Posted on 03/24/2007 12:44:30 PM PDT by Austin Willard Wright
Ron Paul ping.
But...but...this can't be. Paul is an anti-war nutcase, he marched with Code Pink < /Paul haters >
LOL! Those who see the world through simplistic us v. them partisan blinders age going to have to reboot because of the mental overload.
Does Paul support getting Al-Qaeda? If yes, how?
Also, does he care about people who have gambled on our staying the course, like the Kurds, Iraqi Shias and Sunnis, and Afghanis?
The bloodbath following a withdrawal could dwarf Rwanda. Hard decision, no?
But wasn't the point to save Democracy? I mean, that's what this fight is for isn't it? Aren't we over there fighting for the Democracy so we want to just give it to the Mexicans to turn into Mexico North?
Aren't we over there fighting for the Democracy so we can give the US to the Mexicans to turn it into Mexico North?
Man, I could proof-read it maybe.
Very much so. He has always supported the effort against Bin Laden, voted for the Afghan war, and has urged the President to issue Letters of Marque.
In great part, because of his opposition to Al Qaeda he opposed the Iraq quagmire which has fueled the growing strength of Al Qaeda of Iraq, an organization that did not exist under the secular Saddam. Those who criticize Paul on this issue, should reconsider their own misguided optimism back in 2003 and ask a simple question: why keep repeating the same mistake over and over again?
Does Paul support getting Al-Qaeda? If yes, how?
Of course not, he is a cut and runner.
Also, does he care about people who have gambled on our staying the course, like the Kurds, Iraqi Shias and Sunnis, and Afghanis?
Why would Ron Paul be concerned with those people, They can't vot for him. He is only concerned for what is best for him.
Oooops....I think I accidentally stumbled into a leftist forum.
We fought Hitler and Tojo for the same reasons we are now fighting radical Islam: they want to control and/or kill us. In 1942, no one but the U.S. could have successfully led such an effort. The same is true today, and the enemy is just as dangerous. Paul refuses to see this because, well, I'll say it: he's an anti-Semite, has consistently voted against Israel, and is captive to the Arab lobby. He represents the ugly convergence of the far left and far right, and I would suggest to anyone who doubts me to read what the man has said on the floor of the House about Israel. You'd think he was speaking about Nazi Germany.
Sounds like Paul is in damage-control mode.
his chance are better playing lotto
Pouring more resources into this medieval hell-hole makes about much sense is the Democratic policy of fighting poverty (which was created and nurtured by the welfare state) by spending even more money on to expand that same welfare state!
Actually all you did was fail to look into why Congressman Paul voted the way he did. He's explained it numerous times.
Quite frankly he's the only one advocating that the US Constitution actually be used at some point in this war.
Silly of him, isn't it...expecting the Feds to actually follow the Constitution.
Go back and read his Letters Of Marque position. I think you'll find it quite enlightening.
L
Link?
It isn't Congressman Paul's comments I was referring to.
But what about the bloodbath to follow withdrawal from Iraq?
One could support impeaching Bush for mis/malfeasance in Iraq, and still insist on seeing this through.
Link?
Ron Paul also just dissed the troops. He can play politics with something else besides their lives.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.