Ron Paul DESTROYS Bachmann on Iran war debate.

Originally posted by CharlesMartel
I support his economic policies, but his blaming us for the Islamists' attacks on us, shows he is incompetent in foreign policy.

You should consider how in the 2008 debates all the candidates except for Ron Paul were saying "The enemy hates us for our freedoms, they hate us because we are prosperous and they want to change our way of living"

Right now, look at indefinite detention, look at all anti-privacy bills, TSA, illegal spying left and right, legal spying left and right, patriot act, FISA Bill, ect... etc...

Ron Paul is the only one that doesn't hate you for your freedoms and want to change your way of life

But right now everyone else on the podium is so pro patriot act, TSA and spying etc...

You should really think about that

I wish Ron Paul coud just come out and say...

Israel is the problem

In the interview with Jay Leno he did not defend Israel, thank God but he did not slam it, which he should have.

It just shows that we do not have freedom of speech when an honest person like Ron Paul can not come out and say.

Zionism is fundamentally evil.

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth

I bet the military industrial complex hates Ron Paul. He would make it very hard to make a profit, since he actually doesn't want war.....

Now, how can she stand there and claim to stand on the side of piece, after just advocating for war with Iran?

The real warmongers, are the israelis ... she just said it, out loud ... the only country that matters, is Israel ... if she needs to murder millions of people, and millions of children, and leave radioactive dust around that makes children born malformed.

I wonder when they've murdered enough people, just for Israel ...

Originally posted by CharlesMartel
reply to post by Alaskan Man

 

Considering that Ron Paul has clearly shown that, like Jimmy Carter, he is incapable of recognizing evil in Iran, he has zero chance of getting the Republican nomination.

I support his economic policies, but his blaming us for the Islamists' attacks on us, shows he is incompetent in foreign policy.

OH REALLY ?? Ive awaken my friend, I no longer believe the US government is sin free and crimson white and now dont believe all the propaganda the msm feeds me.. Maybe you should research and do the same, oops you dont have to I did all the research for you.

In 1953, the US government overthrew the democratic government of Iran (which was pretty secular) and put in its place the Shah. The CIA trained Iran's political policy, which was responsible for killing and imprisoning thousands of Iranians. The popular revolt created the Revolution in 1979, which installed an Islamic regime in Iran. BECAUSE of US interventions, Iran became a fierce anti-American country. Let me ask you this: what is the cause and what is the effect? So, Iran didn't attack the US. Quite the contrary, US attacked Iran, via CIA, in 1953. This is a fact. In 1953 there was already a report saying that this intervention would generate blow-back. Blow-back is not ONLY the unpretending consequences of an action. It's an unpretending consequence of an action which is hidden from the public, so that the people CAN'T put cause and effect together. No, I'm not inventing this: former CIA specialists use the term in this way...

In 1998 Ron Paul said that, because of the disproportion of forces, the only way people in the Middle East could retaliate American agressions would be through terrorism. And, as America intervene more and more, the terrorist threat would be greater. So, yes, terrorism is a retaliation tactic. Everybody knows that terrorism CAN'T be used as war strategy. So we should be concerned with attacks from Islamic terrorists. OK, Ron Paul is too. BUT he understands the causal relationship in these matters. What the other candidates are suggesting as a strategy to avoid terrorism is EXACTLY what causes them.

In 1947, George Kennan wrote an article under the pseudonym Mr. X, in which he said that the expansionism of the Soviet Union would demand an ever increase of its military expenditures. This would eventually bring them down. That's exactly what happened. Same as Bin Laden's strategy. He said he would put the US in a PERPETUAL war in the Middle East and that would crush America in the same way it did with the USSR. Most candidates are willing to accomplish Bin Laden's strategy. Sun-Tzu always advised that, to win a war, you must know your enemy. And what do a lot of well-intentioned Americans do? Well, they do EXACTLY what our enemy wants us to do. Let's put it this way: We have all been acting as a Bin Laden puppet, without having a clue about this...


Finally, what's the big deal with Iran having a nuke? Let's just assume that it happens - and we don't have any indication of this, except from the same sources of war propaganda that led to the Iraq War. Again, what's the big deal? Do you think they're going to use it? In the moment they do this, they would be wiped off the face of Earth. Ron stated this in a former debate. Israel has 300 nukes. But why are they striving to get a nuke, if they really are? Ron gave the correct answer: it's about respect. How do America treat North Korea? You know, North Korea HAS a nuke, is profoundly anti-American, and was not invaded. Why? Because they have nukes! What happened to Lybia? It had nuclear power. Then they gave that power away. What was the consequence? Well, America and other countries created a mess and Gaddafhi is dead!

