Posted on 05/03/2007 10:23:46 PM PDT by OrthodoxPresbyterian
Nope!
What makes you think that our engagement in Iraq does not provide a "huge recruiting tool for the jihadists" NOW?
It seemed to work for Carter and Reagan in supporting the mujaheddin against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. What makes you think that many Iraqis are not similarly motivated to join the various insurgent and terrorist factions -- simply because, regardless of how noble we believe our motives to be, we are nonetheless Armed Foreigners in Their Land?
Not to sound snippy, but perhaps you shouldn’t bother posting on threads about the election, and concentrate on those about, say, the queen’s visit to the US.
You can keep pushing your threads for Paul but you will not be winning him any votes. The only people that want him to win are libertarians and democrats. The vast majority of republicans will not vote for a libertarian isolationist that wants to run from the terrorists with his tail between his legs. The terrorists would follow us here and kill many more Americans than those that lost their lives on 9/11.
Right now I don’t have one. But he needs to realize there is a war on militant Islam going on and willing to grow our military to confront it.
Personally, I don’t have any intention of converting to Islam and I don’t want my kids to have to either.
They won't vote for a straw man, either.
I will call it here right now, Paul will not get more than 3% (if he is lucky) for the republican nomination. Most people are not that stupid. There is nothing more important than the WOT. All else takes the back seat.
I voted for Ron Paul for President in 1988. Even volunteered to work for the campaign.
He really should have stayed in the Libertarian party. When he left it to become a Republican again, BOTH the Libertarian party and the Republican party were the losers in that deal.
I agree that most of Paul’ votes on the online polls came from anti-war liberals and assorted jokers.
Yeah, Ron really cracked me up when he held up Eisenhower as an example of a non-interventionist President. I guess he needs to hit the history books and study up on the 1953 Iranian coup.
How about making defense of our borders a priority instead of an undeclared war?
That is an absolutely ridiculous position.
On the basis of those Facts alone: Abortion, Illegal Immigration, and Gun Control are all FAR more important issues than "Terrorism". And Ron Paul is Number #1 with a Bullet on all of those key Conservatives issues.
Those are the FACTS. And they are NOT in dispute.
It’s ironic that a man who actually supports the Constitution is chastised by many so called conservatives. I guess it is “just a GD piece of paper” after all.
The press says "insurgent", I hear "Vietcong".
Means the same to me. People you are trying to give freedom to are in return trying to kill you. They wear no uniform and live in the village as part of it.
We should have gone into Cambodia and didn't. We need to take out Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia now(think we will?) and give the whole mess back to Great Britain. The only thing which ever kept them peaceful was colonization.
I don't know know if we'll ever do any of the above but the course we are on is a slow bleed. And the governments failure to secure our borders makes this war appear to be about other then National Security.
I think you just hit the nail on the head.
I ping you and your posse of a very small group of freepers (the same btw on all your threads) when Paul loses and loses badly. Once that occurs, you will see how little influence he has with most conservatives.
Do as you like.
I see the Paul-bot Libertards are out in force tonight.
Dr. Paul is my Congressman, but he came across as a looney old man in this debate. Only Tancredo did worse in presentation.
Even McCainiac was smoother in his delivery and tone.
And Tommie Thompson came across as more innovative than most of the others, who spouted pretty much canned responses.
Iraq, and the treasure spent trying to 'liberate' it, will have longterm costs to everything that affects this country: technology, energy, science, etc.
This Manhattan Project-dwarfing investment had better produce a return that our grandchildren will reap benefits from for quite some time, else they'll be deeply saddened.
About the only way this could happen would be for our efforts to result in a type of 'virus' that could render Islam extinct.
No more shots fired, just folks ditching the Koran for a better life as exemplified by the strides made among free people. Until I see evidence of this, I'll remain weary of our efforts in the middle east and the motivation (whether short term or long term) behind our involvement.
Mitt Romney holding steady at a strong 35%.
Tommy Thompson and Giuliani have moved down.
Ron Paul has moved further up to 17% -- now within 3% of Rudy.
Everyone else holding steady.
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.