Ron Paul Would Divide America

I have to agree. We cannot be divided. Divided we fall and all that. Seriously I like some of what Ron Paul says about taxes but what part of THEESE PEOPLE WANT TO KILL US doesnt he understand. Listen to Bin Laden? Ok he says “CONVERT TO ISLAM OR DIE”. Hopefully his followers will vote for Thompson after Paul looses but for some reason I think they are probably way too RETARDED.

Haven’t the Dems already created this divide – RP is just trying to dig deeper.

While you are out donating to the RP society for the cognitive impaired – why not fork some cash over to the flat earth society – they also are trying to instruct the masses.

Donating to the mental dwarfs in either party is really stupid. Paul and Dennis the Menace have as much chance of ever reaching the white house as a fart in a hurricane. Someway the bottom half of both tickets are managing to steal millions of dollars, otherwise they would pack up and go home. Then we have the wounded ego’s and BDS at work in the democrat party that explains most of what we think is stupidity. It is really a recently proven mental illness. The real idiots are those running down the Iraqi government for not accomplishing a lot, while the complainers are members of the United States congress that has accomplished ‘0′, ‘nothing’, in 8 months.

I find your ideas intriguing, and wish to subscribe to your newsletter; but I don’t like supporting a war that continues escalating al Qaeda’s recruiting power. And as the poster above said, paper covers rock.

70% of americans want out of Iraq. The only divide is in your own mind. Last time I checked 70% beats 30% TIME TO COME HOME

I’ve never participated in this ‘poll’ you carry so close to your heart. I’m SURE no one else on this thread has participated either. Make one wonder about the veracity of this poll. I wonder what the percentage would look like if this ‘poll’ were conducted with only the participants of this comment thread. Hmmmm.

STAY THE COURSE – LET THE TROOPS DO THEIR JOB!

How about a war where negative news coverage, such as 5th column NYTimes with 33 consecutive frontpage news stories on abu Ghraib, and media propaganda escalates al-Qaeda’s recruiting power?

How about decades of unfettered funding, recruiting and training – all the while their attacks escalated with impunity. This is the surest way to build al-queda. In Iraq, Michael Yon said it best: “al-queda is committing suicide”.

The difference is everything

See this is the paulites problem. When they think of a nuclear attack on Iran all they see in the million or so dead civilians. What they dont see is what will happen if we dont nuke Iran. 30 million dead jews. A new holocaust. This is what the paulites are advocating with there “peace”.

This whole politics game is starting to get annoying, because the candidates for the president do not really work together as they should.

I wonder if Ron Paul would nominate Obama as a Vice president, which would be more interesting than affending eachother on TV.

Yours Sincerely.

explain the idiot in chief’s statement…
A Bush quote…freudian slip as they say…
“Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.” —Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004
DEFEND YOUR CHOSEN ONE….

explain the idiot in chief’s statement…

Do you also need help to tie your own shoes?? I love OUR President’s anachronisms. Although, if you have trouble comprehending OUR President’s statement – the problem lies with you and not OUR President.

Actually, he understands the threat we face completely. Have you read the book “Imperial Hubris?” It’s not as the title might have you think. Anyways, Michael Scheuer (head of the CIA bin laden unit for a number of years) who wrote the book is someone who has had major impact on how Ron Paul views the current conflict with Islamists. Why do I say this? Because they meet frequently and Ron Paul recommended the book to Rudy Giuliani so that he might better understand our policy in the middle east and the enemy we face.

Why don’t you think Israel can support herself? All we do by standing by her is hurt her. We tie Israel to the UN and by having so much influence over Israel’s foreign policy (cough Israel-Hezbollah war cough) we hurt Israel. She cannot act with the necessary force because we tell her not to (just as Condi Rice did in the Israel-Hezbollah war). We effectively tie their hand so they can’t with the enemy, the same way we tie the hands of our soldiers in Iraq. As Ron Paul says, if we’re going to fight, we fight hard and get it over with. With the rest of the neo-cons, it’s all about policing and law-enforcement tactics. Don’t believe me? Look at how we’re fighting in Iraq. Anyways, Israel has far superior nuclear capabilities to Iran. Let’s not deny this. Israel will destroy Iran if she sees fit and we should not stop her. By tying ourselves so closely to Israel, we inhibit her ability to act. We can still be allies and allow Israel’s sovereignty. I urge you to read “Imperial Hubris.” It is really an excellent book on how we can destroy our enemy.

