I don't understand this. Is he unwilling to give the Iraqis a chance to work these problems out, and siding with Reid and Murtha who want to run away? Doesn't he think anything can be salvaged? Granted, this is the first and the most I've heard about him, but I really don't get his position on this.
Given that the Iraqis have voted for a Constitution which makes the Islamic Koran "the Primary Source of Law" (thus by definition relegating Christianity to a Second-Class Religion) and have demonstrated their "gratitude" to us by "democratically electing" self-confessed, and even convicted, Anti-American terrorists to their Ruling Government (The terrorist Islamic Al-Dawa Party of Prime Minister Al-Maliki, whose Ruling Coalition includes convicted "Kuwait 17" US Embassy Bomber Jamal Jafaar Mohammed), Ron Paul believes that we should stop spending American Blood and Treasure to prop up an Islamic Theocracy in Iraq which has knowingly and willfully harbored Convicted Terrorists.
In calling for a cut-off of all US Military and Financial support to Iraq, Ron Paul is thus the only GOP Candidate staying true to the principles laid out in the 2002 State of the Union address.
"..support for the criminal Islamic Terrorist thug-regime.."
What part of "criminal Islamic Terrorist thug-regime" do you not understand?
Is nation-building a power authorized to the federal government by the Constitution? If so, wherein does it reside? If not, why are we still in Iraq after Dubya said we’d accomplished our mission?