Posted on 08/08/2007 1:30:04 PM PDT by CJ Wolf
Ron Paul was right during the Des Moines Republican debate when he said that our going into Iraq had nothing to do with al-Qaeda. And Mitt Romney was wrong when he interrupted him.
At the Republican debate in Des Moines, Iowa, on August 5, Congressman Ron Paul made clear that our going to war against Iraq had nothing to do with going after al-Qaeda, the terrorist group that attacked us on 9/11.
"The neoconservatives promoted this war many, many years before it was started," Paul said during the debate. "It had nothing to do with al-Qaeda. There was no al-Qaeda in Iraq." As Ron Paul elaborated on how wrong the neocons have been, Governor Romney, apparently attempting to telegraph his disgust with the congressman’s remarks, snidely said to the audience, "Has he forgotten about 9/11?" as he gestured with his hands. A couple seconds later, Romney again rudely interrupted — "Have you forgotten about..." — as Paul continued using the time allotted to him.
Later in the debate, Paul revisited the subject of al-Qaeda. "I supported going after the al-Qaeda into Afghanistan," he said, "but, lo and behold, the neocons took over. They forgot about Osama bin Laden. And what they did, they went into nation- building, not only in Afghanistan, they went unjustifiably over into Iraq. And that’s why we’re in this mess today."
Put simply, Ron Paul does not believe we went into Iraq because of 9/11. But Mitt Romney obviously believes we did. So who’s right?
It is true that President Bush and other neocons in his administration have repeatedly juxtaposed references to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq to those of 9/11 in their public statements. In so doing, they have created the impression among many Americans — apparently including Romney — that Saddam Hussein had attacked us on 9/11. But the administration did not explicitly say this and did not even present evidence supporting this allegation. As President Bush himself said on September 17, 2003: "We’ve had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11th [attacks]."
The administration did portray an al-Qaeda/Iraq connection as a concrete fact. Yet in a January 8, 2004 press conference, then-Secretary of State Colin Powell acknowledged: "There is not — you know, I have not seen smoking-gun, concrete evidence about the connection, but I think the possibility of such connections did exist and it was prudent to consider them at the time that we did." In truth, the evidence simply was not there.
By interrupting Congressman Paul with his "Has he forgotten about 9/11?" protestation, Governor Romney not only made himself appear less than presidential, he also confirmed that, where Iraq is concerned, he does not know what he’s talking about.
JBS posts are generally discouraged. I’m inclined to let this one stay.
Last night, our forces combined with Iraqi forces wiped out 32 Mahdi Army scum and captured about a dozen more.
As I type this, another operation appears to have gotten underway, judging by the sounds I am hearing.
This is definitely not the time to quit. So much ground has been gained in just the last few weeks.
Thank you. Won’t happen again.
Only to those too ignorant to follow a line of reasoning more than 4 words long and that doesn't rhyme.
By interrupting Congressman Paul with his "Has he forgotten about 9/11?" protestation, Governor Romney not only made himself appear less than presidential, he also confirmed that, where Iraq is concerned, he does not know what he’s talking about.
No, he showed that he understands that the 21st Century's biggest threat is non-state actors who receive willing or unwilling support from rougue or hostile regimes to carry out extremely effective 4th generation or asymmetric warfare against the US and it's allies. Anyone who doesn't understand that the shocking lesson of 9/11 is about more than any one man or one organization or one government is stuck in the 19th Centuy.
Nuff said. It's more productive to go back to that off-topic Civil War debate from yesterday. Unless someone wants to talk evolution vs creationism ;^)
just kidding folks...
Anyone who interrupts Ron Paul is RIGHT.
LLS
Good news and stay safe.
Good call...
Ron Paul’s “just war” terminology is a coward’s excuse to avoid defending the nation.
Paul is dangerously incompetent, and UNFIT TO COMMAND!
Paul will neither defend his country, nor will he uphold our military alliances.
Only fools worship at the altar of Ron Paul.
I think he’d defend this country.
with what? Letters of the Marque? Pirates?
Don’t make me laugh.
“Romney was demonstrating he either believes in or wishes to disingenuously peddle a connection between Saddam and 9/11.”
Actually to be fair to Romney, he didn’t get a chance to explain that remark. It could have meant that he agrees with the preemptive war policy Bush has set and that taking out Saddam was a way to prevent future 9/11s or he could believe that Saddam was responsible for 911, when we all know it was the Chinese. ;-)
Oh brother.
I think he’d secure the border. I think he’d respond with overwhelming force to any attacks. I think he’d disregard the UN, when we need to declare war. And yes he’d use the Letters of Marque to equip and fund private death squads to attack our enemies. I think he’d surprise you.
You stay safe..
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.