Us embassy in iraq

[Crazyhole]

This sentence right here is perfect. It has been true on every issue crazyhole has ever disagreed with Trump on. He has his own opinions and then they slowly erode as he consumes curated right wing opinions from his biased outlets.

Crazyhole is a confirmed conservative nut job media user. The places he is "reading about this" are biased right wing sites. He is having the story presented to him from a group of people who want him to support Trump on all actions. Slowly he realizes that his ideas are wrong and these new ideas are right. It's happened on so many issues in real time on this board. At one point Crazy said the evidence against Trump for Ukraine didn't look good, now that hes "read about it," he thinks it's all a partisan attack and he wants Joe Biden brought to justice.

This is why it's a waste of time to do anything other than make fun of the MAGA chuds. You'll never make an honest point that is stronger than their echo chamber on any issues because their echo chamber is stronger than even their own opinions and values. It took only 2 days for crazyhole to abandon his own values and ideas and accept the justification for starting a war with Iran.

Ah yes, the old tactic of taking a statement and dissecting it so you can respond to what you want. Take a few words of a sentence and then disregard everything else that shows the context, even if the rest agrees with you. What trump did is dangerous no doubt. But the fact that the Iranian people weren't particularly fond of him does change that part of the narrative, doesnt it? This may have emboldened the pro-western Iranians who weren't sure if the US would have their backs should they try to overthrow the Ayatollah. I'm not so sure this wasn't a sign to them more than just killing a military leader that we dont like.

 

[UCFKnight85]

When we ended the Iran deal we issued harsh sanctions against Iran, which hurt the import of things like certains medicines and medical devices and things of that nature. That does nothing but hurts the average Iranian citizen. We most certainly are not innocent in all of this and it is a lot more complex than you are giving it credit for.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-49051782

Please, just stop. Sanctions cannot be used as justification for acts of war, even though so many Democrats shamelessly have tried to excuse Iranian actions over sanctions. Also, the medicine comment is bullshit. The US never sanctioned or blocked the import of medicines, the regime did it themselves to create this false narrative.

Think about how ridiculous and dangerous your assertion is. Should every country under sanction be excused if they take up arms against US citizens and our soldiers? If Russia shot a US C130 out of the sky and cited sanctions for doing so, would you say "Well gee, we do have sanctions on these guys so it's only reasonable that they'd shoot down our aircraft! We're not innocent!"

 

[sk8knight]

But what is the likeliehood of those things still happening? Or happening even more frequently now? We seem to have this mindset in this country that killing bad guys solves the problems, when we have seen time and time again that it often times exasperates those problems. If this does just blow over without incident then by all means, I will say it was the right decision. If it doesn't, and the attacks escalate, then it is more than reasonable to criticize the decision. At this point we will just wait and see, but my guess is there will be some sort of response, hopefully it is limited and doesnt hurt/kill many (or preferably any) people.

I guess we’ll see. I do think all this hyperbole about starting a war is premature at the least. It also makes us look weak when we can’t take any action without our leadership having to endure extreme partisan reactionism from the media and Democrats. Concerns about starting a war are fine, the rhetoric being launched is irresponsible.

 

[UCFKnight85]

I guess we’ll see. I do think all this hyperbole about starting a war is premature at the least. It also makes us look weak when we can’t take any action without our leadership having to endure extreme partisan reactionism from the media and Democrats. Concerns about starting a war are fine, the rhetoric being launched is irresponsible.

Cubs doesn't seem to know that the Quds Force has already been at war, for years, and just last week killed an American in one of more than 30 rocket attacks they launched at US bases and compounds.

We didn't start shit.

 

[Cubs79]

I guess we’ll see. I do think all this hyperbole about starting a war is premature at the least. It also makes us look weak when we can’t take any action without our leadership having to endure extreme partisan reactionism from the media and Democrats. Concerns about starting a war are fine, the rhetoric being launched is irresponsible.

There were more airstrikes today too. I am not saying it is a full scale war at this point by any means, but it also obviously wasnt a one off event.

 

[Cubs79]

Please, just stop. Sanctions cannot be used as justification for acts of war, even though so many Democrats shamelessly have tried to excuse Iranian actions over sanctions. Also, the medicine comment is bullshit. The US never sanctioned or blocked the import of medicines, the regime did it themselves to create this false narrative.

