Is Ron Paul correct on Iran?

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Texaspride74

2) I don't speak for WTF or anyone else other then myself, all though he is clearly more educated then you on a lot of things.

3) 9/11 was an attack on America, however the truth is our government helped it happen at the very least. This is not an opinion. It is a fact and if you or anyone wants to debate it then we can do that.

4) You need to learn the difference between an isolationist and a non-interventionist. There is a very big difference.

6)Do you believe George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and the rest of the Founding Fathers were radical isolationists? Because they didn't even want us to have a standing army and wanted the States Militias to take care of National Defense. The reason being they knew what happens when Empires try to Nation Build, Police the world, ect. In every case, that empire collapses as a result, just like the US will if we don't stop this shit and bring the troops home.

#2: Yea, but we aren't talking about transvestites.
#3: Facts? You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you in the ass. Helped?
#4: I probably knew the difference before you could standup and pee at the same time ... and hit a toilet.
#6: I appreciate that you have the ability to read the minds of folks how died over 200 years ago, but that is one of the characteristics of self-proclaimed liberal "intellectuals" ..... they always know it all .... like what the "founding fathers" were thinking ....

... Actually, I doubt the founding fathers anticipated a lot of the shit our government does, and a lot of the shit that other countries have tried to do to our country. For about 200 years (I think it actually began in response to pirates attacking ships coming and going from the "new world") this country's national policy regarding military confrontation has been to keep it off our soil ....

... that necessarily requires a healthy naval capacity, a sophisticated air force, and a mobile ground force, at a minimum. It also necessarily requires the staging of assets and personnel at various places throughout the world to facilitate a rapid and more effective response.

... "bring the troops home" is not an option, although it sounds wonderful as a political sound bite. If Obaminable uses the phrase to speak to his "base" of his liberal anti-military/anti-war/anti-self-defense crowd. The French tried the "strategy" of building a "line" in the dirt to defend their country. That didn't work out too well, now did it?

The wimps in this country that want to "bring the troops home" and defend our country at its borders, don't even want to put up a friggin fence, much less have military bases ringing this country's borders with sufficient fire power to ward off any enemy attack, which includes anti missile and anti aircraft capabilities ... I don't think our "founding fathers" were actually ... thinking about that ... now do you?

Now, if you don't like the so called "military industrial complex" ...
how about a "frontier" of military bases, check points, vehicle searches, personal searches, unexpected stops by armored personnel carriers, anti-missile and aircraft facilities, prohibitions of carrying weapons within 100 miles of the borders ... and BTW ... is Houston within 100 miles of a border?.....how you gonna like that ..?

Or do you want every family to have a musket leaning in the corner?

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Texaspride74

No, I mean Ron Paul the 12 term Texas Congressmen who has been the staunchest defender of the Constitution in Congress since Thomas Jefferson . . . . First of all, there is a huge difference between Isolationism and non-interventionism, and if you didn't believe everything your TV told you then you might know this. What Ron Paul stands for and what the Founding Fathers George Washington and Thomas Jefferson stood for is non-interventionism. It is a foriegn policy which includes diplomacy and free trade with other Nations. It also includes avoiding all wars not related to direct self-defense. That means no Nation building, no policing the world, and no preemptive attacks or invations of other Nations based on what some boogeyman might hypothetically do.

Regarding the Founding Fathers:

May 28, 1754, Lt Col George Washington personally led the pre-emptive attack against the French, the Jumonville affair, that directly precipitated the French and Indian War: AKA the Sevens Year War in Europe.

General Andrew Jackson, with President James Monroe’s – Monroe was a Founding Father – acquiescence, invaded Spanish Florida in 1818.

Thomas Jefferson’s Louisiana Purchase and the Lewis and Clark expedition define Jefferson’s position on “Manifest Destiny” and it’s inherent interventionism with serious overtones of expansionism.

The War of 1812 reflects President James Madison's (another Founding Father) feelings about how U.S. prerogatives and interests should be defended.

So, your premise is wrong.

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

The Japanese viewed all bombers over their territory the same.

