Armed Chinese Troops in Texas!

Pretty sensationalistic. But I do agree with the general message. I would not like it if foreign troops were occupying this country much as I imagine they do not like is being over there.

I am all for bringing our troops home...But at the end of the day, this video is just another political ad....


Politicians will say anything to get elected. In this video it points out that Obama had said he would pull our troops home and then did not.... Well, he said what he had to in order to get elected.

Why should I believe this video which suggests that Ron Paul will bring our troops home?

Don't get me wrong, I like Ron Paul and what he has to say but at the end of the day why is this not just another empty campaign promise inside of another half baked political ad?

It certainly plays on your emotions....

I'll give you that much.

reply to post by primoaurelius


lol, right over your head. we don't expect people with little intelligence to understand, so don't worry. Do you really think these countries were going to say no to us? It benefited them with trading, exports/imports etc, because doing what the U.S. says ultimately opens up opportunities to receive foreign aid from the U.S. etc. Again though, we don't expect you to understand how the world works, so go back to 7th grade social studies and then return to this thread.

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman

So, if it is so predictable, then do you disagree at all with anything contained in it? Seriously, think about your comment for a moment...

Why is it predictable? Because it's fact?

Meanwhile I think Ron Paul is the best bet we have right now, at least to stop the economic crisis, and to stop the Progressive movement from completely finishing what they started with Woodrow Wilson when he signed the Federal Reserve Act, and the IRS as it exists right now, sometimes I think that even Ron Paul is not aware of the many defining moments of U.S. history, and there are some things he says that I don't agree with. At least not completely.

Would you, or Ron Paul call Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and other founding fathers who weere part of Congress back in the late 1700s terrorists who were sending our troops only to die over money during the Barbary wars in the 1800s?

After all the Muslim pirate states only demanded $660,000 dollars when $40,000 U.S.D. was the limited allocated money given to our envoys to achieve peace...

Would you, or Ron Paul say that these founding fathers were waging an illegal war over money, even though those pirate Muslim states were attacking U.S. and European passenger and merchant vessels that were sailing from Europe to the U.S. and back?

Would you say it is nothing but a conspiracy that Muslim terrorists existed before, during and after the Declaration of Independence of the U.S., and that there is no real reason for them wanting to destroy us or subvert us if we didn't convert to Islam? That it is only a "CIA-U.S. government lie"?...

Would you claing that Muslim extremists who joined with the pirates to fight the Barbary Wars were nothing but "freedom fighters just trying to defend their countries"?...

Perhaps someone more "internets savy" member should make a video as dramatic as the one the OP showed, dramatic music included, but with the fact that the U.S. had to wage two wars against Muslim extremists during the time of the founding fathers.

Would you all claim our founding fathers should have been fired, and or impeached from office for waging wars against Muslim states for the actions of Muslim pirates?

Do note that back then the Muslim states backed the Muslim pirates because the majority of their revenue came from raiding mostly passenger and merchant vessels from Europe and the U.S.

I do however agree that no company, or people should be profiting from wars, but if, or when we are attacked we should show decisively that we will not stand still and allow American lives being taken by ANYONE.

Do any of you know, or remember for example the American lives that have been taken overseas by Muslim extremists during the Clinton administration yet nothing was done?... Yet that was the EXACT same reason why Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and other U.S. founding fathers started the Barbary Wars...

Do yourself a favor and search online how many Americans have been murdered by Islamic extremists for example who were visiting Israel, and many of them were specifically targetted for being Americans in Israel...

reply to post by gimme_some_truth


Let's see, because he's been saying the same damn thing for 25+ years maybe? Because it is part of his core values, peace, prosperity, and FREEDOM for all? He doesn't believe in war, obviously you haven't really done your research. The man has skirted the mainstream war mongering morons for his entire career, at the expense of his own popularity, because unfortunately this country has been a war-hungry corporatist monopoly money-printing machine for a while now. Please do some research on people before you speculate as to "what theyre going to do once they get into office" not everyone is a scumbag like a lot of our past presidents (not JFK).

