Rep. Ron Paul: Clearly, language threatening to wipe a nation or a group of people off the map is to be condemned by all civilized people. And I do condemn any such language. But why does threatening Iran with a pre-emptive strike, as many here have done, not also deserve the same kind of condemnation? And we wonder why the rest of the world accuses us of behaving hypocritically, of telling the rest of the world “do as we say, not as we do.”
PaleoPaulie is a UNITED STATES Representative and not supposed to be an Al Qaeda representative. He suffers from role confusion. A pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear weapons facilities can be distinguished from an Iranian promise of genocide against Israel. To make it simple enough for even the "paleos" to understand, destroying Iranian weapons-making facilities under current circumstnces is quite justified as a way of PREVENTING genocide and genocide is NOT justified by its aim of exterminating Jews whom the Iranian mullahs hate for being Jews. If that looks like hypocrisy, go into therapy.
We possess and Israel possesses atomic weapons. Iran does not yet. Iran threatens genocide against the Jews if and when it does possess nuclear weapons. If it looks like hypocrisy to you that we and Israel have such weapons and insist that the genocidal mullahs do not, again you might profitably consider therapy because your logic mechanism (if any) is broken.
One more reason for us to be relieved that neither paleoPaulie nor you nor any of your ilk will be nominated by the GOP next year.
BTW, I am all for the rest of the world having to worry about what we might do next. I care less what the world thinks of us. May we never need to care what the world thinks of us. We are a nation and not a popularity contestant (Miss Whirled Peas 2007???). As Machiavelli observed, if you have to choose, it is better to be feared than to be loved.