Next time, watch the debate…then you will know all of what was said, and not just the favorite sound bites culled by the media.
Paul actually said he was confused by the policy of going after Iraq, and mentioned Osama bin Laden being on the loose in Pakistan/Afghanistan while we are busy spilling blood and treasure into the sands of Iraq.
He is not a pacifist, and he does not believe in “appeasement”. What he believes in is not sticking our noses in the business of other nations when there is no compelling interest.
For those keeping score: Saddam’s phantom WMD’s – not a compelling national interest. Tracking down the perpetrator of 9/11, arguably in the national interest.
Pay REAL attention, and read George Washington’s farewell address for a primer on non-interventionism.
Ron Paul makes Ronald Reagan look like a classic tax-and-spend liberal.
Nice try Cuthbert! I live in SC and WAS watching the debate and Curt has the video of the segment in question.
I realize you would prefer to attempt, however lamely, to change the subject.
But here you have OBL’s demand for peace.
What is your answer? Are you going to disown every ally we have in the Middle East and withdraw only to wait for the muzzies to come here and strike again? Do you care?
Sorry, but your delusion is no excuse for your stupidity.
scrapiron
17 years ago
People like Cuthbert is the reason the democrat party is changing their logo from a Jackass to a Cockroach. Shine a light on them and they run and hide.
“Sorry, but your delusion is no excuse for your stupidity” He doesn’t need an excuse, he’s a democrat and it’s expected that they be stupid. Anyone watch the happening’s in congress today who still thinks Peeeeloshi isn’t a danger to the country as a whole and the Amerian people specifically? Too much BDS or too much Botox has sent her over the edge and she’s determined to take millions with her. Sort of like Osama.
Ethan
17 years ago
The point was never that we’re going to bring Osama bin Laden around by being nice to him. You don’t think this, and I don’t think this, and Ron Paul certainly doesn’t think this.
You’ve posted a quote by bin Laden, whom I would hope we would all agree is a psychopath, and you’ve implied that it speaks for a majority of the Muslim community. It simply doesn’t. Believe it or not, most Muslims don’t care nearly so much about teaching us a lession as they do about the negative effects of being bombed into oblivion.
Look how enraged you’ve become over the deaths of our 3,000 on 9/11, multiply that by one-and-a-half orders of magnitude, and you might get a quick glimpse of what this looks like to those who are trying to decide right now whether or not to join the insurgency.
The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States has been clear about this. The National Intelligence Estimate has been clear about this. Ron Paul is clear about this. Rudy Giuliani either isn’t aware of any of it, or — 100 times more likely — he’s cynically counting on nationalistic fervor to overcome it.
Which it will, undoubtedly. May God’s grace protect us from the end result.
—
“There is nothing bin Laden could have hoped for more than the American invasion and occupation of Iraq.” — Michael Scheuer, Central Intelligence Agency
Dar
17 years ago
Good foreign policy is not a matter of doing what this person demands or doing what that person demands, it’s a matter of doing what is right. A nice byproduct is that less people are likely to do something bad as a consequence. Ron Paul is right.
Look how enraged you’ve become over the deaths of our 3,000 on 9/11, multiply that by one-and-a-half orders of magnitude, and you might get a quick glimpse of what this looks like to those who are trying to decide right now whether or not to join the insurgency.
As opposed to the rape rooms, acid baths, and gas attacks they received under a dictatorship.
Pathetic, pathetic, pathetic.
Man you Ron Paulbots are a disgusting bunch.
Matters little. Ron Paul is a sideshow circus, our Howard Dean, who will be regulated to the sidelines where he belongs.
Actually, he belongs to be OUT of politics completely. But one thing at a time.
Maybe this explains why conservative blogs are being invaded by the nutwing of the conservative movement:
During the Debate
1. Make your voice heard on blogs during the debate.
After the Debate
1. Vote for Ron Paul via text-message using your cellular phone. The number to which you can send your text-message is 36988. It will accept your vote between 9:30 p.m. EDT and 12:30 a.m. EDT. The code for Ron Paul is “R7”
2. Engage with others in the blogosphere about why Ron Paul is the only real conservative in the race who values the Constitution and the core values of America. Many of these sites will be querying their audiences about who won the debate — so please help promote Ron Paul!
The Ron Paulbots do not understand the Jihadist movement and that we are in a long war that doesn’t involve just Osama bin Laden.
Ethan
17 years ago
“The Ron Paulbots do not understand the Jihadist movement and that we are in a long war that doesn’t involve just Osama bin Laden.”
No: it involves oil and pseudo-Christianity as well, with respect to our lethal response.
jpm100
17 years ago
It kind of funny though.
What we did with the Iraq War is what was necessary to end 10 years of bombing and sanctions.
Damned if we do. Damned if we don’t. Nice.
Scott Malensek
17 years ago
18th century non-interventionism might have been a great idea for a nation with a comparatively tiny military and where defense was even in question, but when that nation is no longer fledgling but a superpower things are bit different. I love the argument that if it was good in the 18th century, then it’s good in the 21st century because apparently the world situation hasn’t changed. Brilliant. I’d type more, but I’ve gotta go churn some butter. and send a letter overseas so that it gets there before Christmas.
Wondering Aloud
17 years ago
I listened to this exchange and it does make sense, sort of, It’s dead wrong and childiish I’m gonna take my ball and go hom kind of sense just like the Dems.
mark
17 years ago
Ron Paul is just the latest in a long line of people trying to re-write history… but in stead of him pushing a book he is running for President. Well, lets look at exactly what he said.
“Non-intervention was a major contributing factor. Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we’ve been over there; we’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years.”
Now the attack he is talking about is 9/11, and it was pulled off by Osama bin Laden and his group al Qaeda… we all agree on that right, well outside of the tin foil hat committee who think Bush did it. Well, doesn’t any one remember when Osama bin Laden first declared war on the US and why? It was in 1990, and it was because Saudi Arabia accepted the United States offer of help in the Iraq/Kuwait mess over his offer. That’s right, Osama bin Laden wanted the same thing in 1990 that we did, Iraq out of Kuwait, and when his offer of help was snubbed he cursed Saudi Arabia for letting infedels onto the holy land and has been attacking the US ever since.
So in a way Ron Paul was right, it is blow back, but not because we forced our selfs on anybody, we OFFERED to help Saudi Arabia, and not because “we’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years” but because his feelings got hurt that Saudi Arabia accepted our offer of 300,000 men to his offer of a couple of thousand.
Wondering Aloud
17 years ago
If we are supposed to listen to these enemies as Paul suggests; why doesn’t he listen to them. It’s like Al Gore and global warming “do as I say not as I do”?
Bin Laden and a variety of other terrorists are not attacking us because we are there nor will they stop because we leave. There goal was to get us out of there until they take over, but their final stated goal has always been our submission to Sharia.
Are people and Congress actually stupid enough to think that our leaving will make the Mideast better? Or that it will stop the terrorists? Genocide is a high price to pay for a few years of false peace isn’t it?
To the unthinking individual who posted the previous comment: the Michigan GOP leader withdrew his petition because his office was being bombarded by people disagreeing with his decision.
Ron Paul supports going after the terrorists who are attacking us– al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, etc. He supported the invasion of Afghanistan right after 9/11; he introduced a bill in Congress that would allow us to put a bounty on Osama’s head so that private Afghanistanis would turn him in and would allow us to declare war on him as an individual so that we could actually defeat him. He is STRONG against terrorism. He thinks the Iraq War is keeping us from dealing with al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and that it is increasing terrorism (according to the Government Accounting Office study last year, worldwide jihadi terrorism has increased 600% from March 2003, when the Iraq invasion started.)
He would actually defeat the terrorists who are starting things against us rather than fight other people and allow them to spread al Qaeda’s message.
Ron Paul is also more Republican than any of the other candidates. Some are pro-abortion, some are pro-illegal immigration, some are pro-gun control, and he is none of those things. He is a true conservative Republican, who wants to make us safer and secure our borders.
Michael Scheuer headed the CIA’s bin Laden and al Qaeda team for many years. He actually started the division and was paid by our government to study Osama for years. He has this to say:
“Last week, Representative Paul did all Americans an immense service by simply pointing out the obvious: Our Islamist enemies do not give a damn about the way we vote, think, or live. Though any country they ruled would surely not look like ours, they are motivated by the belief that U.S. foreign policy is an attack on Islam, its lands, and its believers.”
“Of the eighteen presidential candidates now in the field from both parties, only Mr. Paul has had the courage to square with the average American voter. We are indeed hated and being warred against because we are “over there,†and not for what we are and how we live. Our failure to recognize the truth spoken by Mr. Paul — and spelled out for us in hundreds of pages of statements by Osama bin Laden since 1996 — is leading America toward military and economic disaster.”
Now, just try to come up with an argument against the man who studied Osama bin Laden for 10 years… I think he knows what drives that crazy terrorist.