EVEN if Iran gets a nuke (and, again, ONLY WAR PROPAGANDA suggests that -- the exact same allegation was brought up in a 2007, that Iran would get a nuke within one year), that doesn't mean a threat. It means that America must use DIPLOMACY, not BOMBS to deal with them. And that's great. Look at Vietnam: to prevent the communist takeover, America engaged in a nonsensical war and, eventually, lost. They became communist. BUT, when America stopped dropping bombs and started trading and talking with them, they became a friend and are now westernized. THAT'S what Ron is talking about. That's what George Washington advised: befriend every country, trade with them. In this way, both countries establish an interdependent relation and the chance of having a conflict is significantly reduced...

WHEN America was a principled country, when it really defended liberty, peace, free markets etc., then America was loved all around the world!! Others LOVED the freedoms America once HAD. Yes, had: We are loosing it, We are becoming a tyrannical Police State. People around the world don't hate America's freedom: they hate the negation of the true American values that our government forces on other countries.

reply to post by ker2010


I ridiculed the people who thought the Obama was the Messiah. People who think Paul is Superman deserve the same treatment. Have you read Matthew 24:5 lately?

reply to post by CharlesMartel


Not one Ron Paul supporter, including the good doctor himself, tolerates the adjective, "messiah," in referring to Dr. Paul. You comments sir are delusional in nature...

Is Ron Paul running for the Pres Of Iran? Ron Paul in the 1930s would prob say Nazi Germany was not a threat. Bachmann Kicked Ron Paul's little ass.

bachman and the others smell like burnt toast today

everyone see ron paul on LENO the other nite?

HE ROCKED IT AGAIN

Originally posted by CharlesMartel
reply to post by ker2010

 

I ridiculed the people who thought the Obama was the Messiah. People who think Paul is Superman deserve the same treatment. Have you read Matthew 24:5 lately?

Wow your totally off your rocker.. No one here worships Ron Paul, he is a man just like any of us. What we do however love are his ideas and ideals. We love that he is honest and has integrity unlike what we are used to having run for president. Most here do not blindly follow him, but most people do blindly follow the main stream media. Those are the real cultist listening to every spoon fed word they hear off Fox news and taking it as the word of God or something.

Weak weak weak argument, I figured as such.

well, i have to say, its good to be able to post on my favorite website, ive been following multiple issues and topics for months now on a phone just out of range technologically for me to create an account. now, with the oppurtunity, i took it. so hello to all you intelligent, analytical, likeminded, savvy seekers of the truth and constitution. with that being said, i chose to make my first post on ron paul. this guy is where its at. i havent voted before, the reason being is nobody really has deserved my vote. ron paul however, i am going to come out of the woodworks and bring the fam to cast our support when it comes here in georgia. he mirrors my views and says what most dont dare. he has positions that would crumble most if not all of the incompetent groomed politicians in the government herd. he says it in a way that "just makes sense". this guy schools all who open their cud chewers back with his verbal cattle prod. go ron paul you certainly do "just make sense".and as far worshipping him, no, i just think stepping into his mud puddle is better than diving into the others sewage ponds. why vote for an ok guy? dont settle for less. he isnt the greatest thing since sliced bread, but he is relatively a vast improvement on our current choices. and a welcomed change of fresh air

Hi all,

A few thoughts on this post.

Main stream media doesn't cover Ron Paul as much as Newt.
Newt all the time seems to be the money maker for the spinsters in the media for the moment.

For Ron Paul to win it isn't only a REP nominee he needs to beat, it's the creator of a HUGE grassroots money maker a.k.a the Obama admin, so for now Ron Paul while cool is just Huckabee 2.0

To win he would need a block of Dems, young voters, and non right leaning REP votes and backers.

I mean right?

I voted for Obama and look at the rules and bills his office is churning out, If I voted for him four years ago I know his base will vote with him again.
It's almost as if huge corp got what they wanted from him so here is four more years and a list of Looney's you could beat in your sleep.

Ron Paul has my Vote..

How to convince mainstream Dems who hate Republicans simply for the reasons spin masters want...that's something else.

LMAO.

Ron Paul said "Michelle hates Muslims. She wants to go get them." on Leno

Originally posted by BRAVO949
I wish Ron Paul coud just come out and say...

Israel is the problem

In the interview with Jay Leno he did not defend Israel, thank God but he did not slam it, which he should have.

It just shows that we do not have freedom of speech when an honest person like Ron Paul can not come out and say.

Zionism is fundamentally evil.

There is nothing fundamentally evil with zionism and those that say so really do not understand what they are talking about. It is a complex situation that has intentionally been blown out of porportion by the bankers/media/military and especially by the religious fundamentalists. All these people work for the old world order and are either satanists or pure atheists. The controlers are satanists and the rest(scientists) are atheists.
Pretty much people who hate god and use money to get what they want. They control the banks and wall street so it is pretty easy to bribe anyone they want.

Ask yourself why isn't southern sudan a bigger issue or maybe rwhanda or ehtiopia, etc? Then you will comprehend the obvious! People are not capable of thinking anymore and it is becoming a problem!

reply to post by Alaskan Man


This guy speaks the truth. He's got my vote.

reply to post by thekaliyuga


Ron Paul's party base is the republicans and Barack Obama's party base is the democrats.

