Ron Paul Is Correct About Pakistan

History News Network ^ | December 31, 2007 | David T. Beito and Scott Horton

[Milligan]

Yep, the Iranian Religious leaders accepted CIA and M16 help to get Mossaddeq out because he was a Secularist and making reforms that was anti-Islamic. The Shah was the better choice according to the Iranian Religious leaders. Shah supported traditional Islamic views and they eagerly reinstated the Shah back on to his thrown.

But when Khomeini got into power in 1979. He never mentioned about Mossaddeq being a revolutionary for getting rid of the Western influence...he basically had Mossadeq name erased from the public consciousnes and killed scores of Communist sympathizers.

But now Mossadeq is suddenly the hero by the Left and those who hate America. The Mullahs figured out Mossadeq is a useful selling point to make the United States look bad and rewrite history that Ron Paul is eagerly believing in.

[Milligan]

You need to look at Jane’s Military Handbook.
Iranians have a capable Navy.
My husband was there during the Tanker Wars.

[Milligan]

Why are you picking on the United States for our current world affairs?

Should we share this blame with the Soviet Union?

Soviets never staged coups?
They did and it was never a bloodless coup either.
Soviets were keen having warm water ports for their Navy and liked the idea of having a steady supply of oil to run their nation.

They also had their nose involved with the Middle East Problems too.
First they wanted to get chummy with the Israelis but the government turned down their support and aid.
Soviets helped other Middle Eastern countries with aid. Who helped the Egyptians to build a hydroelectric dam?

KGB supported Arafat.

Takes two nations to tango.

[cgbg]

The current relationship we have with countries like Pakistan seems to be the worst possible one: we are sufficiently engaged with them so as to get blamed when something goes wrong, while not having the leverage to actually get them to do anything.

We share that distinction with A.Q. and Mush.

:-)

[tabsternager]

“I don’t think the arabs hate us because of our society or culture. I think they hate us because we keep crapping in their back yard.”

I agree. Backing dictators is bad policy, as history has shown.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Yes, I am also very interested to see what solid conservative gets nominated, and the zeal with which he is going to be supported on FR.

Not only that, but Paul's supporters aren't going to vote for the GOP nominee, after the way the GOP and Fox News have treated Paul.

You're looking at lots of libertarians and newcomers who are going to stay home or write in Paul's name, and once again you'll hear the pissing and moaning here on why these people ar traitors. What makes it even funnier is that if leftists are supposedly supporting Paul in the primaries, then if Paul is not nominated, how would their votes mattered in the general election anyway?

[fortheDeclaration]

You're looking at lots of libertarians and newcomers who are going to stay home or write in Paul's name, and once again you'll hear the pissing and moaning here on why these people ar traitors. What makes it even funnier is that if leftists are supposedly supporting Paul in the primaries, then if Paul is not nominated, how would their votes mattered in the general election anyway?

Yes, according to the anti-Ron Paul zealots, no real Republicans are supporting him.

So they will not miss our vote anyway.

Now, that being said, I do vote GOP and will vote the Party ticket, since a Republican in the office is always better then a Democrat and I believe in the Party system.

But that means if Ron Paul does get nominated, Republicans should support him as well.

It is always the RINO's who desert conservatives, but expect our 'loyal' support when their guy gets nominated.

[fortheDeclaration]

Why are you picking on the United States for our current world affairs? Should we share this blame with the Soviet Union? Soviets never staged coups? They did and it was never a bloodless coup either. Soviets were keen having warm water ports for their Navy and liked the idea of having a steady supply of oil to run their nation. They also had their nose involved with the Middle East Problems too. First they wanted to get chummy with the Israelis but the government turned down their support and aid. Soviets helped other Middle Eastern countries with aid. Who helped the Egyptians to build a hydroelectric dam? KGB supported Arafat. Takes two nations to tango.

Our actions during the Cold War were understandable and in many cases justifiable due to the world wide threat communism represented.

However, that threat no longer exists and now the impetus for the United States to get involved in other nations affairs is not national security, but a utopian vision of a new world order.

[fortheDeclaration]

Yep, the Iranian Religious leaders accepted CIA and M16 help to get Mossaddeq out because he was a Secularist and making reforms that was anti-Islamic. The Shah was the better choice according to the Iranian Religious leaders. Shah supported traditional Islamic views and they eagerly reinstated the Shah back on to his thrown. But when Khomeini got into power in 1979. He never mentioned about Mossaddeq being a revolutionary for getting rid of the Western influence...he basically had Mossadeq name erased from the public consciousnes and killed scores of Communist sympathizers. But now Mossadeq is suddenly the hero by the Left and those who hate America. The Mullahs figured out Mossadeq is a useful selling point to make the United States look bad and rewrite history that Ron Paul is eagerly believing in.

No one is rewriting history.

What is being urged is for Americans to learn from history, that there are always unforeseen consequences that we cannot control.

America could not control the events in France during the French Revolution and France after it, became an enemy, not an friend as she had been during the American Revolution.

Washington noted that no friendships with nations are permenant nor are hostilities.

So, we must not get entangled in another nations internal affairs that our own interests become affected.

America's foreign policy should be simply, friendship with all of those nations who want to be friends, and hostility with those who do not.