Gloria
17 years ago
Here’s another tidbit from Michael Scheuer:
“And no matter how you view Mr. Paul’s words, you can safely take one thing to the bank. The person most shaken by Mr. Paul’s frankness was Osama bin Laden, who knows that the current status quo in U.S. foreign policy toward the Islamic world is al-Qaeda’s one indispensable ally, and the only glue that provides cohesion between and among the diverse and often fractious Islamist groups that follow its banner.”
That’s the CIA’s head guy on bin Laden! He knows more about what motivates that guy than anyone.
Ron Paul was right. And Osama doesn’t like it that someone is finally speaking the truth.
“”And no matter how you view Mr. Paul’s words, you can safely take one thing to the bank. The person most shaken by Mr. Paul’s frankness was Osama bin Laden…”
Thanks Gloria. I needed a laugh. Please let me know where you got the stuff you are smoking. I’d like to try some.
Apparently, you haven’t read Osama’s OWN WORDS describing the goals of Jihad as it relates to the U.S.:
From the bin Laden’s 2002 “Letter to the American People:”
What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?
(1) The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam.
(a) The religion of the Unification of God; of freedom from associating partners with Him, and rejection of this; of complete love of Him, the Exalted; of complete submission to His Laws; and of the discarding of all the opinions, orders, theories and religions which contradict with the religion He sent down to His Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Islam is the religion of all the prophets, and makes no distinction between them – peace be upon them all.
It is to this religion that we call you; the seal of all the previous religions.
…
You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Shariah of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your policies, contradicting the pure nature which affirms Absolute Authority to the Lord and your Creator.
You ready to give up all your rights as a woman, put on the full burka and become property of an Islamist on the same par as his goat?
I’d really be interested in your answer Gloria. If anyone here is “unthinking” you qualify.
Skip742
17 years ago
Wow! The Bush legacy is apparently a party full of angry people who can’t stand disagreement. Even when that disagreement comes from our party’s own heritage.
First, whatever you think about this policy, Ron Paul has never been a member of the appeasement camp, and he’s anything but soft in his foreign policy. He does, however, hold to the old-fashioned Republican policy of non-intervention. You remember, the one that George W. Bush used in his campaign speech announcing his commitment to avoid “nation-building” and other similarly foolhardy foreign policy blunders. If you can think back before the Bush years, this is what ALL conservative Republicans supported. This is the Republican Party that Ron Paul grew up in. He got involved in 1976, and was one of a handful of Republicans who supported Ronald Reagan over Gerald Ford in that election.
I’m not sure I agree 100% with Dr. Paul’s assessment of the 9-11 attacks. Sure, there may be some “blowback”, but there also may be some unfathomable hatred that bin Laden and his cronies carry that we couldn’t have done anything about. Regardless, I’ve never seen how Iraq has been helpful. We should have stayed in Afghanistan and pursued them there, where we had a clearer picture of the situation, and could have had kept the war contained. But, again, its not the strategy that I should be arguing for.
What worries me about so many of these posts is the idea that under Bush, we can’t even be allowed to debate policy. Somehow, that scares me a lot. In that context, Ron Paul looks better and better to me every day. Because an honest discussion of foreign policy is ALWAYS a key to freedom.
Side note: the people who you ineloquently call Ron Paulbots are not some group of mindless internet zombies with an anti-war penchant. Many of us have been following Paul’s ideas for years. We know him to be a staunch conservative (in the old definition of the world, pre-neoCons). We appreciate his grasp of economic theory, and his opposition to inflation (something Bush and his Keynesian advisors don’t seem to get). We value his commitment to constitutional principles, even when it’s inconvenient. We appreciate his experience in medicine, as well as his experience running a private practice and making a payroll. We respect his military service (because, one thing my father taught me is that someone who has served in wartime will be much less likely to get us into pointless wars). Oh, yeah, and we see some value to having been involved in government since the 1970’s, unlike many of the newcomers. This level of experience deserves some respect.
So, whether you agree or disagree with Paul’s stance on this one issue, let’s try to be a little less antagonistic. I mean, if you’re trying to rip your party to shreds, you’re right on target. I have to tell you, after being an active Republican for nearly 30 years, the venom I’ve seen coming at me from my own party during this election is almost enough to make me rethink that choice. Yes, I know that there’s nowhere else to go, but I could always register as an independent, for whatever good it will do me.
Zach Warren(TN)
17 years ago
The author is woefully ignorant. Ron Paul is absolutely correct. Quite honestly, he has my vote and the votes of many others I know. If the Republicans want to win they need this guy. Otherwise, they will have to stick to the “caging” techniques, found in the not-so-missing Karl Rove e-mails!!!