Funny thing.

China is in Texas right now...start looking at the labels on your possessions.
Made in China
Made in Taiwan
Made in India
Made in Mexico Made in Guatemala etc.


The only way this will ever end is an extinction level event in which No one survives. That will be a good day indeed.

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


It's different when you are actually being attacked. Again, you fail to understand. Muslims have not attacked us, have not been attacking us. You have been lied to. And if some did, its because they were paid to as well as radicalized by the CIA. Research the CIA's ties to Al-Qaeda and Bin Laden. I can't believe I have to keep pointing this out to people. There are even documents that say they were going to shift the threat from Communism to Muslims, to homegrown White Extremists. Look like whats happening now? I thought so. Every "serious" threat that you have perceived to be of great threat to the United States, from Communist Russia, to Muslim Extremists attacking the towers, has either been greatly exaggerated or downright a set-up/false-flag/lie in order to gain support for war.

And now it is FACT, I repeat, FACT, that the government were the ones that got the UNDERWEAR BOMBER ON THE PLANE!!! Talk about a set-up. And if you noticed, just after that, the airport full-body scanners went in. The more ignorant people become, the easier these thugs can get away with this crap and set up a police state and world government.

edit: And it's not the entire government, but large factions/sections of it are highly corrupt and working for the banks.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman

 

Perfect.

That is what a "true Conservative" can see, where a faux-conservative, Republican cannot.

They would be foaming at the mouth at this video, then accuse you of being un-American.

I had a dream that 'Ron Paul was going to be the next Beast' and that my MotherinLaw had won a lot of money from Grandma.
In real life my MotherinLaw has been dead 2 years but her mum died recently and she did leave some money.

I am English and I couldn't care a less who is USA president, so as they say, you get who you deserve-good or bad.

And did anyone notice NLP? That will annoy the visual people.
And it is a take on John Lennon's song 'Imagine all the people were living in perfect harmony'.
NWO and Borg anyone!!!!!

Remember he is the next Beast.

reply to post by Iamonlyhuman


Wow, I'm blown away!!! That was such a powerful message, and then to find out it was delivered by Ron Paul! I'm stunned... Awesome, Go Ron Paul!!!!

reply to post by AriesJedi


I fail to understand what you mean by "Beast" but we do not like the NWO Corporatist borg here at ATS, at least some of us don't.

No offense intended, but I'm going to imagine I didnt just waste 3 minutes and 11 seconds watching that video.

reply to post by Iamonlyhuman


Reading the title and seeing the start of the video pissed me off exactly because of how hypocritical it seemed since we have bases in and occupy many countries but its somehow "okay" and "spreading freedom" or whatever other nonsense brainwashing propaganda for us. Glad to see that the video ended up saying the same message as was running through my head.

Shame it ended up being a political commercial in the end though else I'm sure it would be better received by people who will instead now just brush it off as ron paul propaganda if they don't like ron paul. Honestly, if not for the ron paul ending I bet my last buck there would not be half as many haters in this thread. It's pretty sad how people are so brainwashed and polarized that they can't appreciate any message if it comes from a certain politician they don't like or don't want to vote for. That's why I hate politics in our country and especially the 2 party "us-vs-them" bull# system.

Originally posted by smarterthanyou
It's different when you are actually being attacked. Again, you fail to understand. Muslims have not attacked us, have not been attacking us. You have been lied to. And if some did, its because they were paid to as well as radicalized by the CIA. Research the CIA's ties to Al-Qaeda and Bin Laden. I can't believe I have to keep pointing this out to people. There are even documents that say they were going to shift the threat from Communism to Muslims, to homegrown White Extremists. Look like whats happening now? I thought so. Every "serious" threat that you have perceived to be of great threat to the United States, from Communist Russia, to Muslim Extremists attacking the towers, has either been greatly exaggerated or downright a set-up/false-flag/lie in order to gain support for war.