Think about how ridiculous and dangerous your assertion is. Should every country under sanction be excused if they take up arms against US citizens and our soldiers? If Russia shot a US C130 out of the sky and cited sanctions for doing so, would you say "Well gee, we do have sanctions on these guys so it's only reasonable that they'd shoot down our aircraft! We're not innocent!"

You have this mindset that the US should be able to do things and there shouldnt or wont be some sort of retaliation. That simply isnt realistic. The reality is we have meddled with Iran over decades far more than they have with us. And when we finally had an agreement that again, seemed to be working, we decided to tear it up and issue harsh sanctions against them, which basically seemed to show that we are the ones not interested in diplomacy.

 

[Cubs79]

Cubs doesn't seem to know that the Quds Force has already been at war, for years, and just last week killed an American in one of more than 30 rocket attacks they launched at US bases and compounds.

We didn't start shit.

YOu also dont seem to realize that we have bases and a military presence essentially surrounding Iran, and have constantly talked about war with them. If a foreign country surrounded America with military bases or military personnel and constantly talked about war with us, you most certainly would deem it a threat and would likely want a response.

 

[DaShuckster]

It also makes us look weak when we can’t take any action without our leadership having to endure extreme partisan reactionism from the media and Democrats.

Yeah, only Democrat Presidents get free passes from the opposition party regarding their Middle East policies.

 

[UCFKnight85]

YOu also dont seem to realize that we have bases and a military presence essentially surrounding Iran, and have constantly talked about war with them. If a foreign country surrounded America with military bases or military personnel and constantly talked about war with us, you most certainly would deem it a threat and would likely want a response.

This tired, dumb talking point again? Here, I'll help you- we have bases in that region because we were invited by those host nations to put bases there as a deterrent to the country to their East, that has been inflicting chaos and violence across the region since 1979.

Iran had their revolution and the very first thing they did was take Americans hostage. Yea, really hard to understand why we've been wary of them all of this time!

 

[Cubs79]

This tired, dumb talking point again? Here, I'll help you- we have bases in that region because we were invited by those host nations to put bases there as a deterrent to the country to their East, that has been inflicting chaos and violence across the region since 1979.

Iran had their revolution and the very first thing they did was take Americans hostage. Yea, really hard to understand why we've been wary of them all of this time!

It isnt a talking point, it is a fact. And we were most certainly not invited into Iraq or Afghanistan, but regardless whether we were invited or not doesnt change any of the facts. If Canada or Mexico invited Iran to have bases around our borders you would be ok with that becaue they were invited? Of course you wouldnt, as you shouldnt be.

No one is saying Iran is completely innocent, but what you wont acknowledge is that the US most certainly meddles in other places as well, including Iran. We overthrew a Democratically elected leader in Iran well before they took hostages.

 

[UCFKnight85]

It isnt a talking point, it is a fact. And we were most certainly not invited into Iraq or Afghanistan, but regardless whether we were invited or not doesnt change any of the facts. If Canada or Mexico invited Iran to have bases around our borders you would be ok with that becaue they were invited? Of course you wouldnt, as you shouldnt be.

No one is saying Iran is completely innocent, but what you wont acknowledge is that the US most certainly meddles in other places as well, including Iran. We overthrew a Democratically elected leader in Iran well before they took hostages.

Yes, it is a talking point. A tired, worn out talking point that Ron Paul made famous and people lazily use when they want to finger America with some sort of blame for an asshole committing terrorism in the region.

 

[Crazyhole]

This tired, dumb talking point again? Here, I'll help you- we have bases in that region because we were invited by those host nations to put bases there as a deterrent to the country to their East, that has been inflicting chaos and violence across the region since 1979.

Iran had their revolution and the very first thing they did was take Americans hostage. Yea, really hard to understand why we've been wary of them all of this time!

You're looking at this like its black and white where we are always the good guys and they are always the bad guys. That isn't the case. We've done a lot of meddling in the middle east because it served our interest in nothing more than oil. We helped place the Shah because BP didnt like the idea of losing their profit margin on cheaply extracted oil. They've resented us ever since. Blame the UK or Kennedy for it, but the fact remains that Iran would never have had the revolution if their people had gotten what they wanted in the first place, which was to be able to use their natural resources to their own benefit.