Being called “woefully ignorant” by a fool is the best complement I could expect.
Notice how NONE of these Paulbots ever discussed the nature of bin Laden’s demands?
Perhaps oh-so-brilliant Zach would like to tell me how he will accede to bin Laden’s demand that he and us offer:
“complete submission to His Laws; and of the discarding of all the opinions, orders, theories and religions which contradict with the religion He sent down to His Prophet Muhammad.”
All your Paulbot nonsense about Israel or Iraq won’t save your butt unless you are prepared to submit to Islam.
You ready to convert Zach?
Simon
17 years ago
He said listen to them for their reasons, not listen to them and obey. He pointed out that Americans would have their guns out if they were being occupied, I see no reason that he would just submit to some crazy Islamists. You are putting words in his mouth.
Also, Fundamental Islamism is a failed ideology so the idea of them getting so big is laughable. The only reason people are attracted to it now is because of US foreign policy in the Middle East. They used too like the US because it wasn’t imperialist.
Simon: You and your fellow Paulbots are delusional.
You say the idea that the Islamic Fascists could threaten us is “laughable.”
Where were you on September 11th?
That attack to the Islamists was a prelude to something far worse.
You can ignore the demands of bin Laden calling you to convert to Islam, submit or die. But sticking your head in the sand and saying it ain’t so is foolish and dangerous.
If Islamic Fascism was centered on attacking American and Zionist Imperialism how do you explain the thousands of Buddhist Monks who have been murdered in Thailand by Islamic Fascists offering the same message: convert, submit or die?
Are those peaceful monks some hidden arm of Zionist Imperialism?
You people are politically irrelevant. As an experienced practitioner in electoral politics at every level I’ve seen it all before. Paul will go no where.
Yet you folks have fallen into a dangerous trap. Instead of facing the fact that we are at war and MUST win, you would handcuff the very folks with the clear understanding of the nature of our enemy and place us all at greater risk.
The war will last longer and more American lives will be lost because of your dangerous delusions.
And for that, you should be rightly denounced for deserting your country and endangering the lives of your fellow citizens.
I’m reminded of the words of American Patriot and Founding Father Samuel Adams:
“If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
Kaligula
17 years ago
I’m recalling the old joke about Goldwater back in the day. Vote for Goldwater and we will go to war in Vietname. Sure enough, voted for Goldwater and we went to war in Vietnam.
The joke needs to be updated. Vote for Gore and become a nation builder. Sure enough, voted for Gore and we became a nation builder.
Kaligula
17 years ago
Mike’s America:
Regarding your Samuel Adams quote, I believe it’s more appropriately aimed at those who advocate we need Patriot Acts to maintain the american way of life as opposed to the likes of Ron Paul, who values liberty above bogus security.
Our founding fathers would have scoffed at a Patriot Act, despite the fact the country/colonies were littered with British Torries at the time.
Yes, we’d all be much better off with dirty bombs exploding in our cities, school buses full of young children hijacked and massacred and our shopping centers turned into slaughter houses.
Ah the joys of a Ron Paul world of freedom and peace….
Freedom to die at hands of evil men.
And the only peace, the peace of the grave.
Nice try moonbat! Let me know when you are serious.
Kaligula
17 years ago
Shit, Mike, I just fired up Metallica’s Kill em All after reading that…
Something tells me you fired up your bong long before that.
Dar Scott
17 years ago
Mike, I am surprised that you would threaten me with harm. I think you are letting your fears get the better of you. I encourage you to put panic aside, take courage, stand up for what is right, side with Ron Paul.
Oh that’s funny. What a transparent and ridiculous smear.
I said “Your mindboggingly delusional idiocy borders on the insane. Maybe we can check you into one of those mental health facilities in Cuba that treats just your kind of ailment.”
That’s threatening you with harm? I thought you folks worshipped Castro?
All those who say that Islam is a serious threat to us are doing a serious disservice to our country and our history. Does anyone here even know the Bill of Rights? They can’t force us to submit. They can’t convert us by the sword. We have a superpower military. They have an insurgency. We have a tradition of individualistic freedom. They have a tradition of fragmented tribalism.
The odds that they could attack us are weak. The odds that the attack would accomplish anything are null. Their demands to submit are hyperbole. People who take them seriously are cowards who demean the prestige of our nation.
“The odds that they could attack us are weak. The odds that the attack would accomplish anything are null.”
Really?
Ever heard of September 11th?
How about all the attacks that have been prevented, no thanks to delusionists like you?