Really? First of all I am not saying all Muslims, but Muslim extremists. Second of all we have been attacked several times even in our own soil by Muslim extremists.

When we are attacked we shouldn't wage endless wars, but at least show that WE WILL FIGHT BACK. The war in Iraq should have lasted 2-5 years, although things do not go as planned and more so in wars.

Examples of some Muslim extremist attacks on the U.S. include the 1993 WTC bombings, the WTC attacks, the attack on the U.S.S. Cole, the attack on the Marine barracks and many others.

The 1993 World Trade Center bombing occurred on February 26, 1993, when a truck bomb was detonated below the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City. The 1,336 lb (606 kg) urea nitrate–hydrogen gas enhanced device(1) was intended to knock the North Tower (Tower One) into the South Tower (Tower Two), bringing both towers down and killing thousands of people.[2][3] It failed to do so, but did kill six people and injured more than a thousand.(4) The attack was planned by a group of conspirators including Ramzi Yousef, Mahmud Abouhalima, Mohammad Salameh, Nidal A. Ayyad, Abdul Rahman Yasin and Ahmad Ajaj. They received financing from Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, Yousef's uncle. In March 1994, four men were convicted of carrying out the bombing: Abouhalima, Ajaj, Ayyad and Salameh. The charges included conspiracy, explosive destruction of property and interstate transportation of explosives. In November 1997, two more were convicted: Yousef, the mastermind behind the bombings, and Eyad Ismoil, who drove the truck carrying the bomb.

en.wikipedia.org...

BTW, perhaps the claim that the WTC towers should have "toppled like a tree" came from this belief by the terrorists who did the 1993 attack that tower one would topple over tower two?...

I don't think I need to give any links to the 9/11 Ismalic extremist attack on the WTC right?

The Beirut Barracks Bombing (October 23, 1983 in Beirut, Lebanon) occurred during the Lebanese Civil War, when two truck bombs struck separate buildings housing United States and French military forces—members of the Multinational Force in Lebanon—killing 299 American and French servicemen. The organization Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the bombing.

en.wikipedia.org...

The USS Cole Bombing, or the USS Cole Incident, was a suicide attack against the United States Navy destroyer USS Cole (DDG-67) on October 12, 2000 while it was harbored and refueled in the Yemeni port of Aden. Seventeen American sailors were killed, and 39 were injured. This event was the deadliest attack against a United States Naval vessel since 1987.

en.wikipedia.org...

And that's just a few of such attacks.

You want to see a list of the Islamic extremist attacks which have killed Americans until 2002?

i can't excerpt the whole list because it is too large, but do yourself a favor and visit the following site.

avpv.tripod.com...

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


Iraq did not attack us in any way... Furthermore, if you want to play the blame game, the US has attacked muslim nations over other disputes long before any of this. So if you want to use the silly argument that wars are justified because of non govt individuals pulling off some small scale attacks then how are they not justified in those attacks if we also attacked them? Hypocrisy as usual. Viscious cycle with millions of innocents caught in the crossfire, starting wars does not end the cycle, simple.

Originally posted by darkest4

Iraq did not attack us in any way... Furthermore, if you want to play the blame game, the US has attacked muslim nations over other disputes before "terrorism" against America ever arose. So if you want to use the silly argument that wars are justified because of non govt individuals pulling off some small scale attacks then how are they not justified in those attacks if we also attacked them with cruise missiles and what not way before any of this 9/11 etc #. Viscious cycle with millions of innocents caught in the crossfire, starting wars does not end the cycle.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong... i just showed you, and everyone else that Muslim extremists were attacking us even right after our nation was founded and you want to claim "we attacked them first"?...

Second of all it is a FACT that Saddam Hussein founded Islamic terrorists, even against American targets, he even paid handsome rewards to the families of suicide bombers...

