A Word on Surrender (Pro Ron Paul)

The Flada Blog ^ | Aug. 9, 2007 | Edmund Snyder

[Equality 7-2521]

A Word on “Surrender”

by Edmund Snyder August 9th, 2007

From the Wikipedia entry on surrender:

"Surrender is when soldiers, nations or other combatants stop fighting and become prisoners of war, either as individuals or when ordered to by their officers. A white flag is often used to surrender, as is the gesture of raising one’s hands empty and open above one’s head.

Surrender may be conditional, if the surrendering party promises to submit only if after the victor makes certain promises. Otherwise it is unconditional surrender; the victor makes no promises of treatment other than those provided by international law. Normally a belligerent will only agree to surrender unconditionally if completely incapable of continuing hostilities.

…

Entire nations can also surrender in an attempt to end a war or military conflict. This is done through the signing of an armistice or peace treaty."

This article is in reply to all of the neo-conservatives who attempt to castigate Rep. Ron Paul for his stance on the Iraq conflict. As most readers already know, Rep. Ron Paul is running for the Presidency as a Republican. In opposition to every other Republican in the race, Paul has taken the principled stance that we should remove our troops from Iraq immediately. His position is supported by those of such greats as Thomas Paine, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and James Monroe.

In Washington’s farewell address he said:

"The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to domestic nations, is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities."

In his treatise, Common Sense, Paine established many of the non-interventionist policies that would become the keystones of the American body politic for many years. His arguments are as germane today as they were when he wrote them and are the foundations of conservatism, yet there is only one Republican in all of Congress that still holds to them. Read the rest of this entry »

[bnelson44]

George Washington smoked dope?

[Badeye]

Paul has taken the principled stance that we should remove our troops from Iraq immediately. His position is supported by those of such greats as Thomas Paine, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and James Monroe.

If the above leaders had witnessed the murder of 800 plus Americans between 1972 and 9/11....and then witnessed the WTC collapse...they’d beat the livin hell out of Ron Paul on ‘general principal’ alone.

Sheesh.

[wideawake]

You know that when a column begins by citing Wikipedia as a magisterial authority on its subject, the rest is going to be amusing and appalling in equal measure.

[ari-freedom]

you must be on drugs before you can support ron paul!

[wastedyears]

What did we do in response to unrestricted submarine warfare from Germany? We went to war.

What did we do in response to Japan attacked our naval base in Pearl Harbor? We went to war.

What did we do in response to Islamic extremists flying aircraft into the World Trade Center? We went to war.

I’m all for going back to our isolationist policy again, but if somebody attacks us they will be damn sure we’ll fight back and win.

[Gorzaloon]

What a silly article. I thought all the founding fathers were dead.

That's pretty scary, then, since the Dead all vote Democrat.

[wastedyears]

I’m on Synthroid (thyroid medication) and I don’t support Ron Paul.

:)

[Chi-townChief]

That must be why he lost all his teeth!

[ari-freedom]

I was thinking something like hard crack

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

s position is supported by those of such greats as Thomas Paine, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and James Monroe.

Actually, they would probably have had Ron Paul shot by firing squad for treason.

[MEGoody]

In opposition to every other Republican in the race, Paul has taken the principled stance that we should remove our troops from Iraq immediately.

The Dems agree with him - lets surrender now.

I don't agree with them, so naturally, I won't be voting for Ronnie.

[wideawake]

"Behind every good man there is a woman, and that woman was Martha Washington, man, and everyday George would come home, she would have a big fat bowl waiting for him, man, when he come in the door, man, she was a hip, hip, hip lady, man." - Ron Slater, Dazed And Confused.

[april15Bendovr]

New Hampshire "Live Free Or Die," voiced by General John Stark, the state’s most distinguished hero of the Revolutionary War

Choose life has a dual purpose for Ron Paul in this post.

Keep terrorists on the run so we wont have to run from terrorists

[The_Victor]

What a racist statement

I wasn't aware that neocons are a race. Learn something new every day I suppose.

[mnehring]

I always laugh when the Paulites ask what Washington would do.. while we don’t know how he would react in the current situation, and it would be dishonest to speak for him as this article does, we can look at his history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Canada_(1775)
(I know, another Wikipedia link, but it had the best summary)

Canada 1775 = Iraq 2007 with one difference.. Benedict Arnold actually fought on our side for a while during this battle.

[samtheman]

The objective is to kill terrorists. They keep coming, we keep killing them. If and when the Iraqi government can take over the killing, then we can leave. But if you put a date on that, then you might as well be honest and call it what it is: RETREAT, SURRENDER, CUT-N-RUN.

[ex-snook]

Bush cut and ran [e.g. surrendered] from bin Laden.

[bamahead]

All of these people are dead. We don't know what they would say about the current conflict

"We can't know for certain what the founding fathers meant by this or that, and of course it doesn't apply to 'here and now', so lets just do what we think they might have meant."

Phrases such as the above are always thrown around by those deciding which of our constitutional rights to trample on next... Your use of the same logic here is absolutely NO DIFFERENT.

[mnehring]

Then let’s look at post #25 as an example instead of guessing based on speeches, why don’t we?

[italianquaker]

Lets see ru pauls foreign policy is to surrender, his domestic policy is 8 million dollars for shrimp and beside this stupidity he blame us for 9-11. I think he sounds more like obama and company every day