We view all air attackes by terrorists the same.

Does the exact term used matter? Not to me.

Whether or not it matters to you isn’t the issue. The issue is why WTF refuses to see 9/11 as an act of war, and belittles and dismisses the deaths of 3,000 innocent civilians – most of whom were U.S. citizens. It doesn’t matter that there were only just four commandeered aircraft any more than it mattered that the Enola Gay was a solitary aircraft. Both attacks were acts of war perpetrated by men invading the sacrosanct boundaries established by the people of another nation.

Originally Posted by Texaspride74

My evidence came directly from Freedom of Information Acts filed with the US Navy and other government sources. What you are putting out is the same main line lies that have been stated for a long time. As is often credited to Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's propaganda minister....

Impossible! What you are saying is not true, because it is not based on anything released under the Freedom of Information Act. The JN-25 codes were not decipherable and routinely broken until mid-1942—six months after Pearl harbor.

Originally Posted by Texaspride74

What recent actions? The supposed Iran Terror Plot to Assassinate.....ect. ect. that was reported to be caught by the FBI but the FBI says they have no knowlege of this and it was likely something the Obama Administration made up. That one? Or some other form of fearmongering?

The U.S. agents that uncovered the plot were not FBI. Do not confuse wariness with fear.

Originally Posted by Texaspride74

The price of Gas will soar as a result of the inflation and eventually hyper-inflation caused by the Federal Reserve who prints money based on nothing to support all the wars and other big government spending you are such a fan of. Using our own domestic sources could chop the price of gas down to a dollar or less. Your Military Industrial Complex will come to an end one way or another.

QE1 and QE2 were very misguided attempts to resuscitate the housing industry; hence, the premise behind your assertion is factually wrong.

Originally Posted by Texaspride74

Do you mean the aircrafts hijacked by 19 members of "Al Queda", at least 4 of which trained at US bases, who flew planes into three buildings in New York on 9/11? Oh wait, there weren't 3 planes in New York.....but 3 buildings were brought down. That's right, Building 7 wasn't hit by a plane and still managed to fall at free fall speed into its own footprint. Well, surely that was due to fires though, forget the fact that no building that size has ever collapsed to do fires, the numerous witnesses, media, and first responders who reported hearing explostions inside the building. Also, there is nothing to Larry Silverstein, the owner of all three building, stating that they made the decision to "pull it" and watch the building come down. I am sure all of this was explained in the 9/11 commision's report. Oh, that's right, there is no mention of building 7 in there.

But at least the Government "got its act together" after that because even though we had "no knowlege" of this prior to the attacks, we were able to get the names and pictures of the 19 hijackers in 2 days. Even more "conclusive proof" was the passport of one of the hijackers, which made it out of the plane, through the fires and carnage inside, out of the building, and into the rubbel on the ground in perfect condition to be found. Never mind that the man later stood up to say he was alive and well, just as at least 5 other "hijackers" have.

Your opinion means absolutely nothing in the real world of facts. And the 9/11 Commission Report is considerably more truthful than any of those "Conspiracy-R-Us" sites you're using to justify your twisted mind set. On September 11, 2001, 7 WTC was damaged by debris when the nearby North Tower of the WTC collapsed. The debris also ignited fires, which continued to burn throughout the afternoon on lower floors of the building. The building's internal fire suppression system lacked water pressure to fight the fires, and the building collapsed completely at 5:21:10 pm. The collapse began when a critical column on the 13th floor buckled and triggered structural failure throughout, which was first visible from the exterior with the crumbling of the east mechanical penthouse at 5:20:33 pm. No one is known to have died in WTC 7; hence, it did not deserve the attention that was given to WTC 1 and WTC 2. http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/f..._qa_082108.cfm

Originally Posted by Texaspride74

However, at least this terror attack allowed us to give up our Constitutional rights in the Patriot Act, be cooked in radiation filled naked body scanners and have the pleasure of being sexually violated at the airports by wonderful TSA agents who do things Cops can't even do, lose thousands of US soldiers, kill a million people, excuse me, "insurgents" in Afganastan and Iraq, help their people grow Opium so the CIA has something to ship back to the States to make some extra cash and help out to ensure the "war on drugs" folks and the Prison Industrial Complex have something to do, print endless amounts of money backed by nothing at the Federal Reserve (which isn't federal at all) to fund the war effort, cause inflation, devalue the dollar, and give the Military Industrial Complex a "War on Terror" with no specific enemy that could go on forever. But, that is on the bright side of things.