The Council on Foreign Relations stated in a Dec. 2005 article "Terrorism Havens: Iraq":


"Has Iraq sponsored terrorism?
Yes. Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship provided headquarters, operating bases, training camps, and other support to terrorist groups fighting the governments of neighboring Turkey and Iran, as well as to hard-line Palestinian groups. During the 1991 Gulf War, Saddam commissioned several failed terrorist attacks on U.S. facilities. Prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the State Department listed Iraq as a state sponsor of terrorism. The question of Iraq’s link to terrorism grew more urgent with Saddam’s suspected determination to develop weapons of mass destruction (WMD), which Bush administration officials feared he might share with terrorists who could launch devastating attacks against the United States...

What type of terrorist groups did Iraq support under Saddam Hussein’s regime?
Primarily groups that could hurt Saddam’s regional foes. Saddam has aided the Iranian dissident group Mujahedeen-e-Khalq and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (known by its Turkish initials, PKK), a separatist group fighting the Turkish government. Moreover, Iraq has hosted several Palestinian splinter groups that oppose peace with Israel , including the mercenary Abu Nidal Organization, whose leader, Abu Nidal, was found dead in Baghdad in August 2002. Iraq has also supported the Islamist Hamas movement and reportedly channeled money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. A secular dictator, however, Saddam tended to support secular terrorist groups rather than Islamist ones such as al-Qaeda, experts say."
...

and along the long list

Judith Yaphe, PhD, Senior Research Fellow and Middle East Project Director for the Institute for National Strategic Studies at the National Defense University, stated at a July 9, 2003 public hearing to the National Committee on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States:


"Iraq under Saddam was a major state sponsor of international terrorism. They almost wrote the book, and I've read the books that have been written. Iraq under Saddam was an active sponsor of terrorist groups, providing safe haven, training, arms, logistical support -- requiring in exchange that the groups carry out operations ordered by Baghdad for Saddam's objectives. Terrorist groups were not permitted to have offices, recruitment, or training facilities, or freely use Iraqi territory under the regime's control without explicit permission from Saddam.
Saddam used foreign terrorist groups and terrorism as instruments of foreign policy. Groups hosted by Saddam were denied protection. If he wanted to improve relations with a neighboring country and encourage to attack the same countries when Saddam wanted to pressure them. If they refused Saddam's requests, they were exiled. Now, conventional wisdom casts Saddam as a terrorist, a primary consumer of the terrorist tactics and methods, and an enemy of the United States. And that is all true. Conventional wisdom describes Iraq under Saddam as a primary state sponsor of international terrorism, and that is all true. If the mathematics is correct, then the conventional conclusion must be that Saddam and Iraq are responsible for acts of terrorism against the United States, going back to the 1993 Trade Towers attack to perhaps 9/11.
...

usiraq.procon.org...

BTW, note the PERHAPS in the last sentence above regarding Saddam's possible involvement in 9/11. It was believed Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attacks because Islamic extremists which have been funded by Saddam have attacked us and even have found refuge and training in Iraq with the permission of Saddam.

reply to post by Iamonlyhuman


Great Video and I don't mind about the misleading title at all.
Once, when our dog was sick, we hid his medicine in a cupcake to make sure he would eat it.

I find it interesting to read the comments that questioned the message. I actually read all the comments before I saw the vid. Afterwards, I re-read the negative comments and came back with a clearer understanding of some that have failed in the emotional intelligent side of being an adult. It's a real shame that material that shows the other side of the story would have such a opposition and posters attempting to deny that this is a real and honest message to open your eyes and see what effect we have done to other country's and the the people. I have read recently that the CIA is responsible for at least 6 million deaths in the last 50-60 years or so throughout the world. And, to qualify my statements, I am retired Military which makes this message that much more of a conflict inside of me. Sometimes, it's hard for me to except the fact that I was nothing more than a dumb kid with no money and no education looking for a way to survive and I was used in a dirty way when I joined. I cannot and could not willing agree to let my children join the U.S military without letting them know what the real deal is.