But at least you concede that even if we were to throw Israel, our only reliable ally in the Middle East, over the side it won’t make the slightest difference.
P.S. We’ve already seen plenty of examples of Islamists seeking to supplant U.S. law and tradition in the U.S. and replace it with Sharia. Ever been to Dearborn Michigan?
Hey Mike:
Next time, watch the debate…then you will know all of what was said, and not just the favorite sound bites culled by the media.
Paul actually said he was confused by the policy of going after Iraq, and mentioned Osama bin Laden being on the loose in Pakistan/Afghanistan while we are busy spilling blood and treasure into the sands of Iraq.
He is not a pacifist, and he does not believe in “appeasement”. What he believes in is not sticking our noses in the business of other nations when there is no compelling interest.
For those keeping score: Saddam’s phantom WMD’s – not a compelling national interest. Tracking down the perpetrator of 9/11, arguably in the national interest.
Pay REAL attention, and read George Washington’s farewell address for a primer on non-interventionism.
Ron Paul makes Ronald Reagan look like a classic tax-and-spend liberal.
Nice try Cuthbert! I live in SC and WAS watching the debate and Curt has the video of the segment in question.
I realize you would prefer to attempt, however lamely, to change the subject.
But here you have OBL’s demand for peace.
What is your answer? Are you going to disown every ally we have in the Middle East and withdraw only to wait for the muzzies to come here and strike again? Do you care?
Sorry, but your delusion is no excuse for your stupidity.
People like Cuthbert is the reason the democrat party is changing their logo from a Jackass to a Cockroach. Shine a light on them and they run and hide.
“Sorry, but your delusion is no excuse for your stupidity” He doesn’t need an excuse, he’s a democrat and it’s expected that they be stupid. Anyone watch the happening’s in congress today who still thinks Peeeeloshi isn’t a danger to the country as a whole and the Amerian people specifically? Too much BDS or too much Botox has sent her over the edge and she’s determined to take millions with her. Sort of like Osama.
The point was never that we’re going to bring Osama bin Laden around by being nice to him. You don’t think this, and I don’t think this, and Ron Paul certainly doesn’t think this.
You’ve posted a quote by bin Laden, whom I would hope we would all agree is a psychopath, and you’ve implied that it speaks for a majority of the Muslim community. It simply doesn’t. Believe it or not, most Muslims don’t care nearly so much about teaching us a lession as they do about the negative effects of being bombed into oblivion.
Look how enraged you’ve become over the deaths of our 3,000 on 9/11, multiply that by one-and-a-half orders of magnitude, and you might get a quick glimpse of what this looks like to those who are trying to decide right now whether or not to join the insurgency.
The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States has been clear about this. The National Intelligence Estimate has been clear about this. Ron Paul is clear about this. Rudy Giuliani either isn’t aware of any of it, or — 100 times more likely — he’s cynically counting on nationalistic fervor to overcome it.
Which it will, undoubtedly. May God’s grace protect us from the end result.
—
“There is nothing bin Laden could have hoped for more than the American invasion and occupation of Iraq.” — Michael Scheuer, Central Intelligence Agency
Good foreign policy is not a matter of doing what this person demands or doing what that person demands, it’s a matter of doing what is right. A nice byproduct is that less people are likely to do something bad as a consequence. Ron Paul is right.
What is right is protecting the national security interests of the United States “Dar.”
You and your ilk would weaken this country and make us more vulnerable, not less, to terrorist attacks.
Your mindboggingly delusional idiocy borders on the insane.
Maybe we can check you into one of those mental health facilities in Cuba that treats just your kind of ailment.
As opposed to the rape rooms, acid baths, and gas attacks they received under a dictatorship.
Pathetic, pathetic, pathetic.
Man you Ron Paulbots are a disgusting bunch.
Matters little. Ron Paul is a sideshow circus, our Howard Dean, who will be regulated to the sidelines where he belongs.
Actually, he belongs to be OUT of politics completely. But one thing at a time.
Maybe this explains why conservative blogs are being invaded by the nutwing of the conservative movement:
The Ron Paulbots do not understand the Jihadist movement and that we are in a long war that doesn’t involve just Osama bin Laden.
“The Ron Paulbots do not understand the Jihadist movement and that we are in a long war that doesn’t involve just Osama bin Laden.”
No: it involves oil and pseudo-Christianity as well, with respect to our lethal response.
It kind of funny though.
What we did with the Iraq War is what was necessary to end 10 years of bombing and sanctions.
Damned if we do. Damned if we don’t. Nice.