 

[UCFKnight85]

You're looking at this like its black and white where we are always the good guys and they are always the bad guys. That isn't the case. We've done a lot of meddling in the middle east because it served our interest in nothing more than oil. We helped place the Shah because BP didnt like the idea of losing their profit margin on cheaply extracted oil. They've resented us ever since. Blame the UK or Kennedy for it, but the fact remains that Iran would never have had the revolution if their people had gotten what they wanted in the first place, which was to be able to use their natural resources to their own benefit.

Ok, sure- we meddled in the 60's and 70's. We then largely disengaged in the entire region since Vietnam made everyone hesitant to commit forces anywhere again.

We returned in 1991 to expel Iraq from Kuwait and defend Saudi Arabia, where the asshole OBL came from. This was after we assisted his militias in Afghanistan in the 80s.

So sure, we helped his fighters in the 80s then defended his homeland and the Muslim homeland from an invader, but he hates us because our troops were always meddling and stuff.

Like I said, let's stop finding ways to blame ourselves for terrorist assholes deciding that they're going to devote their lives to killing Americans.

 

[Cubs79]

Ok, sure- we meddled in the 60's and 70's. We then largely disengaged in the entire region since Vietnam made everyone hesitant to commit forces anywhere again.

We returned in 1991 to expel Iraq from Kuwait and defend Saudi Arabia, where the asshole OBL came from. This was after we assisted his militias in Afghanistan in the 80s.

So sure, we helped his fighters in the 80s then defended his homeland and the Muslim homeland from an invader, but he hates us because our troops were always meddling and stuff.

Like I said, let's stop finding ways to blame ourselves for terrorist assholes deciding that they're going to devote their lives to killing Americans.

As you mention, we also supported Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war throughtout almost the entire 80s, so we most certainly never "disengaged" from the region. YOu completely contradicted yourself within the same post. Not to mention we have been involved with Saudi Arabia in some way, shape, or form since the 1950s until the present.

Dude, it isnt about "blaming" ourselves. It is about acknowledging actual reasons for things. Ignoring history doesnt change history, and ignoring the reasons for the US-Iran tension doesnt change those reasons. We can either try and make things better, or we can just look at the world through star spangled glasses and pretend we are perfect and that things will suddenly change and we arent at fault for anything, ever. You appear to choose the latter.

 

[Crazyhole]

Ok, sure- we meddled in the 60's and 70's. We then largely disengaged in the entire region since Vietnam made everyone hesitant to commit forces anywhere again.

We returned in 1991 to expel Iraq from Kuwait and defend Saudi Arabia, where the asshole OBL came from. This was after we assisted his militias in Afghanistan in the 80s.

So sure, we helped his fighters in the 80s then defended his homeland and the Muslim homeland from an invader, but he hates us because our troops were always meddling and stuff.

Like I said, let's stop finding ways to blame ourselves for terrorist assholes deciding that they're going to devote their lives to killing Americans.

I'm not placing blame on us at all, but we have to acknowledge what our support for certain positions has led to. We propped up Saddam for a lot of years as a way to oppose Iran. We sold weapons to what eventually became ISIS. We supported the revolution in Lybia after Gaddafi had already been neutralized. We gave support to the Islamic brotherhood in Egypt. None of those things ended up working out in our favor, so it's only natural to question what kind of outcome we're going to see when we kill the #2 guy in Iran.

 

[DaShuckster]

Trump blasted the Iran nuclear agreement because “we could get a better deal.” What’s the likelihood of that happening now?

Trump blasted our endless wars in the Middle East and said we needed to bring our troops home. What’s the likelihood of that happening anytime soon?

But I’m sure our resident Red Hats will twist and turn their latest comments to spin this escalation as some ‘big win’ for peace. If you honestly believe that bullsh*t, I’ve got some prime land to sell you in the Everglades.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Trump blasted the Iran nuclear agreement because “we could get a better deal.” What’s the likelihood of that happening now?

Trump blasted our endless wars in the Middle East and said we needed to bring our troops home. What’s the likelihood of that happening anytime soon?

But I’m sure our resident Red Hats will twist and turn their latest comments to spin this escalation as some ‘big win’ for peace. If you honestly believe that bullsh*t, I’ve got some prime land to sell you in the Everglades.