Have you read the book “Imperial Hubris?”

RP hasn’t a realistic idea of geopolitics or the threat of global jihad – he never did and never will.

Have you read – Unholy Alliance, Treachery, Countdown to Terror, Bush VS the Beltway, Londonistan and Disinformation.

Bert M. wrote:

Actually, he understands the threat we face completely. Have you read the book “Imperial Hubris?” It’s not as the title might have you think. Anyways, Michael Scheuer (head of the CIA bin laden unit for a number of years) who wrote the book is someone who has had major impact on how Ron Paul views the current conflict with Islamists. Why do I say this? Because they meet frequently and Ron Paul recommended the book to Rudy Giuliani so that he might better understand our policy in the middle east and the enemy we face.

I made my opinions of Michael Scheuer’s expert analysis known already in my previous posts.

“The Iraq authorization for war was made on a truly bipartisan basis and represented the clear will of the American people as expressed through the democratic process for representative government.”

America is a republic, not a democracy, as recognized and guaranteed by the first clause of the fourth section of the fourth article of the Constitution. Neither the Congress nor the President nor the Supreme Court nor the people of this country have the power to over-rule the Constitution. No power is delegated in the Constitution to authorize a war without Congress declaring war, thus very simply no such power exists.

“Three years before the outbreak of the U.S. Civil War, Abraham Lincoln warned that “A house divided cannot stand” ”

Lincoln was a monster, easily the worst tyrant in American history. Not only did he spill so much blood, and violate the law many times committing the most horrible of crimes, he also created the beginnings of the modern behemoth of the federal government that controls ever more of our lives on a daily basis.

United we stand, divided we stand apart.

>>You are an American. And as along as you live under the Stars and Stripes you owe an obligation to the nation which created and protects your freedom to do all you can to support victory in whatever mission the U.S. military is directed by the Congress and the President to undertake.

The obligation we have is to understand and uphold the law, and to oppose and refuse to blindly submit and obey any other man or group of men no matter what position they may hold.

“Anything less than that and you don’t deserve to benefit from the freedom won by others let alone run for President!”

Supporting the actions of the government without considering their legality is a surefire means of eroding our freedom.

“70% of americans want out of Iraq. The only divide is in your own mind. Last time I checked 70% beats 30% TIME TO COME HOME”

I believe the number’s even higher as no one wants the war despite the Bush-hate rhetoric, BUT 56% of Americans believe it’s “winnable” and want to stay until it’s won.

“explain the idiot in chief’s statement…
A Bush quote…freudian slip as they say…
“Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.” —Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004
DEFEND YOUR CHOSEN ONE….”

Hmm, which is more likely:
a Freudian slip
OR
Bush is a poor public speaker

Given that both Reagan and Clinton can’t hold a candle to President Bush in terms of the competition for the most motivational and inspirational American President in modern times, gosh, then it must be a slip…unless one thinks that President Bush is a poor public speaker?

All things being equal, I’d have to go with just another example of being a poor public speaker (plenty of evidence to support that, none to support the Freudian slip propagandist claim).

DING
DING
DING!

Winner! The neocon label pops up again (in complete agreement and sympathy with Osama Bin Laden’s latest tape which is being parroted by Paulbots)

Can Israel defend itself?

No. No one can defend themselves against a terrorist-delivered nuke. Ever hear that expression, close only counts in hand grenades and nuclear war? All Iran has to do is have their terrorist proxies get close to Israel (perhap through occupied territories) and boom. You cannot defend against terrorism unless you attack it. To defend against terrorism is to increase security, and what is it that Paul the Great tells us? If we increase security, we lose our liberties. So which is it? Do Paulbots want to defend against terrorists here and abroad by reducing our civil liberties OR go after the terrorists?

Btw, I’ve read Imperial Hubris. I wonder if you’ve read the three other CIA first hand accts from the Bin Laden unit?

JAWBREAKER
First IN
and
The Hunt For Bin Laden (Robin Moore-not an actual CIA guy, but he was embedded with SOF/CIA teams during the invasion of Afghanistan)

Imperial Hubris is nice, but Schuer himself says it’s contradictory, poorly organized, and offers no real solutions.