18th century non-interventionism might have been a great idea for a nation with a comparatively tiny military and where defense was even in question, but when that nation is no longer fledgling but a superpower things are bit different. I love the argument that if it was good in the 18th century, then it’s good in the 21st century because apparently the world situation hasn’t changed. Brilliant. I’d type more, but I’ve gotta go churn some butter. and send a letter overseas so that it gets there before Christmas.
I listened to this exchange and it does make sense, sort of, It’s dead wrong and childiish I’m gonna take my ball and go hom kind of sense just like the Dems.
Ron Paul is just the latest in a long line of people trying to re-write history… but in stead of him pushing a book he is running for President. Well, lets look at exactly what he said.
“Non-intervention was a major contributing factor. Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we’ve been over there; we’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years.”
Now the attack he is talking about is 9/11, and it was pulled off by Osama bin Laden and his group al Qaeda… we all agree on that right, well outside of the tin foil hat committee who think Bush did it. Well, doesn’t any one remember when Osama bin Laden first declared war on the US and why? It was in 1990, and it was because Saudi Arabia accepted the United States offer of help in the Iraq/Kuwait mess over his offer. That’s right, Osama bin Laden wanted the same thing in 1990 that we did, Iraq out of Kuwait, and when his offer of help was snubbed he cursed Saudi Arabia for letting infedels onto the holy land and has been attacking the US ever since.
So in a way Ron Paul was right, it is blow back, but not because we forced our selfs on anybody, we OFFERED to help Saudi Arabia, and not because “we’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years” but because his feelings got hurt that Saudi Arabia accepted our offer of 300,000 men to his offer of a couple of thousand.
If we are supposed to listen to these enemies as Paul suggests; why doesn’t he listen to them. It’s like Al Gore and global warming “do as I say not as I do”?
Bin Laden and a variety of other terrorists are not attacking us because we are there nor will they stop because we leave. There goal was to get us out of there until they take over, but their final stated goal has always been our submission to Sharia.
Are people and Congress actually stupid enough to think that our leaving will make the Mideast better? Or that it will stop the terrorists? Genocide is a high price to pay for a few years of false peace isn’t it?
I watched the ENTIRE debate and I Clearly saw Ron Paul say “Look at the reason they attacked us, we have been boming Iraq for 10 years”!
What was that? We had been ENFORCING the No-Fly Zones UN Resolution, and we were certainly NOT bombing Iraq for 10 years!!
Ron Paul also said “We have to negotiate with other Countries”
What was that?
WE DONT NEGOTIATE WITH TERRORISTS!!
Ron Paul is a Blame America First, Conspiracy Theory Believeing, Terrorist Appeasing Moron.
He is a Libertarian that has no belief whatsoever in defending this Country. He isnt even a REPUBLICAN!!
But hopefully we wont have to put up with his loser ass for much longer
Michigan GOP leader wants Paul barred from future debates
To the unthinking individual who posted the previous comment: the Michigan GOP leader withdrew his petition because his office was being bombarded by people disagreeing with his decision.
Ron Paul supports going after the terrorists who are attacking us– al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, etc. He supported the invasion of Afghanistan right after 9/11; he introduced a bill in Congress that would allow us to put a bounty on Osama’s head so that private Afghanistanis would turn him in and would allow us to declare war on him as an individual so that we could actually defeat him. He is STRONG against terrorism. He thinks the Iraq War is keeping us from dealing with al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and that it is increasing terrorism (according to the Government Accounting Office study last year, worldwide jihadi terrorism has increased 600% from March 2003, when the Iraq invasion started.)
He would actually defeat the terrorists who are starting things against us rather than fight other people and allow them to spread al Qaeda’s message.
Ron Paul is also more Republican than any of the other candidates. Some are pro-abortion, some are pro-illegal immigration, some are pro-gun control, and he is none of those things. He is a true conservative Republican, who wants to make us safer and secure our borders.
Michael Scheuer headed the CIA’s bin Laden and al Qaeda team for many years. He actually started the division and was paid by our government to study Osama for years. He has this to say:
“Last week, Representative Paul did all Americans an immense service by simply pointing out the obvious: Our Islamist enemies do not give a damn about the way we vote, think, or live. Though any country they ruled would surely not look like ours, they are motivated by the belief that U.S. foreign policy is an attack on Islam, its lands, and its believers.”
“Of the eighteen presidential candidates now in the field from both parties, only Mr. Paul has had the courage to square with the average American voter. We are indeed hated and being warred against because we are “over there,†and not for what we are and how we live. Our failure to recognize the truth spoken by Mr. Paul — and spelled out for us in hundreds of pages of statements by Osama bin Laden since 1996 — is leading America toward military and economic disaster.”