Second line. Which party is known to be the least tolerant of muslims, russia/china and speaks of war?

That means party affiliation is more important than who is potus. Get it?!

If Ron Paul says no to war but everyone else on his party says YES, then Ron Paul says yes as well, otherwise he is "a traitor" to himself, his party and his country.

He had no business being on the republican ticket. He was a libertarian at heart but is willing to sell himself for a chance at becoming president. Pretty desperate tactic!

reply to post by rogerstigers


Back in May of 2008 former President Jimmy Carter let the cat out of the bag (as an official policy we have never commented or acknowledged Israel's nuclear arsenal, but Jimmy did).

I would bet this was pay back to the Jews for never acknowledging Jimmy's Peace plan with the Palestinians. He obliviously felt this is what condemned him to owning the "worst president in history" title.

Although, I think he recently moved up a notch (only one) in the standings when comparing the ratings of our current President.

www.foxnews.com...

reply to post by Grimpachi


Actually, I maintain a relationship with a former HS classmate (foreign exchange) the left school in 1979 to return to Iran to help overthrow the Shah, I also have relationships with Iranian Americans and none of them share those views.

Iran is the red headed stepchild in the middle east they are not accepted by the Arabs (in fact hated), they have had to deal with US intervention since 1953 that finally in 1979 gave way to radicalism. If this sounds familiar look at Egypt, Iraq, Syria, and Libya
.
Today they have a religious theocracy, but what the media does not let out is that Iran is changing so quickly that the Mullahs are having a difficult time adapting. Iran is going to change on its own, due to demographics, there is no stopping it, no slowing it down. 72.9% of the population is between 15-64 yrs of age with the largest percentage of that group under 35. Iran is changing everyday and will continue to advance culturally.
en.wikipedia.org...

The biggest problem Iran has is that it is 1 of 4 countries (left) that doesn't have a Rothschild Central bank and we in the western world know that really pisses off TPTB. There were 7 countries in recent history that didn't succumb to the Rothschild banks, Iraq (gone), Afghanistan (gone), Libya (Gone?), Iran, Cuba, North Korea, and Sudan. With Libya, I believe the recent events (over thrown) that the New Libya will back away from the demand of a gold based currency for Oil and accept fiat currencies to their New Central Bank.
www.lookingglassnews.org...

The problem the US has with Iran has nothing to do with Nuclear technology or bombs, it has everything to do with Iran Not recognizing the Dollar as the world reserve currency. I believe they only accept Euros or Gold for the Oil they produce. and that alone is enough reason for the US to develop a propaganda strategy leading to war. (always follow the money)
www.globalresearch.ca...

Iran has not maintained itself throughout history by not paying attention and I don't believe they would use a nuclear weapon offensively, defensively yes I believe they would and history would stand on my side as Iran hasn't attacked anyone in 300+ years.
isteve.blogspot.com...

My 2 cents

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by thekaliyuga

 

Ron Paul's party base is the republicans and Barack Obama's party base is the democrats.

Second line. Which party is known to be the least tolerant of muslims, russia/china and speaks of war?

That means party affiliation is more important than who is potus. Get it?!

If Ron Paul says no to war but everyone else on his party says YES, then Ron Paul says yes as well, otherwise he is "a traitor" to himself, his party and his country.

He had no business being on the republican ticket. He was a libertarian at heart but is willing to sell himself for a chance at becoming president. Pretty desperate tactic!

YOU ARE COMPLETELY WRONG AND I HAVE THE PROOF

This is off of the official GOP website, just go there and click issues and you'll see it.



You know what Regan did? He had peace talks.

You know what Ron Paul wants? Yes you do.

You know the rest of the GOP wont even talk consider? Peace talks.

Actually following what the GOP's own website says about national defense? RON PAUL

STOP SPREADING DISINFO

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by thekaliyuga

 

Ron Paul's party base is the republicans and Barack Obama's party base is the democrats.

Second line. Which party is known to be the least tolerant of muslims, russia/china and speaks of war?

That means party affiliation is more important than who is potus. Get it?!

If Ron Paul says no to war but everyone else on his party says YES, then Ron Paul says yes as well, otherwise he is "a traitor" to himself, his party and his country.

He had no business being on the republican ticket. He was a libertarian at heart but is willing to sell himself for a chance at becoming president. Pretty desperate tactic!

What if the guy actually loves his country and actually wants whats good for it??? He is gonna do what gives him the best shot at becoming president as long as it doesn't go against his morals and principles. I vote for the man not the party their i said it. geez

reply to post by gimme_some_truth


What bothered me were the people booing. Like Ron Paul was in the wrong for being "mean" to a woman. Uh wake up people this woman is running for president. It honestly seemed like they were booing him out of pity for her because he called her out. We are in trouble. If we don't get Paul we are in trouble.