You were the one losing your shit when Trump attempted to remove troops from Syria. Who is the real hypocrite here?

 

[DaShuckster]

You were the one losing your shit when Trump attempted to remove troops from Syria. Who is the real hypocrite here?

ROTFLMAO. You didn't give a shit about deserting the Kurds or allowing ISIS fighters to escape prison because Trump was "sending our troops home."

And now???

Screw bringing them home. You support MORE TROOPS going over there to fight the Saudi Prince's war against Iran.

 

[UCFKnight85]

ROTFLMAO. You didn't give a shit about deserting the Kurds or allowing ISIS fighters to escape prison because Trump was "sending our troops home."

And now???

Screw bringing them home. You support MORE TROOPS going over there to fight the Saudi Prince's war against Iran.

I love how you just lie at will. You're one delusional person, you know that right?

What I said, and what still rings true, is that we had absolutely nothing to do with a decades' old fight between Turkey and the Kurds and our troops didn't deserve to be caught in the crossfire. You were basically begging to keep them there to use as human shields. Why didn't you go over there to act as a human shield then, if all we needed were a few Americans between two sides?

On the other hand, here we have an Iranian terrorist leader who already has hundreds of dead Americans on his resume, just killed more, and was targeting Americans outside of Iran in a country that we have a legal mandate to be in.

Sorry if a dead terrorist who has killed Americans is bad news to you, your obsessive hate for Trump must be a crippling disease.

 

[DaShuckster]

I love how you just lie at will. You're one delusional person, you know that right?

You spent pages worth of posts proclaiming that you didn't want our troops to have their lives threatened in Northern Syria by coming between the Turks and the Kurds. You proclaimed that ISIS was defeated and our troops could come home.

And now?

Apparently assassinating the Iranian General was worth threatening our troops with retaliation. You applaud the defeat of ISIS and an assassination that's guaranteed to create new terrorists.

Jesus, doesn't everybody have war fatigue at this point? I thought our renewed involvement in the Middle East was intended to stomp out ISIS. If, as you've told us, ISIS is no longer a threat, why not get the hell out of there?

Why in God's name would Trump choose to deliberately escalate a conflict with Iran for goodness sakes???!?!

 

[UCFKnight85]

You spent pages worth of posts proclaiming that you didn't want our troops to have their lives threatened in Northern Syria by coming between the Turks and the Kurds. You proclaimed that ISIS was defeated and our troops could come home.

And now?

Apparently assassinating the Iranian General was worth threatening our troops with retaliation. You applaud the defeat of ISIS and an assassination that's guaranteed to create new terrorists.

Jesus, doesn't everybody have war fatigue at this point? I thought our renewed involvement in the Middle East was intended to stomp out ISIS. If, as you've told us, ISIS is no longer a threat, why not get the hell out of there?

Why in God's name would Trump choose to deliberately escalate a conflict with Iran for goodness sakes???!?!

Like I said, you're a liar. He didn't escalate anything, they did when they killed a contractor and attacked our Embassy. You're a disingenuous nitwit.

 

[UCFWayne]

alot of lefties in here supporting a known terrorist that would torture and kill them without hesitation if given the opportunity. im glad hes dead. i hope the show of force reminds those idiots in iran not to screw around anymore. i dont want war, but theyve been attacking us for years. i mean they shot down one of our drones a few months ago. i guess they also forgot about all those ships they hijacked. yea iran is definitely peaceful...

 

[DaShuckster]

He didn't escalate anything, they did when they killed a contractor and attacked our Embassy.

Assassinating a beloved Iranian General isn't escalating anything?

Let's wait and see how your latest prediction holds up.

 

[Crazyhole]

Assassinating a beloved Iranian General isn't escalating anything?

Let's wait and see how your latest prediction holds up.

Under his direction, oil tankers were bombed that were going to and from countries that have nothing to do with us. Seems like he did a fine job of escalating things himself.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Assassinating a beloved Iranian General isn't escalating anything?

Let's wait and see how your latest prediction holds up.

I give no shits that he was "beloved". He was a mass murdering terrorist. The fact that he was "beloved" is simply an indictment of Iran.

Very impressed by your shilling for Iran and terrorists who just killed an American since you must get another ding on Trump. How very American of you.

