essentially intact. Worth thinking about tRump’s abnormal envy of President Obama, his recent call from his handler Putin, the news coverage of his impeachment, Lev Parnas’ imminent release of documents to The House Judiciary, the Deutsche Bank loan report, the opportunity the attack provides to make money on the stock market and finally, Moscow’s attempt to blame our IC for misleading tRump. All food for thought in the era of disinformation.

[scarytomcat]

7. He thinks he can say any shit and that is that

he committed a serious international crime. is there no one to stop him?