I on the other hand, DO have a solution:
attack rather than defend
oppose rather than submit
dispel their casus belli rather than support and agree with it

To the above poster’s comments about a nuclear bomb being delivered to Israel via “Iranian terrorist groups”. Time for a reality check:

1) Iran has had chemical and biological weapons for decades, and has never handed them off to surrogates. Iran has very long range-high payload missiles that it has never handed off to Hizbollah. There is no evidence Iran would suddenly hand off a nuke to destroy Israel. This is fear-mongering at its worse.

2) It is not US’s responsibility to protect Israel. Israel has expanded its territory numerous times and kept millions of Arabs under occupation for 4 decades against international law. Israel needs to deal with its own mess.

3) Israel can take care of itself, it has 200+ nuclear missiles

4) While Israel refuses IAEA inspections of its facilities, and has hundreds of nuclear warheads, Iran has been subject to more IAEA inspections than any other country in history, and there is no evidence it has a weapons programs, so there is no reason to take Israel’s side.

5) Jewish media moguls like Rupert Murdoch are hurting America for the sake of Israel’s imperialistic desires with their propaganda, and you have fallen for it. I guess the Iraq war didn’t wake you up, you’re as dumb and gullible as ever.

Would you be prepared to take responsibility for those consequences should your program be enacted? I doubt it.

If everyone who argued in the public sphere were somehow held to account for their share of the bad consequences of the policies they advocated, I’d be happy to sign up. Or if both good and bad were accounted for, I’d sign up unilaterally. In the real world, though, it’s not even clear what you mean by taking responsibility for the consequences of an opinion, and I have to assume that this attempt to call me out is just a rhetorical gimmick.

Forcing Israel to use nukes to retaliate against Iran is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard of.

The strong presumption is that Israel will not actually have to use nukes, since the threat alone should be deterrent enough. I’m not clear on why you think Israel’s nuclear deterrent would be less effective than our own (or maybe you are saying something else).

…Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you…

As already noted, this quote isn’t very applicable to the actual positions of your opponents. Indeed, I can find many radical opinions on the web, from white nationalist secessionists to anarchocapitalists to blame-America-firsters of all kinds, and yet I don’t find any American advocating a surrender to Islam (Azzam the ‘American’ excepted, I guess). But then, you haven’t chosen this quote because it is on target; you’ve chosen it because it drips with the same contempt for your opponents that Sam had for his. There is something peculiar about an advocate for unity who is so intolerant of others’ different opinions.

Yes, the House and Senate represented the will of the people when they authorized force… but where your argument falls on its face is: The people and their representatives formed their opinions based on falsified evidence presented by the Bush administration. So yes, Ron Paul is correct when he names those responsible.

As for rescinding the authorization to use force, the reality is that the Democrats do not have a large enough majority in the Senate to defeat a veto, and they know it. Any attempt to do so would be futile and a waste of time and resources.

Impeachment is likely not considered for a similar reason. The task of proving that the president knowingly misled Congress is difficult… in part because he probably didn’t do it knowingly. I believe that if the evidence to go to war was intentionally falsified, it was Dick Cheney and others behind the scenes who are responsible… Moving for legal action is only wise when the evidence is strong enough to win the case. I… and the majority of the people of the US… believe that those who misled Congress did it and got away with it just as much as OJ Simpson did.

However… let’s put all of that aside for a moment and assume the American people are responsible for the decision to attack Iraq. So we as a nation have removed Saddam… we’ve stuck for years trying to establish and strengthen a democratic government… and we’ve failed. If you don’t agree (which I know you don’t), then how much longer do we wait before we accept that we are incapable of changing the sectarian dynamics of the Middle East? If the situation persists as it has for the next 20, 30, or 40 years, do we really stay there that long? Sure, it’s honorable to want to fix your mistakes as a nation… but being able to recognize the extent of your capabilities in an alarmingly backwards part of the world is equally important. At what point does resolve become stubborness?

But what side is dividing who?. united we stand divided we fall. Seems like a wise concept a 100 plus years ago and the same still holds true today. I may not agree with this war, but, my God I will support the decisions that both sides approved to invade that country.

“I may not agree with this war, but, my God I will support the decisions that both sides approved to invade that country.”

If everyone took up the same attitude, boy, what a boring country we would live in. Dissent is the spark for change. Without it, we would still be a British colony.