What? You find no comfort in WTF’s simple homily to stay at home and not travel. Don’t fly if you don’t like TSA.

Originally Posted by WTF

9/11 was an invasion?

Yes, it was.

Originally Posted by WTF

It was a terrorist act.

If anything it showed just how desperate those folks are.

It was an invasion. It was an act of war; hence, the U.S.’ military response was justifiable and appropriate.

You have previously argued that the U.S. fell into bin Laden’s trap when it sent troops to Afghanistan. You have previously argued that that was just what bin Laden wanted. You were right. That is what bin Laden wanted. But it was bin Laden who underestimated the U.S. capabilities and resolve to seek him out and put a bullet in his brain.

Now you are arguing that the war in Afghanistan is a war for oil in Afghanistan!?! Seriously? You cannot argue that it was both bin Laden’s plan and a plan by oil companies to increase their profit margin.

Originally Posted by WTF

As I said before, the only thing we have to fear is fear itself.

You’re plagiarizing FDR, and FDR was not speaking about acts of war.

Originally Posted by WTF

Japan had us breathing down their ass. They had nothing to do but a utter and complete surrender.

No. They in fact had other plans. Only U.S. atomic weapons (a technology gained at great, public expense) changed their mind. U.S. atomic capabilities also had an impact on Soviet (Stalin’s) decision to invade Manchuria.

Originally Posted by WTF

You need to learn the difference between a military victory and a simple terrorist act. Though tragic 9/11 was nothing near a military victory,

It was bin Laden’s tactical – but pyrrhic – victory, not unlike Pearl Harbor for the Japanese. Like the Japanese strike at Pearl Harbor, it was also an act of war.

Originally Posted by WTF

we have over 30 to 40k traffic deaths per year. Shall we start a war on driving?

Seriously? You haven’t noticed the state troopers, local police and sheriffs departments whose job it is to enforce driving regulations? There are millions of dollars spent and tens of thousands of public safety officers tasked each and every day to prevent each and every traffic death in this country.

Originally Posted by WTF

There are around 3 thousands deaths per year on on people 0-19 year olds by guns.....do you want a war on guns?

There are millions of dollars spent and tens of thousands of public safety officers, in addition to the ATF, tasked each and every day to prevent each and every gun deaths in this country.

Originally Posted by WTF

There is a reason you are brainwashed...it is to get your money. Those two industries need fear to have you support bankrupting this country in the name of safety. Ron Paul is dead on right about Iran and a shit load of other things as well.

You are intellectually bankrupt, and your sense of logic and responsibility are twisted. Ron Raul is wrong about Iran and several other issues.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Only U.S. nuclear weapons (a technology gained at great, public expense) changed their mind. U.S. nuclear capabilities also had an impact on Soviet (Stalin’s) decision to invade Manchuria.

Technically (and that is more than a technicality) the weapons used on Japan were "atomic bombs" and not considered "nuclear," which were in the process of being developed.

In fact that was a problem with Germany who was attempting to develope the atomic bomb in Madame Curie's lab in Paris; the formulas they were using were actually for a hydrogen bomb and they could not develope the atomic bomb, although they were close. The papers and documents reflecting their research were smuggled out of Paris to the U.S. the day before the beginning of the "fall" of Paris to the Allies and before the Germans could destroy the information and lab.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Technically (and that is more than a technicality) the weapons used on Japan were "atomic bombs" and not considered "nuclear," which were in the process of being developed.

In fact that was a problem with Germany who was attempting to develope the atomic bomb in Madame Curie's lab in Paris; the formulas they were using were actually for a hydrogen bomb and they could not develope the atomic bomb, although they were close. The papers and documents reflecting their research were smuggled out of Paris to the U.S. the day before the beginning of the fall of Paris to the Allies.

Thank you, it's corrected.

[LexusLover]

"Originally Posted by Texaspride74
Using our own domestic sources could chop the price of gas down to a dollar or less."

I thought I asked this as yet unanswered question:

What "domestic sources"?

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Texaspride74

We have more then enough oil and other resources right here in America and using our own resources would drastically cut the cost of gas and other goods.

http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?c=af&v=97

U.S. is 14th ... and from a "size" or "volume" perspective that's small.

Your minset of using our own resources to lower gasoline prices is founded in the "fast food" consumption mentality that drove up the national debt.

Use up our resources so we can "feel good" today, and let someone else worry about it tomorrow.

And you want $1.00 a gallon gasoline for what reason?

Furthermore, it's always refreshing to see the liberal mind toss out phrases like ... "oil and other resources" .... to gas up your gas guzzler? Robert Kennedy, Jr., used to mouth off about conserving "our resources" while he drove around in a Mercedes SUV sucking up gasoline like a vacuum cleaner consuming air.

So what "other resources" are you going to use to propel millions of vehicles every day in this country ....

... electricity? coal? hay? steam? ................ hot air?

Wear a rebreather and talk while you drive down the road. Perpetual motion!

I am 100% opposed to using our "strategic reserves" for lowering public consumption gasoline prices ... that is not a "strategic" usage ... that is a "feel good" program that back fires. At the same time I believe we should expend every effort to develop alternative fuels to move about the country, and expend every effort on modifying our transportation systems (which means our life styles) to anticipate that day in the future when the last drop of gasoline falls out of the pump. But when it does I want it to be made from U.S. oil and not from elsewhere ... because I want their last drop to have fallen long before ours does!

[WTF]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

You taking credit for that too?

That is one of the most famous quotes in history....but if you wanna think I'm thinking about taking credit for it, knock yourself out.


No really,go knock yourself out!

Originally Posted by LexusLover

You obviously have not found or read the assessments and predictions provided for the purpose of reviewing the options on how to bring the war with Japan to a conclusion and the risk assessments involved.

Tarawa was an example of the possibilities (more like probabilities) of the potential losses (deaths and casualties) on both sides if an invasion of the Japanese mainland was initiated. The use of the atomic bomb was considered the lesser of the evils as far as overall human losses, and it was clearly a better solution for the U.S.

Again, the breadth of your knowledge is limited to Puffington BS.

And you think you are the only one who knows this shit?

Damn............I fully support wtf Truman did.

I in fact was a proponent of dropping a nuke on Bin Liden's ass right after 9/11 when the stupid ass Taliban would not turn his murdering ass over. We have nuke's. I say use'em or lose'em

Ya'll have posted to many cock and bull stories for me to address'em all. If you two blow each other, be sure and let us know who has the tightest vagina

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by Texaspride74

Yeah, I didn't even get into the carriers that left prior to the actual attack or many other details surrounding Pearl Harbor.

looks like IB Hankering is not buying the code thing.

do you have links to the FOIA docs?

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by WTF

I in fact was a proponent of dropping a nuke on Bin Liden's ass right after 9/11 when the stupid ass Taliban would not turn his murdering ass over. We have nuke's. I say use'em or lose'em.

#1: Why "after 9/11"?
#2: Why not after the first attempt on the WTC in the early 90's?
#3: Where was his "ass" "right after 9/11"?
#4: If "we" knew where his "ass" was "we" would not need a nuke to get him.
#5: Before you shit figure out who is gonna clean it up.

You have now confirmed your irresponsiblity and lack of cognitive ability.

Thank you. Keep sniffing under those transvestite skirts. Good job.

As for staying on the theme of the thread .....

"nuking" Iran would create a mess to clean up beyond our foreseeable future.

For instance, how's that power plant clean up going in Japan? That was a leak!

[WTF]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

#1: Why "after 9/11"?
#2: Why not after the first attempt on the WTC in the early 90's?
#3: Where was his "ass" "right after 9/11"?
#4: If "we" knew where his "ass" was "we" would not need a nuke to get him.
#5: Before you shit figure out who is gonna clean it up.

You have now confirmed your irresponsiblity and lack of cognitive ability.

Thank you. Keep sniffing under those transvestite skirts. Good job.

As for staying on the theme of the thread .....

"nuking" Iran would create a mess to clean up beyond our foreseeable future.

For instance, how's that power plant clean up going in Japan? That was a leak!

1) Nuke'em before sending troops over there, fuc you are slow.
2) No public support then. fuc you are slow.
3) Tora Bora, fuc you are slow.
4) We knew the general area, all ya need with a nuke. Fuc you are slow.
5) I get slow as fuc'ers to clean up my shit when I have any. I think things out and rarely have any shit to clean up so for the most part , folks like you are safe.


Japan has experience in cleaning up nuke's , so it seems to be going well!

Them'em fuc'n Afgannies would have a lil experience too if it was up to me.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by WTF

1) Nuke'em before sending troops over there, fuc you are slow.
2) No public support then. fuc you are slow.
3) Tora Bora, fuc you are slow.
4) We knew the general area, all ya need with a nuke. Fuc you are slow.
5) I get slow as fuc'ers to clean up my shit when I have any. I think things out and rarely have any shit to clean up so for the most part , folks like you are safe.

The gift that just keeps on giving:

"You have AGAIN confirmed your irresponsiblity and lack of cognitive ability."

[WTF]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

The gift that just keeps on giving:

"You have AGAIN confirmed your irresponsiblity and lack of cognitive ability."

Yea , yea , yea but Ron Paul is still right....

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by WTF

Yea , yea , yea but Ron Paul is still right....

Then since the vast majority of the U.S. voters conform and agree with your view of the world and your worldly opinions, he's a "shoe-in." Right?

[WTF]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Then since the vast majority of the U.S. voters conform and agree with your view of the world and your worldly opinions, he's a "shoe-in." Right?

No and we will continue to bankrupt this country because the vast majority wants free shit.....that isn't free. Like oil and military protection fro the boogie man.

You warmongers always win until the Empire crumbles. Dat be called realpolitik....I B taught us dat!

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

looks like IB Hankering is not buying the code thing.

do you have links to the FOIA docs?

Yeah, what code? oh that code. Not interested either. Please don't be stupid and go all 9/11 conspiracy postal. News flash there was no NWO staged demo, no missiles and nothing else but 'bout 19 fuckheads on a Jihad. And Oswald was the lone shooter and there's no little green men either. And Santa. Bet that one hurts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WTF
I in fact was a proponent of dropping a nuke on Bin Liden's ass right after 9/11 when the stupid ass Taliban would not turn his murdering ass over. We have nuke's. I say use'em or lose'em.

Dude what an asinine, stupid thing to blab out in a post. You can't be serious. Don't sit there and post something that banal and crude. Obama has about as much leadership as a turnip but at least he's smart enough not to toss nukes around. Good thing you aren't in charge.


Originally Posted by Texaspride74
No, I mean Ron Paul the 12 term Texas Congressmen who has been the staunchest defender of the Constitution in Congress since Thomas Jefferson . . . . First of all, there is a huge difference between Isolationism and non-interventionism, and if you didn't believe everything your TV told you then you might know this. What Ron Paul stands for and what the Founding Fathers George Washington and Thomas Jefferson stood for is non-interventionism. It is a foriegn policy which includes diplomacy and free trade with other Nations. It also includes avoiding all wars not related to direct self-defense. That means no Nation building, no policing the world, and no preemptive attacks or invations of other Nations based on what some boogeyman might hypothetically do.


Ron Paul is right, and the founding fathers would agree that we as a sovereign nation should respect the sovereign rights of other nations. Barring any tangible and credible threats to the US, we have no right to invade Iran simply to prevent them from getting nukes.