Posted on 12/09/2011 10:14:48 AM PST by Responsibility2nd
Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul said Thursday evening that Bush administration officials were gleeful after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks because it gave them a pretext to invade Iraq.
"Just think of what happened after 9/11. Immediately before there was any assessment there was glee in the administration because now we can invade Iraq," the Texas Republican told a group of mostly young backers in Iowa. He went on to suggest officials are now setting the stage for an invasion of Iran.
Paul, who was tied for second in this week's CBS News/New York Times poll of likely Iowa caucus-goers, is making a strong push in the Hawkeye state in hopes of scoring an upset victory in the first-in-the-nation January 3 caucuses. Paul volunteers have been working to convince Paul's mostly young supporters - many of whom will be on holiday break from college when the caucuses take place - to be sure to make it to their caucus site.
Paul's libertarian views - on the foreign policy front, he wants to dramatically reduce the U.S. military presence abroad and end all foreign aid - put him at odds with many Republican voters. A poll from Gallup this week found that 62 percent of Republican and Republican-leaning independent voters see Paul as an unacceptable nominee.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
With this, you have good reason. This is shameful.
Just don't.
“With this, you have good reason. This is shameful.”
Drat! I was hoping we would get into one of our epic battles!
LOL!
“With this, you have good reason. This is shameful.”
Drat! I was hoping we would get into one of our epic battles!
LOL!
Bush ex-Treasury Secretary O'Neill: Bush planned Iraq invasion before 9/11
Bush Denies Ever Linking Saddam and 9/11
Yeah, Ron Paul's crazy, he just make this stuff up out of "nowhere"/s
You can dispute the word "glee" but it's hard to argue that 9/11 didn't give the Bush Administration the excuse to do what they'd been planning to do in Iraq well before 9/11 and then deny any connection after, given the level of documentation available on the subject.
BTW, I owe you a Merry Christmas.
Merry Christmas!
Can we PLEASE get back to attacking each other now ?
LOL!
Did you ask them?
I believe that I did mention it a few times over the past several years.
For the information of everybody who did not read my posts, or have "forgotten", please scan this:
The real reason was for the money. Not just a few hundred billion, either, ALL of the money.
FYI: Saddam Hussein was planning to sell his oil in rubles, not dollars. Effectively taking the U.S. dollar out of position as the currency of last resort.
Now we couldn't allow that to happen, could we? So he had to "go".
So you believe he was fighting an economic war against us?
How is that different than, say, firing on our aircraft. Economic sabotage is warfare none the less.
So not only did Saddam break a treaty with us, he fired on our aircraft, attempted to assassinate a former President, fund terrorist operations all over the world, and also he was trying to collapse our economy.
Thanks for adding one more nail in Saddam’s coffin and further justification for the need to take him out.
Did I ask who what ?
Please....no pseudo-intellectual Zen nonsense.....It gets tiresome.
As a review, you said te last administration had a lot to answer for. If you’re talking about NCLB, Medicare Part D, amnesty, and baliouts, you’re a 1000% right. I was not a fan of any of that Tokyo Rove inspired nonsense.
However, if you’re talking about the War on Terror, you’re a 1000% wrong. Bush was right for invading Afghanistan and he was right for invading Iraq.
See, this is the difference between Paul Cultists and Conservatives. Conservatives don’t worship their elected officials or their intellectual glitterati.
“FYI: Saddam Hussein was planning to sell his oil in rubles, not dollars. Effectively taking the U.S. dollar out of position as the currency of last resort.
Now we couldn’t allow that to happen, could we? So he had to ‘go’.”
Proof ? Links ?
You used a link from CNN (Communist News Network), a link from a leftist think tank, and a youtube video featuring Keith Olbermann.
You’ve gotta be kidding. THIS is your defense for RuPaul’s verbal diarrhea ?!
On a roll, Paulbot. Definitely on a roll.
My only complaint with the War on Terror as it was waged is that we didn’t nuke Afghanistan repeatedly until they coughed up Osama bin Laden.
Disputation the evidence itself? None from you, because you know that the info is available from a number of sources:
There are a multitude of links from neutral sources that says Former Bush Treasury Secretary O"Neal stated that Bush wardrums for Iraq began before 9/11 --Hell, even the inquiry by the British Government on their involvement with Iraq corroborated that.
The Committee for the Liberation of Iraq Take your pick of sources on the one -- very real -- and BTW Newt Gingrich was a member.
And I am sure that you can find some "communist aspersions" to cast on a Youtube video of a George Bush speech -- have at it -- it's what people to lazy to actually debate facts do.
I don't have to defend Ron Paul. He explains his "glee" comment from about the 5 minute mark to 6:40 here. But then again it's just so much more fun to ignore what he means and make it up yourself.
The point is that you can agree or disagree on whether "glee" should have been the right word, but Ron Paul's comment was based on some very real verifiable events, statements, timelines and relationships -- not just some crap out of nowhere, and off the top of his head. It's reality based.
Sorry, I just can’t see Dubya or Dick Cheney writing a TV show about singing, flamboyant teens.
Not trust RuPaul w/the nuclear football? Don’t worry - he’d never use it - he’d let us get atttacked first.
“I don’t have to defend Ron Paul.”
You can’t. It’s impossible. RuPaul’s stupidity is indefensible.
“I don’t have to defend Ron Paul.”
You can’t. It’s impossible. RuPaul’s stupidity is indefensible.
see post #102
No, he’ll never be President, but he sure has the power to hand the current one a second term, to the detriment of our country. Does he love America enough not to? Pray he does.
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.