 

[DaShuckster]

alot of lefties in here supporting a known terrorist that would torture and kill them without hesitation if given the opportunity.

Come on, Wayne, you KNOW that's total bullsh*t. If you're going to weigh in on this mess, at least be honest about it.

No one is arguing that Iran isn't a bad actor in the Middle East quagmire. We made a nuclear agreement with them that by all accounts they were abiding by. Now that didn't stop them from using proxies to promote terrorism. But where are we now? The agreement is in shreds; Iran has openly proclaimed their back in the nuclear arms business; and have vowed vengeance against the United States.

Glad that Trump is making us all safer.

 

[DaShuckster]

I give no shits that he was "beloved". He was a mass murdering terrorist. The fact that he was "beloved" is simply an indictment of Iran.

Your simplistic saber-rattling is as bad as Trump's.

The General was beloved enough that his death at the hands of the United States has rallied Iranian support for a government that had been receiving increasing public pressure.

 

[NinjaKnight]

alot of lefties in here supporting a known terrorist that would torture and kill them without hesitation if given the opportunity. im glad hes dead. i hope the show of force reminds those idiots in iran not to screw around anymore. i dont want war, but theyve been attacking us for years. i mean they shot down one of our drones a few months ago. i guess they also forgot about all those ships they hijacked. yea iran is definitely peaceful...

You really, truly are a moron.

 

[UCFWayne]

iraq gov held a voted and ask the us forces to leave the other day. now it looks like we are actually going to leave.

 

[Crazyhole]

iraq gov held a voted and ask the us forces to leave the other day. now it looks like we are actually going to leave.

Wow. I read a Reuters article a couple of days ago that predicted this but didnt think it was real. Basically said that we would say "we killed the bad guy, now take care of your own business, we're out".

I'm 100% in favor of this move.

 

[UCFBS]

First off, even a pro-Iranian media outlet in Iran found that 2/3rds of Iranians are blaming Iran for this, and still plan to protest. That says a lot! It also means the Trump adminsitration's policy of sanctions is crippling the Iranian leadership's ability to bribe business and community leaders.

Secondly, Trump has purposely avoided killing Iranian personnel, and refuses to strike Iran. Iran is getting desperate and finally decided to start killing Americans, not just unmanned vehicles. First a contractor, then organizing a protest with militia firing on the embassy (sound familiar?), and then rocket attacks on US compounds.

So ... that was the line, the 3 strikes.

So Trump basically took out their in-theater terrorist, and his chief calling-the-shots, while they were in Iraq, committing terror, and planning more. It wasn't any different than Trump 'reminding' the Syrians and Russians when we finally bombed after a chemical weapon use. That put Syria in-line. Everyone forgets that.

Let me say that again ... Trump took out the leadership, not the low fruit, not the individual Iranian soldiers, that 'made the calls.' Just like Trump took out the Syrian capability for chemical weapons usage. It was basically, "We know where you are, and if you pull it enough times, we take you out."

So now the question isn't just what Iran 'does next.' Iran will 'strike back.' But how?

• Civilians -- the US went after the Iranian 'expeditionary forces' in Iraq, as they were committing acts of terror -- so Iran killing civilians wouldn't go over well.
• Military -- Iran strikes at US military assets. They may have some success. But what happens when the US starts destroying 'equivalent' capabilities in the Gulf? I don't see that 'ending well' for Iran, even if the US avoids hitting Iran itself.
• US Soil -- The US hasn't attacked Iranian soil. This would also look poorly for Iran.

I don't see this ending well for Iran.

As always, let's pull out and let China v. Europe happen in the Middle East. The US is completely independent energy-wise, and we're back to being 100% domestic for not only rare earth mining, but refining. We don't need the Chinese at all.

In fact, I say we cut them off from Helium and other resources.

 

[UCFBS]

I give no shits that he was "beloved". He was a mass murdering terrorist. The fact that he was "beloved" is simply an indictment of Iran.
Very impressed by your shilling for Iran and terrorists who just killed an American since you must get another ding on Trump. How very American of you.

I have to 100% agree with 85 here ... it's time we started killing the top level people pulling this crap -- as they are in-country and directing it 'in real time' -- and 'see where everyone stands.' Now we know.