Now, just try to come up with an argument against the man who studied Osama bin Laden for 10 years… I think he knows what drives that crazy terrorist.
Here’s another tidbit from Michael Scheuer:
“And no matter how you view Mr. Paul’s words, you can safely take one thing to the bank. The person most shaken by Mr. Paul’s frankness was Osama bin Laden, who knows that the current status quo in U.S. foreign policy toward the Islamic world is al-Qaeda’s one indispensable ally, and the only glue that provides cohesion between and among the diverse and often fractious Islamist groups that follow its banner.”
That’s the CIA’s head guy on bin Laden! He knows more about what motivates that guy than anyone.
Ron Paul was right. And Osama doesn’t like it that someone is finally speaking the truth.
“”And no matter how you view Mr. Paul’s words, you can safely take one thing to the bank. The person most shaken by Mr. Paul’s frankness was Osama bin Laden…”
Thanks Gloria. I needed a laugh. Please let me know where you got the stuff you are smoking. I’d like to try some.
Apparently, you haven’t read Osama’s OWN WORDS describing the goals of Jihad as it relates to the U.S.:
You ready to give up all your rights as a woman, put on the full burka and become property of an Islamist on the same par as his goat?
I’d really be interested in your answer Gloria. If anyone here is “unthinking” you qualify.
Wow! The Bush legacy is apparently a party full of angry people who can’t stand disagreement. Even when that disagreement comes from our party’s own heritage.
First, whatever you think about this policy, Ron Paul has never been a member of the appeasement camp, and he’s anything but soft in his foreign policy. He does, however, hold to the old-fashioned Republican policy of non-intervention. You remember, the one that George W. Bush used in his campaign speech announcing his commitment to avoid “nation-building” and other similarly foolhardy foreign policy blunders. If you can think back before the Bush years, this is what ALL conservative Republicans supported. This is the Republican Party that Ron Paul grew up in. He got involved in 1976, and was one of a handful of Republicans who supported Ronald Reagan over Gerald Ford in that election.
I’m not sure I agree 100% with Dr. Paul’s assessment of the 9-11 attacks. Sure, there may be some “blowback”, but there also may be some unfathomable hatred that bin Laden and his cronies carry that we couldn’t have done anything about. Regardless, I’ve never seen how Iraq has been helpful. We should have stayed in Afghanistan and pursued them there, where we had a clearer picture of the situation, and could have had kept the war contained. But, again, its not the strategy that I should be arguing for.
What worries me about so many of these posts is the idea that under Bush, we can’t even be allowed to debate policy. Somehow, that scares me a lot. In that context, Ron Paul looks better and better to me every day. Because an honest discussion of foreign policy is ALWAYS a key to freedom.
Side note: the people who you ineloquently call Ron Paulbots are not some group of mindless internet zombies with an anti-war penchant. Many of us have been following Paul’s ideas for years. We know him to be a staunch conservative (in the old definition of the world, pre-neoCons). We appreciate his grasp of economic theory, and his opposition to inflation (something Bush and his Keynesian advisors don’t seem to get). We value his commitment to constitutional principles, even when it’s inconvenient. We appreciate his experience in medicine, as well as his experience running a private practice and making a payroll. We respect his military service (because, one thing my father taught me is that someone who has served in wartime will be much less likely to get us into pointless wars). Oh, yeah, and we see some value to having been involved in government since the 1970’s, unlike many of the newcomers. This level of experience deserves some respect.
So, whether you agree or disagree with Paul’s stance on this one issue, let’s try to be a little less antagonistic. I mean, if you’re trying to rip your party to shreds, you’re right on target. I have to tell you, after being an active Republican for nearly 30 years, the venom I’ve seen coming at me from my own party during this election is almost enough to make me rethink that choice. Yes, I know that there’s nowhere else to go, but I could always register as an independent, for whatever good it will do me.
The author is woefully ignorant. Ron Paul is absolutely correct. Quite honestly, he has my vote and the votes of many others I know. If the Republicans want to win they need this guy. Otherwise, they will have to stick to the “caging” techniques, found in the not-so-missing Karl Rove e-mails!!!
Ron Paul, ftw.
Being called “woefully ignorant” by a fool is the best complement I could expect.
Notice how NONE of these Paulbots ever discussed the nature of bin Laden’s demands?
Perhaps oh-so-brilliant Zach would like to tell me how he will accede to bin Laden’s demand that he and us offer:
“complete submission to His Laws; and of the discarding of all the opinions, orders, theories and religions which contradict with the religion He sent down to His Prophet Muhammad.”