Believe it or not, it is okay, and recommended, to disagree even with your elected representatives. If you disagree with the war (as you stated), then as an American, you should try to do something about it. Voting in a president who shares your negative position on the war is absolutely your right. Changing your mind about the war based on the current evidence is absolutely your right. We do -not- have an obligation to remain in Iraq. The only obligations we have are to the Constitution and to the will of the people. If the people vote for an end to the war in the 2008 presidential election, then that absolutely what should happen.

“We are Americans. We never fail at anything we really want.”

This statement (along with much of the rest of what you’ve said) convinces me that our discussion is over. You are welcome to your opinion, and I am welcome to mine… and I have accepted that we will not agree on this. I am just happy that 70% of Americans do not agree with you. According to our president, the “mission” was “accomplished” 3 1/2 years ago. So we have “tried” and we have “succeeded”. I just hope you won’t be too upset when this kind of thinking is voted out of office in 2008. The only people who have a prayer of winning the presidency in a general election are a Democrat or Ron Paul… based on national sentiment. I am a hard-core conservative (as in, a supporter of limited federal power), and I hope the GOP gets its head out of its ass quickly enough to realize that they can’t beat a Democrat in this election without Ron Paul as their guy. Regardless of whether or not you personally support him, I believe this is the cold, hard fact. The 70% of Americans that disagree with you are the same ones that would consider Ron Paul over a Democrat.

So my interpretation of the polls is incorrect, then? Okay. So if the Democrats’ victories which resulted in majorities in both houses in the last election is not enough for you, let’s allow the presidential election to decide for us then. If Guiliani, McCain, Romney, Thompson, or any of the other big-government non-conservatives running for the GOP nomination are elected as president at the end of 2008, I will concede that you are right about the will of the American people. But I’ll still wonder why it is that the Republican party has forgotten what the term “conservative” even means. Good luck to your candidate, whoever he may be.

So much talk about a war. So little we understand about survival. There was a day when children walked to school, parents never doubting for a moment their child would return home.
Today, the same thing could happen, but fear, territoriality, and aggression rule our little insignificant lives.
If we could only return to when the enemy pointed 40000 nuclear bombs at us, we knew it was mutually assured destruction.
But now, the odds are you would die on a plane crashing into a power plant than be impacted by any terrorist act.
But since the Soviet threat is gone, all of the Klingons must find another way to keep the blood flowing. And sometimes, that means stirring up things ourselves.

Ron Paul 2008 or else
To quote the great Mel Gibson in his role as William Wallace,
“I’m going to peck a fight.”

Weak, little, scared, and striking out against 3rd world civilians and talking big talk, like you are the warrior.

I strongly suggest that we make everyone who voted for the war to be drafted and sent over to Iraq to die. That will get rid of this reptilian influence within America, and allow us once again to let our kids walk to school.

Since I served in the USAF and the USN, I can say first hand that when you follow an order that is illegal, you are obligated to object.

If it comes down to it, a civil war in America may be required. The terrorist won’t have to follow us home, they will grow in your backyard.

If we don’t stop as a nation this pre-emptive war, then maybe the true patriots shall stand again and rid this country of the tyranny and murderous ways….

“But I imagine it’s a safe bet for you since there is no way Ron Paul will be the GOP nominee.”

Exactly my point. The bet was… the GOP cannot win unless Ron Paul is their candidate. The reason it is a safe bet for me is because if any other Republican candidate gets the nomination, I am certain he will lose to Hillary… and in the end, it will be the fault of people like yourself that the Republican party lost the presidency. Are you confident enough in your assessment of American public sentiment to bet against that? If so… I am serious. Let’s put $100 on it.

I’m not talking about you Paulbots tho, you guys are no where near Republicans. So with or without you, if Hillary gets the nod the Republican WILL win.

This is exactly why the Republicans don’t have a snowballs change in Hell of taking this election. Paulbots are voters and you would not do well to alienate them as the Republican party has tried to do. 42% call themselves indepenent of a party which to me says they will no longer
support people soely on party but will look to the issue.
Even the Value Voters are starting to disregard party.

Ron Paul has a screw loose. So do his minions who troll Technorati 24/7 in order to spam blogs with cut and paste messages.