Let's see some of the other links which tied Saddam with terrorist groups, including terrorists who had attacked us in our soil or murdered Americans overseas...

Journalist Stephen Hayes reported in July 2003 that the official Babylon Daily Political Newspaper, published by Saddams eldest son, Uday, had printed what it called a "List of Honor" in its November 14, 2002 edition. This list gave the names and titles of 600 leading Iraqis, including this entry: "Abid Al-Karim Muhamed Aswod, intelligence officer responsible for the coordination of activities with the Osama bin Laden group at the Iraqi embassy in Pakistan." According to Hayes, that name matched that of Iraqs then-ambassador to Islamabad.

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, formerly the director of an al Qaeda training base in Afghanistan, fled to Iraq after being injured as the Taliban fell. He received medical care and convalesced for two months in Baghdad. He then opened a terrorist training camp in northern Iraq and arranged the October 2002 assassination of U.S. diplomat Lawrence Foley in Amman, Jordan.

Ramzi Yousef, the Kuwaiti-born ringleader of the February 26, 1993 World Trade Center bombing plot, first arrived in the United States (on September 1, 1992) on an Iraqi passport.

Author Richard Miniter reported on September 25, 2003, that U.S. forces had discovered a cache of documents in Tikrit, Saddams hometown, showing that Iraq had given both a house and a monthly salary to al Qaeda member Abdul Rahman Yasin, who was indicted for mixing the chemicals in the bomb that exploded beneath the World Trade Center in 1993.

Along Iraq's border with Syria, U.S. troops captured Farouk Hijazi, Saddam's former ambassador to Turkey and suspected liaison to al Qaeda. Under interrogation, Hijazi admitted meeting with senior al Qaeda leaders at Saddam's behest in 1994.

While sifting through the bombed ruins of the Iraqi intelligence agency in April 2003, three investigators – the Toronto Star's Mitch Potter, the London Daily Telegraph's Inigo Gilmore, and their translator -- discovered a memo dated "February 19, 1998" and marked "Top Secret and Urgent." It said the agency would pay "all the travel and hotel expenses inside Iraq to gain the knowledge of the message from bin Laden and to convey to his envoy an oral message from us to bin Laden, the Saudi opposition leader, about the future of our relationship with him, and to achieve a direct meeting with him."

On January 5, 2000, Ahmad Hikmat Shakir — an Iraqi airport greeter reportedly dispatched from Baghdad's embassy in Malaysia — welcomed Khalid al Midhar and Nawaz al Hamzi to Kuala Lampur and escorted them to a local hotel where these September 11 hijackers met with 9/11 conspirators Ramzi bin al Shibh and Tawfiz al Atash. Five days later, according to Stephen Hayes, Shakir disappeared. He was arrested in Qatar on September 17, 2001, six days after al Midhar and al Hamzi had slammed American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon, killing 216 people. On his person and in his apartment, authorities discovered papers tying him to the 1993 World Trade Center plot and to "Operation Bojinka," al Qaeda's 1995 plan to simultaneously blow up 12 jets over the Pacific Ocean.
...

www.discoverthenetworks.org...

Yet Saddam did not sponsor or hid terrorists that have attacked us?...

Originally posted by BadNinja68

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman
reply to post by kyred

 

Perhaps you should watch it and find out.

Perhaps you should summarize the video, instead of posting coy replies.
I do not just click vid links on message boards that do not at least have a summary of the topic.
I reserve the right to decide whether the video is worth my time or not.


Summary would be nice rather than trying to bait readers into clicking randon vid links.

You have spent more time moaning about the video that you refuse to watch than you would have spent by watching it and informing yourself about what you are pontificating against. As it is, your posts are based on sheer ignorance. Quit wasting everyone's time!