All your Paulbot nonsense about Israel or Iraq won’t save your butt unless you are prepared to submit to Islam.
You ready to convert Zach?
He said listen to them for their reasons, not listen to them and obey. He pointed out that Americans would have their guns out if they were being occupied, I see no reason that he would just submit to some crazy Islamists. You are putting words in his mouth.
Also, Fundamental Islamism is a failed ideology so the idea of them getting so big is laughable. The only reason people are attracted to it now is because of US foreign policy in the Middle East. They used too like the US because it wasn’t imperialist.
The Power of Nightmares is a good video on the topic
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=881321004838285177
And here’s a DVD version too.
http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmaresDVD
Simon: You and your fellow Paulbots are delusional.
You say the idea that the Islamic Fascists could threaten us is “laughable.”
Where were you on September 11th?
That attack to the Islamists was a prelude to something far worse.
You can ignore the demands of bin Laden calling you to convert to Islam, submit or die. But sticking your head in the sand and saying it ain’t so is foolish and dangerous.
If Islamic Fascism was centered on attacking American and Zionist Imperialism how do you explain the thousands of Buddhist Monks who have been murdered in Thailand by Islamic Fascists offering the same message: convert, submit or die?
Are those peaceful monks some hidden arm of Zionist Imperialism?
You people are politically irrelevant. As an experienced practitioner in electoral politics at every level I’ve seen it all before. Paul will go no where.
Yet you folks have fallen into a dangerous trap. Instead of facing the fact that we are at war and MUST win, you would handcuff the very folks with the clear understanding of the nature of our enemy and place us all at greater risk.
The war will last longer and more American lives will be lost because of your dangerous delusions.
And for that, you should be rightly denounced for deserting your country and endangering the lives of your fellow citizens.
I’m reminded of the words of American Patriot and Founding Father Samuel Adams:
“If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
I’m recalling the old joke about Goldwater back in the day. Vote for Goldwater and we will go to war in Vietname. Sure enough, voted for Goldwater and we went to war in Vietnam.
The joke needs to be updated. Vote for Gore and become a nation builder. Sure enough, voted for Gore and we became a nation builder.
Mike’s America:
Regarding your Samuel Adams quote, I believe it’s more appropriately aimed at those who advocate we need Patriot Acts to maintain the american way of life as opposed to the likes of Ron Paul, who values liberty above bogus security.
Our founding fathers would have scoffed at a Patriot Act, despite the fact the country/colonies were littered with British Torries at the time.
Yes, we’d all be much better off with dirty bombs exploding in our cities, school buses full of young children hijacked and massacred and our shopping centers turned into slaughter houses.
Ah the joys of a Ron Paul world of freedom and peace….
Freedom to die at hands of evil men.
And the only peace, the peace of the grave.
Nice try moonbat! Let me know when you are serious.
Shit, Mike, I just fired up Metallica’s Kill em All after reading that…
Something tells me you fired up your bong long before that.
Mike, I am surprised that you would threaten me with harm. I think you are letting your fears get the better of you. I encourage you to put panic aside, take courage, stand up for what is right, side with Ron Paul.
Oh that’s funny. What a transparent and ridiculous smear.
I said “Your mindboggingly delusional idiocy borders on the insane. Maybe we can check you into one of those mental health facilities in Cuba that treats just your kind of ailment.”
That’s threatening you with harm? I thought you folks worshipped Castro?
Your crazier than I thought.
All those who say that Islam is a serious threat to us are doing a serious disservice to our country and our history. Does anyone here even know the Bill of Rights? They can’t force us to submit. They can’t convert us by the sword. We have a superpower military. They have an insurgency. We have a tradition of individualistic freedom. They have a tradition of fragmented tribalism.
The odds that they could attack us are weak. The odds that the attack would accomplish anything are null. Their demands to submit are hyperbole. People who take them seriously are cowards who demean the prestige of our nation.
“The odds that they could attack us are weak. The odds that the attack would accomplish anything are null.”
Really?
Ever heard of September 11th?
How about all the attacks that have been prevented, no thanks to delusionists like you?
But at least you concede that even if we were to throw Israel, our only reliable ally in the Middle East, over the side it won’t make the slightest difference.
P.S. We’ve already seen plenty of examples of Islamists seeking to supplant U.S. law and tradition in the U.S. and replace it with Sharia. Ever been to Dearborn Michigan?
Hello
I can’t be bothered with anything these days, but shrug. I just don’t have anything to say recently.
G’night