Iraq would rather let Iranians kill Americans in their own country, than let the US 'defend itself.' Time to pull out ... entirely. Seriously ... it's over. The Iranians own enough of the Iraqi leadership, and the Sunni and Kurds protested the vote. We're done.

 

[Crazyhole]

First off, even a pro-Iranian media outlet in Iran found that 2/3rds of Iranians are blaming Iran for this, and still plan to protest. That says a lot! It also means the Trump adminsitration's policy of sanctions is crippling the Iranian leadership's ability to bribe business and community leaders.

Secondly, Trump has purposely avoided killing Iranian personnel, and refuses to strike Iran. Iran is getting desperate and finally decided to start killing Americans, not just unmanned vehicles. First a contractor, then organizing a protest with militia firing on the embassy (sound familiar?), and then rocket attacks on US compounds.

So ... that was the line, the 3 strikes.

So Trump basically took out their in-theater terrorist, and his chief calling-the-shots, while they were in Iraq, committing terror, and planning more. It wasn't any different than Trump 'reminding' the Syrians and Russians when we finally bombed after a chemical weapon use. That put Syria in-line. Everyone forgets that.

Let me say that again ... Trump took out the leadership, not the low fruit, not the individual Iranian soldiers, that 'made the calls.' Just like Trump took out the Syrian capability for chemical weapons usage. It was basically, "We know where you are, and if you pull it enough times, we take you out."

So now the question isn't just what Iran 'does next.' Iran will 'strike back.' But how?

• Civilians -- the US went after the Iranian 'expeditionary forces' in Iraq, as they were committing acts of terror -- so Iran killing civilians wouldn't go over well.
• Military -- Iran strikes at US military assets. They may have some success. But what happens when the US starts destroying 'equivalent' capabilities in the Gulf? I don't see that 'ending well' for Iran, even if the US avoids hitting Iran itself.
• US Soil -- The US hasn't attacked Iranian soil. This would also look poorly for Iran.

I don't see this ending well for Iran.

As always, let's pull out and let China v. Europe happen in the Middle East. The US is completely independent energy-wise, and we're back to being 100% domestic for not only rare earth mining, but refining. We don't need the Chinese at all.

In fact, I say we cut them off from Helium and other resources.

I think that Iran's motivation at this point is just to raise global oil prices, which makes me question how the Saudis will act. A self sufficient US is the biggest threat to the entire region.

 

[UCFKnight85]

iraq gov held a voted and ask the us forces to leave the other day. now it looks like we are actually going to leave.

No, they didn’t. The Shia members who are paid by Iran showed up- the Sunnis and Kurds boycotted the vote and in the process were threatened by Iranian militia

Mostly because Iran has killed tons of Iraqis in Iraq who are protesting their shadow involvement

 

[Crazyhole]

No, they didn’t. The Shia members who are paid by Iran showed up- the Sunnis and Kurds boycotted the vote and in the process were threatened by Iranian militia

Mostly because Iran has killed tons of Iraqis in Iraq who are protesting their shadow involvement

Iraq is like 2/3rds Shia. Its not like a majority was threatened and it would have changed the outcome. They want us out, we should want out, let's just get it done

 

[UCFKnight85]

Iraq is like 2/3rds Shia. Its not like a majority was threatened and it would have changed the outcome. They want us out, we should want out, let's just get it done

The minority part of the government was threatened by militias aligned with the majority , as funded by a foreign terrorist group. That’s troubling

 

[UCFBS]

The minority part of the government was threatened by militias aligned with the majority , as funded by a foreign terrorist group. That’s troubling

The sad thing is that before we removed Saddam, anyone pulling this would have been executed by his Sunni administration ... including the Iranian leader and his 'expeditionary' command, just like Trump did.

Sigh ... I said (back in 2002) going into Iraq was going to be 5 years and 5,000 Americans dead, and people (including plenty on the left, even Hillary) said it wouldn't be that many or that long. And I so, so under-estimated! And then Obama gave us Syria, and Clinton Libya.

Let's bring them all home. I'm really done. We don't need anything from the region at all. We never will ever again.

 

[UCFKnight85]

 

[UCFWayne]

apparently the us put out a letter about leaving iraq on accident. talk about a screw up...

 

[UCFWayne]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...leimani-funeral-procession-deaths/2830680001/

Stampede at Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani's funeral kills at least 40

im sure this is somehow trumps fault