I can sum this up easily. Idiots made some stupid decisions and more idiots want to continue to make stupid decisions without regard for the blood or treasure of the American people. And I thought fascism was dead but apparently it’s alive and kicking with you Neo-Cons scumbags. . Even if it means we lose our freedom in the process. This is a case of the blind leading the dumb..F$%k that! ..I am a true conservative and an old scholl Republican…I am voting for Ron Paul instead!

Getting back to the original topic “Ron Paul Would Divide America” and the reason why I visited this blog in the first place, I just wanted to comment about the recent trip I made to South Carolina for a rally that Ron Paul had there.

There were 13 of us that left Jacksonville early that morning. Most of us had not even met before. It was an interesting group of people. We ranged from right wing abortion activists to anti-globalist anarchists. There were anti-drug war types, people that were concerned with illegal immigration, constitutionalists and even a few “regular folk” that were just interested in seeing the man for themselves.

From my experience I would have to say that Ron Paul actually brought us together. He didn’t divide us. Isn’t that how Ronald Reagan won, with the Reagan Democrats?

You guys seem to forget that we have helped create the problem of Al-Queda and Osama Bin Laden in the first place. We recruited these guys and encouraged and fostered these radical views in order to exploit them for our own aims.

Does it seem odd to any of you that somehow this guy who is supposed to be a descipable villain, manages to get himself on the major news networks at the exact same time they are holding a candlelight vigil at Ground Zero?? They are not his tool, CNN, FOX, whoever.. they could decide to show that “new” tape whenever they want to. They played the tape and the memorial side by side! It’s deliberate, and its disgusting.

I have a hard time reconciling the fact that Osama Bin Laden is at one time a friend and business partner to the family of our very own president and is at the same time the most evil man on Earth. Have any of you heard about who was really responsible for the bombings on 7/7 in London?? It was pulled off by an admitted MI5/Al Queda agent!!! This is admitted in the mainstream news! They killed an innocent guy in response to it and that is also admitted! The double agent is still at large!

Its unfair also to lump all of the combat we see in Iraq as coming from Al-Queda, when the Sunnis and Shias don’t like Al-Queda just as much as we do. Depending on who is talking at any given time they will call them Al-Queda, and if you’re lucky they call them insurgents. There is a nationalist movement going on in Iraq that really does want its freedom, but what it doesn’t want is a US occupation and/or puppet government. Its a no brainer. How would you feel if some foreign government just waltzed in on false pretenses and started building military bases the size of the Vatican??

Now you guys want to go to war with Iran. You want to war on the whole religion of Islam. You want to bring on f@#$ing world war 3 and the end of days or something. You’re ready to drop nuclear weapons on them and let god sort them out. Some people have even suggesting attacking the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. Are you out of your f#@$ing minds or what?!?

How many of you have actually read about the creation of Israel? How many actually know that Palestine was once a sovereign nation, until the British and the rest of the world imposed the creation of Israel there. It has been a battle there ever since and it has been done intentionally knowing this kind of conflict would arise.

Its not about not assisting our allies, its about meddling in these people’s affairs for our interest. They know we installed the Shah, they know we supported Saddam, they know we created Al-Queda, they know we sold Saddam chemical weapons… it goes on.

I’m sorry man but unity over this war with _IRAQ_ is not something I can support consider I was one of millions who participated in _the_ largest world-wide pre-emptive protest ever recorded. We tried to tell you there were no WMDs, we tried to tell you about the policy of pre-emptive war, we didn’t have UN approval, we didn’t have a declaration of war, we had was a president who asserted his right to put our troops in harms way should he want to.

They were drawing up plans for martial law and occupation of Iraq before Bush even went to the Congress for approval. Bush had congress by the balls and no one would dare commit political suicide, and they all voted for the authorization of force despite the fact that it was widely discussed that Iraq was no threat to us. There is no need for I told you so’s, because everyone has known it all along.

Sorry I jumped straight on Osama, because most of the time if you start to point out the fallacies of the war in Iraq, the pro-war camp will say it is part of the larger war. The larger war on what? At this point now that we are getting closer to attacking Iran, you guys are getting to the point to say that the enemy is simply Islam.

That is the common argument being espoused by even Bill Maher! Watch out! They have the Qu’Ran which calls for all of this violence and hatred. Well most of Islam is not like that, unless of course you are talking about Al-Queda and the jihadis – to which I say – we undeniably fostered and helped create that movement. And our continued presence and occupation of Iraq helps fuel that movement.

