Posted on 05/13/2011 10:23:33 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
He has flirted with blame America firstism before, and even with Truthers a couple of times, but tends to leave himself enough wiggle room so that he doesn’t come off as totally off his nut. That’s gone now.
Asked by WHO Radio’s Simon Conway whether he would have given the go-ahead to kill bin Laden if it meant entering another country, Paul shot back that it “absolutely was not necessary.”“I don’t think it was necessary, no. It absolutely was not necessary,” Paul said during his Tuesday comments. “I think respect for the rule of law and world law and international law. What if he’d been in a hotel in London? We wanted to keep it secret, so would we have sent the airplane, you know the helicopters into London, because they were afraid the information would get out?”
The fact that at least some elements in Pakistan have to have known about OBL’s whereabouts, and harbored him, and how that would have impacted any joint mission to go get him, is utterly lost on Paul.
This is the fundamental problem with Ron Paul: When it comes to foreign policy, he is not serious and is not credible. He makes no distinctions between real allies like the UK and duplicitous frenemies like Pakistan. And he always always blames America first. That’s his MO.
>>Ron Paul says killing Osama bin Laden ‘absolutely not necessary’<<
Ron wasn’t in the room. Just sayin’.
Obama said that back in 2009 too, Ron Paul.
Hard to see how this candidate could make himself any more irrelevant, but somehow he still manages.
I’m sure Fraud Paul would love for Osama or any other enemy in a combat situation, to have access to US Justice System lawyers and courts. Imagine Osama appealing to the US 9th Circuit court.
Ron Paul would have apoligised to Osama Bin Laden for 9/11.
And no I’m not making a joke.
If you’re attracked to Ron Paul because of his economic/small-government stance, you should consider that Ron Paul is alson on record that 9/11 was America’s fault; that we were to blame for 9/11.
When it comes to 9/11, Ron Paul and the far left fringe are two pea in the same pod.
He should have been a long time ago, but I thought with his voting for Pelosi’s tax hike bill back in December, it would have killed his chances this go around- but no, his little cult still makes excuses for everything he does.
>>but tends to leave himself enough wiggle room so that he doesn’t come off as totally off his nut.<<
Most of us knew he was both on and off his nut for years.
That's easy. 007 would have killed him.
Ya can’t give credit to the original source for this story when it’s in your own back yard?
http://www.whoradio.com/pages/simonconway.html?article=8557552
Usually libertarians have nothing but disdain for international law. ...and rightly so. But when the subject turns to either Israel or the war on Islamofascism, Ron Paul and his ilk play the "international law" card with abandon. Complete lunatics.
Whatever.
Ron Paul is not necessary either,Go Away!
Whatever indeed... smh...
If one of his family members had been in the twin towers would he be singing a different tune? Actually - probably not because Ron Paul is hard wired, totally rules-based and ddevoid of common sense. If one can’t reason with Paul on a no-brainer like osama bin laden then clearly Ron Paul can’t be reasoned with.
There are tapes of exactly what happened and I hope he posed some threat to justify the shooting. However, I believe there was a kill order, so it was out of the hands of those brave seal team members.
Hard to tell as this White House has been telling lies starting with the President's announcement and compounding daily. I'm sure they will gin up some self defense story, but it is simply not clear. To date, most of the statements say that he was not armed, did not appear to have a bomb or trigger, but there was a gun in the room. Don't know if that is enough.
The theory that we are at war and are supposed to kill enemies is simply not how we have carried ourselves historically. We capture people who surrender or who are unarmed; we don't kill them unless we are at risk.
This is a big line we crossed here and no telling where it will stop.
This is not a proper view for a solidly conservative citizen, but we are a country of laws, not men, and I believe this violated our laws (if not a threat.)
So, he believes Osama was killed by the Obama raid? What a kook
If you want a war run by lawyers, hand ‘em a weapon and send ‘em on over.
Paul, you are done! What an as@. The price of one bullet vs the billions of playing around with this mass killer for a years after years is really stupid. You are a crazy man.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.