Happy Birthday BBQ for Ron Paul

Ron Paul 2008 ^ | August 28, 2007 | Neal Moore

[End Times Crusader]

Obviously not too sick since you hang out with Ru’s supporters.

[txhurl]

Stay with us. We have cookies. :)

[Badeye]

No disputing your post here.

[Badeye]

He’s only a factor because there hasn’t been a primary. First one ends this charade til ‘next time’.

[Badeye]

Its easier than you think, you just pull the tinfoil tight enough to constrict bloodflow to the brain.....
Ah...understanding dawns. Thanks for the help.

I’m from the internet, and I’m here to help....(chuckle)

[CJ Wolf]

“Obviously not too sick since you hang out with Ru’s supporters.”

There is not a single liberal bone in Ron Paul. You’ve been sold a bunch of kool aid.

[Mr. Silverback]

Um...it would be easier to go along with your point if you weren't blaming terrorists for several things that were not caused by terrorists. Three of them weren't even caused by violence.

American Airlines flight 587

Oil refinery explosions

2003 blackout

Appalachian School Shooting

I am aware of no evidence that these incidents were caused by terrorists, and in the case of 587 there is conclusive evidence that the cause of the crash was overuse of the rudder in response to wake turbulence. Indeed, it's so conclusive that American and Airbus are fighting over it in court. The Appalachian shooter may have been a muslim (I'm unsure), but neither his attack, behavior, motives or statement directly after the attack...

“I had to do it. I didn’t know what else to do. I had nowhere else to go.”

...fit at all with a terror attack. Then there's the fact that he's still alive. What Muslim terrorist faces two guys armed with handguns and surrenders instead of shooting it out so that he'll die for Allah?

Now, let's get back to my points about "inspiration" and illegal aliens:

DC Sniper--Americans with no direct AQ connection "inspired" by bin Laden.

LAX shooting--No AQ connection, guy was here legally because of a Green Card lottery

OKU Bombing--If this was a terror attack (disputed) it was carried out by an American citizen without any help from any terror organization and I can't figure a Muslim terrorist would leave "None of you are worth living with. You can all kiss my ass" as his suicide note.

Jewish Federation Shootings--An American citizen, no AQ connection, "inspired" by Israel bombing her enemies...has Ron Paul got a plan to run Israel's military?

Virginia Tech shooting--See how nice I am? I'm spotting you one you missed. Well, the shooter was here legally since he was a small child, and he was not connected to any terror organizations. Another case of "inspiration."

So, you said there were 18 attacks, and you've provided 10. Between the incidents that weren't terror attacks and the incidents that were carried out by Americans or legal immigrants, you're down to two terror attacks, only one of which (anthrax) was arguably an operation by AQ or another terror group.

Surely you have some more attacks to list, and surely you have better evidence than this that Dr. Paul can stop all the terror attacks that Dubya is letting go on, right?

kick out the illegals, arm the American citizens and fight terrorism the right way.

Please elaborate on what is meant by "the right way," what is meant by "arming the American citizens" (we're currently the most well-armed country in the world) and I'm sure you'll tell me why killing terrorists where we can find them overseas is not "the right way" and turning Iraq over to Iran is "the right way."

[CJ Wolf]

Well for one, I said we were told they were not terror related. You can certianly debate it, I gave you only ten (BTW there are many Oil refinery explosions, so that really doesn’t count as just one) because I was tired last night. But you get my gist. If you want to look up the many more suspected terror attacks that aren’t “Terror Related” I’d refer you to the threat matrix threads. There are tons more.

There are many Muslim terrorist that surrender, look at gitmo for example. And I don’t think you have to be in direct link with a terrorist org to be a terrorist.

The right way is not what we are doing right now. We’ve let Iran take footholds in iraq already. Maliki is an Iranian agent with ties to Iran and Syria. We let Iran send arms, intel and fighters into iraq similar to what the Pakistanis did to the soviets in the 80s.

The right way in my opinion is to go on a nation-leveling adventure and take out any government such as Iran’s and leave. If we get bogged down in the mideast in a single place trying to nation build it costs to much in blood and money, the debate of attacking Al Queda in Iraq is moot, they will never stop coming this is the lesson the soviets learned. IMHO we should be on the offensive and take out the rest of the axis of evil in a nation leveling exercise. Now granted, this is not Paul’s opinion, but I like his opinion better then what we got and what we will have if either of the mainstream candidates get in office. Which is more of the same. If we aren’t going to do it right we shouldn’t do it at all. If we are not going to do it right and not at all, we should secure our borders and respond to direct threats. Paul says he’d still pursue Bin Laden, which is more then Bush has done.

[Mr. Silverback]

Well, you'll probably take offense at this, but none is meant: The reason you support Paul and think that getting bin Laden should be a top priority is because you have no strategic sense at all. Let me see if I can help you:

Hunting for one guy, a guy who might be dead and would immediately be replaced by another experienced Islamist terror leader, is a really stupid use of resources compared to using our intel resources to (brace yourself) actually detect and prevent terror attacks. Also, deploying forces to kill this guy is a waste of resources, when the same troops can be tracking and killing Al Qaida. Though bin Laden's death or capture would be a victory, it is far, far more urgent to dismantle the force he uses to strike.

To use a historical analogy, it's as if Wendell Wilkie slammed FDR for placing a higher priority on tracking Axis ships, planes and armies than he did on figuring out exactly where Hitler, Tojo and Mussolini were at any given moment.

"Why haven't we gotten bin Laden" is a talking point straight out of the Dem playbook, and I'm sure that if we got him tomorrow, Dr. Paul, his supporters and the anti-American Left would immediately switch to "Why haven't we got Zawahiri?" That's because the only other "strategy" they have is running away from the enemy like a scalded dog.

[CJ Wolf]

There is no offense taken. However your strategy isn't winnable. Mine is.

We leveled the nation of Iraq, we need to level the nation of Iran and get out of both places. If they dare attack us again or even threaten to attack us, we do it again. It's much cheaper that way. They will learn not to screw with us. Bin Laden is a figurehead, by getting him out of the way it sends another lesson that no matter who steps up to replace him, sorry buddy, you can't get away with the crap he pulled. Suggest it or try it and you die.

To use an analogy. No matter how pretty and clean you make your asshole, crap still comes out sooner or later and you gotta wipe again. That's the islamic world. Endless clean up of crap, while we are there we are wiping their ass 24x7.

BTW, your historical analogy doesn't fit, at the beginning of the Iraq war, what did we do? We tried decapitation strikes. When we went after Noriega what did we do, again decapitation. How bout when we were pissed off at Qudafi? Attempted decapitation. How many times did we try to get Castro? Decapitation works and works well. If successful, you create a power struggle with in the organization and they end up fighting each other, not us.

BTW a minor note, Armed pilots could have prevented 9/11. Think indiana jones shooting the swordsman.

[Mr. Silverback]

BTW, your historical analogy doesn't fit, at the beginning of the Iraq war, what did we do? We tried decapitation strikes.

For all your tough talk about leveling countries with tens of millions of people in them, you (like your candidate) fail to understand the nature of jihad. They would not quit, surrender or bother withn infigting, they would immediately obey the new caliph and go on with their business. Kill bin Laden and Zawahiri gets in.

Sure, it's always a good idea to hit enemy command and control, but it's not a magic bullet in any case, and even less so with Al Qaida.

[Mr. Silverback]

Well for one, I said we were told they were not terror related.

Yes, but you cited several events that were clearly NOT terror related: American Airlines Flight 587 and the 2003 blackout. Where is the evidence that either of those were terror-realted? For example, if Flight 587 was brought down by terrorists, where's the bomb/missile damage? Where's the evidence of an attack that caused the 2003 blackout?

The Appalachian school shooting can only be considered "terror-related" if we accept the premise that any Muslim with mental problems is an Islamist, and hold to that premise even if there is evidence otherwise. Where are the guy's links to terror organizations? Where is there evidence that he held jihadist sympathies?

And I don’t think you have to be in direct link with a terrorist org to be a terrorist.

Here's the problem with that: I said that AQ had not mounted any major attacks on our soil in 5 years and 11 months. You said that you support Paul on national security because of "his desire to close the borders, kick out the illegals, arm the American citizens and fight terrorism the right way." Well, if an American or an outwardly normal legal immigrant commits a terror attack without outside help, that means that your guy's plan isn't going to prevent them any more than Dubya's. It also means that you haven't provided any evidence to counter my premise, only evidence that there are people who will commit terror attacks without being on bin Laden's payroll. Again, the majority of the perps in your list of attacks were Americans or long-term legal immigrants, and none were working for AQ and AQ allies except for the possibility of the anthrax attacker.

Here in Northwest Illinois a guy was caught by the FBI planning to shoot up a large mall during the height of Christmas shopping. He was an American, had no connection with any terror organization (he apparently looked for one to join and couldn't find any contacts) and was caught by an FBI undercover agent looking for guys like him. What is Dubya failing to do that Ron Paul would do to stop guys like that? Why, by the way, would such a guy put aside his wish to be a terrorist if we caught OBL?

I'm not denying there are authorities who are way too quick to rule out terror as a motive for violent crimes, but you've totally faile dot provide any evidence that the administration is failing to prevent terror attacks that Ron Paul would prevent.

[CJ Wolf]

It’s not a magic bullet, a better description would be “that it’s more like zotting trolls”. Except the trolls are the leaders of these countries.

I understand the nature of jihad. We have to tell them what we are going to do as fair warning, then if they do something, we follow through. Then they would understand the nature of America.