Why not pick up a Bible and see some of the violence that Moses commits against his enemies. It is not pretty, its brutal.

if we were to leave completely (while maintaining diplomatic ties), I believe the long term result would be a radical Islamic movement that has no motivation to attack the US. Radical Islam is fueled by hatred… and when you take away it’s fuel, it tends to dissapate. Our continued presence has been a rallying cry for Al Qaeda… and our absence would likely be their doom.

Chub, I don’t believe you are correct on this. Radical Islam is indeed fueled by hatred; but when you speak of “taking away their fuel”, what exactly is the fuel? The fuel is modernity, western civilization, and anything that does not embrace Islam and government under Sharia Law.

Since I served in the USAF and the USN, I can say first hand that when you follow an order that is illegal, you are obligated to object.

If it comes down to it, a civil war in America may be required.

Earl E, you’re proof-positive that even those who serve in the military can have poor judgment.

I understand you don’t like it, but what is illegal about this war?

“I understand you don’t like it, but what is illegal about this war?”

What war?

The bet was… the GOP cannot win unless Ron Paul is their candidate. The reason it is a safe bet for me is because if any other Republican candidate gets the nomination, I am certain he will lose to Hillary… and in the end, it will be the fault of people like yourself that the Republican party lost the presidency. Are you confident enough in your assessment of American public sentiment to bet against that? If so… I am serious. Let’s put $100 on it.

Chubs, that cannot possibly be a serious bet, since Ron Paul won’t win the GOP nomination, and therefore there’s no way to prove he’d win against Hillary.

That would certainly be an interesting race, and a frightening one, at that.

And I thought fascism was dead but apparently it’s alive and kicking with you Neo-Cons scumbags. . Even if it means we lose our freedom in the process. This is a case of the blind leading the dumb..F$%k that! ..I am a true conservative and an old scholl Republican…I am voting for Ron Paul instead!

How are you possibly going to do that when he won’t be the GOP presidential candidate?

How are you losing your freedom, Christos?

and fullfilled none of their promioses of smaller government of the Gringrich revolution of the 90s.

JohnnyB, has any politician ever fulfilled the promise of “smaller government”? It’s an honest question.

You guys seem to forget that we have helped create the problem of Al-Queda and Osama Bin Laden in the first place. We recruited these guys and encouraged and fostered these radical views in order to exploit them for our own aims.

Did my RP posts just get ignored?! I’m sure I’ve addressed this ad nauseam.

We did not “create” al-Qaeda, bin Laden, or Saddam, Mike.

Does it seem odd to any of you that somehow this guy who is supposed to be a descipable villain, manages to get himself on the major news networks at the exact same time they are holding a candlelight vigil at Ground Zero?? They are not his tool, CNN, FOX, whoever.. they could decide to show that “new” tape whenever they want to. They played the tape and the memorial side by side! It’s deliberate, and its disgusting.

Well, who’s responsible for that? Who are you laying the blame with?

I have a hard time reconciling the fact that Osama Bin Laden is at one time a friend and business partner to the family of our very own president and is at the same time the most evil man on Earth.

So are we still “friends” with Osama? Or just with family members? What President hasn’t had “ties” to the Saudi royal families?

Should we follow Jimmy Carter’s sanctimonious example, and never have any dealings whatsoever with leaders and people who do not live up to our estimation and expectations of human rights and morality?

Have any of you heard about who was really responsible for the bombings on 7/7 in London?? It was pulled off by an admitted MI5/Al Queda agent!!! This is admitted in the mainstream news! They killed an innocent guy in response to it and that is also admitted! The double agent is still at large!

Is there a point you’re making here? Because I don’t see what it is you’re trying to get at.

Its unfair also to lump all of the combat we see in Iraq as coming from Al-Queda, when the Sunnis and Shias don’t like Al-Queda just as much as we do.

Who is doing that? Lumping all the combat to al-Qaeda?

Depending on who is talking at any given time they will call them Al-Queda, and if you’re lucky they call them insurgents. There is a nationalist movement going on in Iraq that really does want its freedom, but what it doesn’t want is a US occupation and/or puppet government.

Anyone who thinks the Maliki government is a “puppet” of the U.S. is really, really off his rocker. I hope that’s not you, Mike.

Its a no brainer. How would you feel if some foreign government just waltzed in on false pretenses and started building military bases the size of the Vatican??

