Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SJackson

“Just as they deterred some Islamic group about 6 years ago”

this goes back to the coulda woulda argument. Pre-9/11 We knew Al Queda wanted to strike our soil, we never responded to the Cole or many other attacks. I’m pretty sure Paul wouldn’t let that stand like our other leaders did. Nor would he let future attacks stand.


149 posted on 08/08/2007 4:22:02 PM PDT by CJ Wolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies ]


To: CJ Wolf
we never responded to the Cole or many other attacks

And what did Ron Paul say or do at the time? Was he advocating that the US invade Afghanistan to take out AQ?

I’m pretty sure Paul wouldn’t let that stand like our other leaders did. Nor would he let future attacks stand.

Yeah, right. He was elected to Congress in 1996 and took office in January 1997. Bin laden had issued his declaration of war against us in his 1996 fatwa. And our embassies were attacked in 1998. What was Ron Paul's response to these attacks? Why did he vote against the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998? Why did he vote against the 1997 U.S.-Taiwan Missile Defense Cooperation bill?

Ron Paul is weak on national security issues and defense.

163 posted on 08/08/2007 4:48:25 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies ]

To: CJ Wolf

“I’m pretty sure Paul wouldn’t let that stand like our other leaders did. Nor would he let future attacks stand.” LOL! I don’t know what makes you think he would have gone after the terrorists over the Cole. It is pretty clear from Paul’s speeches that he considered the Cole attack a “warning” — but the context of his speech suggests that his answer to that “warning” was not to go after the terrorists, but to pull out of the Middle East.


166 posted on 08/08/2007 4:50:17 PM PDT by soccermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies ]

To: CJ Wolf
this goes back to the coulda woulda argument. Pre-9/11 We knew Al Queda wanted to strike our soil, we never responded to the Cole or many other attacks. I’m pretty sure Paul wouldn’t let that stand like our other leaders did. Nor would he let future attacks stand.

Of course not, he would have issued Letters of Marque.

Are you suggesting he would have attacked terrorist bases in Yemin, in Somalia, in Lebanon, and, of course the nation of Iraq who fired on our troops on a daily basis.

I would have supported those actions, but you know he wouldn't.

In fact none of those forces would be there. The middle east would be an Islamic/Soviet lake, safe transit for oil I'm sure. And yes, I think access to oil is a legitimate national interest. As to future attacks, there will be none once we've withdrawn our forces from around the world, we'll have no enemies, so future attacks are irrelevant.

217 posted on 08/08/2007 5:32:17 PM PDT by SJackson (isolationism never was, never will be acceptable response to[expansionist] tyrannical governments)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson