Ron Paul: 'U.S. Has Dug a Hole for Itself in Iraq' (Johns Hopkins Speech Today)

ABC News ^ | September 11, 2007

[Austin Willard Wright]

ABC News' Nitya Venkataraman and Nancy Flores report: While his 2008 rivals in Washington, D.C. spent the morning in congressional panels debating the future of US involvement in Iraq, GOP Presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul charged the U.S. has "dug a hole for [itself]" in Iraq, and simultaneously defended his anti-war place in the Republican party and jabbed the current administration saying, "you don't have to be a war monger to be a conservative."

At a policy forum at Johns Hopkins University in Washington, D.C., Paul described Iraq as a "preemptive war" saying it was a "planned invasion and occupation" of a "country that was no threat to us whatsoever."

What might seem like bold rhetoric from the fiery Texas Republican on the anniversary of a historic day is actually nothing new for Paul. His assertions at the forum were consistent with his presidential platform and congressional career, both of which draw heavily from libertarian and constitutionalist ideals.

[takenoprisoner]

Indeed!

That’s what we know.

But, I still want to hear what David Spade’s momma says.
_________________________________________________________

Then you should know better than to be such a cruel ignorant a hole. David’s orginal father abandonned them. His step father committed suicide.

Feel better about yourself yet?

[takenoprisoner]

What he is doing is trolling for anti julieannie posters. His goal is to avenge julieannie socialists bots here that were removed. Himself included. Guess who were the most staunch anti julieannie crowd? That would be we supporters of freedom and our Constitution.

I freely admit that I made it a point to expose julieannie on every thread for his anti American progressively social inclinations. I even exposed the monetary gains his newly formed corporations would make if he was elected. There is little doubt I am despised by julieannie and his bots. It is my conviction that this one has returned for revenge, not only for me, but for all the rest who contributed to the process of removing julieannie and the defenders of socialism from our midst.

Now this one returns to make a list for purging in an effort so satisfy his altered ego. If he can only get the body of defenders for freedom and the Constitution outted as he was, he will have trumped FR and in the same process relieved himself from the horrors of his obesessions which tortures his tiny brain each night.

[Bullish]

Hey Ron, don’t you think you’ve dug a hole deep enough for you to bury yourself in?

I do.

[takenoprisoner]

Hey Ron, don’t you think you’ve dug a hole deep enough for you to bury yourself in?

I do.

---

Thank you for your support. You see, the negatives accentuate the postives. Your posts contribute to RP inspite of your negatives. Such is the nature of metaphysics.

Please, keep up the good work. You are doing more than anyone could ever have imagined. Bring us more.

[takenoprisoner]

Dang, just closed another RP bashing thread without a single response to any of my challenges. Guess they had to sleep on it. Surely some will awake tomorrow from their solicialistic anti constitutional slumber to challenge me later.

I can only hope.

[deaconblues]

And who are YOU???

Simply amazing!

From the comments that I made I am systematically lumped into the "Ru Paul" supporters group....

And by someone who didn't even know FreeRepublic existed when I signed up.

I was discouraged by the fact that the commentary on the thread did not encourage any sort of debate, but rather went straight to ad hominem attacks and name-calling.

There used to be a time on FR when debate, logic, and reason were the norm on this message board.

But, alas.......it seems that nowadays the "norm" is to toe the party line, and to discourage debate.

SAD, very sad.

You may consider me a "Ru Paul Supporter" but I consider you a MORON.

[Oberon]

Is there any list for people who support traditionally conservative values in the Barry Goldwater mold, who are interested to support any candidate who believes in federalism and small government, individual rights and responsibility, low taxes, and a non-interventionist foreign policy? Is there a list for people who are more interested in those issues than the candidates?

Because, much as I like Ron Paul, I'd like to be on such a list if it exists.

[Designer]

"I just remarked about the hostility being displayed."

Remarkable, isn't it?

Any guesses as to why the Paul bashers are so vehement?

[wideawake]

Oh I forgot a coup is 'constitutional' as long as the nation is a 'friend'

No one called Musharraf's coup "constitutional.".

You are dodging the issue: Ron Paul speaks of "overthrowing" Mossadegh as if the US directly moved to end a constitutionally authorized Iranian government, when in reality Mossadegh was a Marxist dictator.

The question is: why does Ron Paul have a soft spot in his heart for a deposed Marxist dictator of Iran and a soft spot in his heart for the current unelected Iranian regime?

[Designer]

"After all, Jorge Bush and the other Republicrats have done so much to... I mean for our country."

Democrat-controlled House, Democrat-controlled Senate, CAFTA, SPP, etc. etc.

[US at Risk]

I’m not sure whether your question is rhetorical or not, but it does make a heck of a good rhetorical question.

No, I don’t know of a list of people interested in these ‘fringe’ issues.

[MEGoody]

Please provide documented proof of Dr. Paul's OFFICIAL campaign

Apparently, you didn't read the article. Ah, well, what can I expect from a Paulestinian.

[winodog]

Because he is against king georges war and has been all along.?
Or because he is a gold bug?

It seems the constitution is ignored so I suspect its the top two.

[winodog]

I second all that.

[Dead Corpse]

I used to think so. His recent speeches don’t impress me though...

[trisham]

O'Reilly, of all people, cleaned his Paul's clock Monday night, when he was ducking questions about a nuclear Iran filling a power vacuum with the nukes they are developing, wanting instead to talk about "letting bin Laden go to Pakistan" and such stuff.

********************

For those who haven't seen it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7JPvbVsDdY

[billbears]

You are dodging the issue: Ron Paul speaks of "overthrowing" Mossadegh as if the US directly moved to end a constitutionally authorized Iranian government, when in reality Mossadegh was a Marxist dictator. The question is: why does Ron Paul have a soft spot in his heart for a deposed Marxist dictator of Iran and a soft spot in his heart for the current unelected Iranian regime?

You're missing the point. You're operating under the assumption the US government has the right to depose someone if need be. And Rep. Paul is operating under the correct belief if we have not been attacked by that nation, there's no need. It's not a 'soft spot' it's just none of our business.

[wideawake]

You're operating under the assumption the US government has the right to depose someone if need be.

Of course we can. Our national interests are paramount.

And Rep. Paul is operating under the correct belief if we have not been attacked by that nation, there's no need.

There's nothing "correct" about hamstringing US policy with constitutionally nonexistent and stupidly inflexible rules.

The Commander In Chief deploys US armed forces and executive branch agents as he sees necessary for US national security interests. One of the reasons for our clumsier deployments are ridiculous prior constraints like the Congressional ban on assassinations.

[bmwcyle]

Get lost this is a Conservative Site.

[billbears]

Our national interests are paramount.

LOL. So much for not going abroad in search of 'monsters to destroy' eh? By that standard any nation with a different form of government is at risk. You'll be paying for this farce will you? Because I'm sick and tired of it.

The Commander In Chief deploys US armed forces and executive branch agents as he sees necessary for US national security interests.

Damn straight. Screw Congress and 'inflexible rules'. Why even bother going to Congress at all? We'll just make our 'dear leader' above the law then shall we? Of course then we'll no longer be a republic. Who cares what the public thinks. After all they just vote. What will the Armed Forces do then....

I hope you're ready for at least 6 years of Democratic rule. Because other than Dr. Paul, there's not a snowball's chance a hawk will get elected.