Aaaaah…the “what if China invaded the U.S. and built bases in California” line of RP reasoning.

I’ve addressed that already in one of my many posts.

It’s quite simple, really.

Now you guys want to go to war with Iran.

Who says that?!

Isn’t it the other way around?

Where has President Bush said that he wanted war with Iran? And how many speeches from ahmadinajad talks belligerently? Which theocracy talks of the 12th Imam and the coming of a worldwide Caliphate?

You want to war on the whole religion of Islam. You want to bring on f@#$ing world war 3 and the end of days or something.

Quit generalizing and lumping us in with the fringe.

How many more times does President Bush have to stress that we are not warring with Islam before folks like you “get it”?

Are we killing more Muslims than Muslims killing Muslims?

You’re ready to drop nuclear weapons on them and let god sort them out. Some people have even suggesting attacking the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. Are you out of your f#@$ing minds or what?!?

I don’t support Tancredo.

How many of you have actually read about the creation of Israel?

Which version? The Ward Churchill version, or reality?

How many actually know that Palestine was once a sovereign nation, until the British and the rest of the world imposed the creation of Israel there.

There was never a Palestinian state. There was never an Arab-Palestinian national movement until around 1964.

Its not about not assisting our allies, its about meddling in these people’s affairs for our interest. They know we installed the Shah, they know we supported Saddam, they know we created Al-Queda, they know we sold Saddam chemical weapons… it goes on.

Thank you for the Noam Chomsky version of American history! I hear Osama bin Laden’s a big fan.

We did not create Al-Qaeda.

The CIA did not fund Osama bin Laden. I’ve heard Lawrence Wright put this forth recently as well, that it is a myth; and he’s written the definitive history to date, on Al-Qaeda.

Tell me which countries supplied Saddam with 99.8% of his arsenal? Hint: Not the U.S.

I’ve addressed this one too elsewhere. Maybe I should dig and cut-and-paste my responses from now on.

Kind of like some of the Paulspambots do.

I’m sorry man but unity over this war with _IRAQ_ is not something I can support consider I was one of millions who participated in _the_ largest world-wide pre-emptive protest ever recorded.

Congratulations for being on the wrong side of history, Mike.

We tried to tell you there were no WMDs,

Some of you, maybe. But the majority of the peace fascists out there making a spectacle of themselves with Halloween outfits in a Mardi Gras parade, protested DESPITE what international intell was warning us regarding Saddam and wmd capabilities. It’s a dishonest hindsight argument for the anti-war movement to make. They were against this war simply for the fact that they are anti-war peace fascists who don’t support war under any circumstances. That’s what the bulk of the professional “peace” protestors do.

we tried to tell you about the policy of pre-emptive war, we didn’t have UN approval, we didn’t have a declaration of war, we had was a president who asserted his right to put our troops in harms way should he want to.

Sheesh. Now you’re depressing me.

Because now it’s back to fighting today’s problem with yesterday’s arguments.

How many more times do we need to rehash this stuff?

They were drawing up plans for martial law and occupation of Iraq before Bush even went to the Congress for approval. Bush had congress by the balls and no one would dare commit political suicide,

Gee….so President Bush really is the “decider” and not Karl Rove or Dick Cheney? Whoa…learned something new.

and they all voted for the authorization of force despite the fact that it was widely discussed that Iraq was no threat to us. There is no need for I told you so’s, because everyone has known it all along.

Given that Congress gave its approval, how is this an “illegal” war?

In another post, I’ve already discussed as well, the issue of war declarations. Another RP fixation.

Sorry I jumped straight on Osama, because most of the time if you start to point out the fallacies of the war in Iraq, the pro-war camp will say it is part of the larger war. The larger war on what? At this point now that we are getting closer to attacking Iran, you guys are getting to the point to say that the enemy is simply Islam.

From the very beginning, wasn’t it obvious that we were at war with RADICAL Islamic terror? At the time, it was too sensitive and non-PC to specify “Islamists”/Islamic fascists.

That is the common argument being espoused by even Bill Maher! Watch out!

OMG! How scary!

you listening to Bill Maher….

They have the Qu’Ran which calls for all of this violence and hatred. Well most of Islam is not like that,

You’re speaking to a “pro-war” conservative who understands that, and who tries to promote distinguishing the difference between “jihad” and “hirabah”.

unless of course you are talking about Al-Queda and the jihadis – to which I say – we undeniably fostered and helped create that movement. And our continued presence and occupation of Iraq helps fuel that movement.

Are you so sure? How does American foreign policy explain away the terror attacks all over the world by Islamic militants? France and Germany were against the Iraq War. Yet they have their problems with Muslim radicals, and just recently, as you know, there was a foiled major terror attack on Germany. Do we blame German foreign policy, or hold radical Islam responsible?

Many people are critical of American foreign policy. But only one group of people are destructive enough to strap on a bomb vest to express that dissatisfaction.

And it’s one of perception, not necessarily reality, when criticizing American foreign policy. There is criticism to be made; but it needs to be balanced with fair perspective and not a lopsided view.

Why not pick up a Bible and see some of the violence that Moses commits against his enemies. It is not pretty, its brutal.

When you see a mass movement of crusaders strapping on bombs and blowing up innocents, let me know.

If you cite Timothy McVeigh, I swear to Allah, I will laugh out loud to my computer screen.

Curt, maybe if Paul and Kucinich were to “combine forces” and choose each other as running mates, America would enter into a new golden age of peace and prosperity.

They are made for each other actually, and believe me the Paulbots would love the teaming of those two.

You guys seem to forget that we have helped create the problem of Al-Queda and Osama Bin Laden in the first place. We recruited these guys and encouraged and fostered these radical views in order to exploit them for our own aims.

How naive.

http://www.floppingaces.net/war-on-terror/the-looming-tower/

Oh Oh, it sounds like Newt is coming out for Ron Paul too! So that makes the John Birch Society, Pat Buchanan, Ann Coulter AND NEWT!!

SOunds to me like the paleocons are taking the party back!

Whoo-hoo comment #100!

What do I get, Mike’s America?

hate to double post, but here’s what Newt Said….

Republican presidential candidates need to make a “clean break” from President George W. Bush and the U.S. government or they will lose in November 2008, a veteran Republican leader said on Friday.

“If you don’t represent real change, you just gave away the 2008 election,” said former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who led the Republican takeover of the House of Representatives in 1994 and now is flirting with a White House run.

Gingrich cited the Iraq war, the failed federal response to Hurricane Katrina two years ago and the inability to control U.S. borders and illegal immigration as evidence of a need for a complete overhaul of the U.S. system of governing.

“Now that may or may not make the White House happy. But I think that’s the whole point about making a clean break,” Gingrich told a group of reporters over breakfast.

He added: “I believe for any Republican to win in 2008 they have to … offer a dramatic, bold change. If we nominate somebody who has not done that, they get to be the nominee but there is very, very little likelihood that they can win.”

There you have it.

Mike’s America you might get your way, and a prowar republican might win the GOP nomination, but they will never win the White House. Its a matter of simple mathematics, when 70% of the people are opposed to the war, and one candidate is against the war while another candidate is for the war, the candidate that is for the war loses the election.

People don’t vote for people to change their minds, they vote for people of like mind. Would you vote for Hillary so she could teach you that socialism is a good idea? No of course not!

People who have made up their minds that they are against Bush and against the war will not vote for a candidate to help them change their minds about the war or Bush’s policies. This is political reality.

This is politics in a democratic society, so you might think about quit blaming Ron Paul and start blaming Bush, because ultimately its Bush’s complete and utter failure as commander in chief that has brought us to this point.

Why don’t you try googling Ron Paul, watch some of his videos on You Tube and see if you can’t find somethings that you like about the guy?

“A. To benefit Hillary Clinton”

Every other Republican candidate (apart from Ron Paul) is a liberal when it comes to the federal government’s role. I hate Hillary… but sadly, I think she is a better choice than any of the guys Mike’s America would support. So if it benefits Hillary somehow to vote for Ron Paul… So be it. At least a neo-con won’t win.

Who gives a shit about Democrat or Republican. All that matters is American. If Ron Paul isn’t nominated, America will collapse:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGpY2hw7ao8

That’s all that matters. SUPPORT RON PAUL. The more I learn about America’s situation, the more of a Ron Paul fanatic I become.

If the US normalized relations with Iran, there would be a democratic transition in that country and Iran would be a US allie.

Care to expound upon this novel approach? What do you mean by “normalize”?

I’d like to see you take responsibility for believing the lies about Iraq’s WMD,

Who lied?