Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: skr

You are correct. And so was Ron. Explaining why our enemy attacked us does not justify it.

1. Saddam refused to let inspectors in.

2. We bombed him.

3. Islamos got angry over that and used it as justification to attack us.

Ron Paul never says that any Islamic moves are justified, nor does he imply they were.


112 posted on 06/07/2007 8:39:12 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies ]


To: Remember_Salamis

i’m no ron paul supporter, but the hijackers weren’t exactly angry about Iraq. If you take Bin Laden’s words at face value, he’s upset about U.S. support for the Saudi regime, and for stationing troops in the Middle East...


157 posted on 06/07/2007 9:30:59 PM PDT by TINS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies ]

To: Remember_Salamis
From http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2002/tst030402.htm

Remember, Iraq has not initiated aggression against us. We, on the other hand, have bombed them, taunted them by flying military jets in their airspace, and starved them with economic sanctions- all for more than a decade. We haven't done these things out of humanitarian concern for Kuwait, we've done them because we want to protect our oil interests.

You and I would disagree on what Mr. Paul...implies. I agree with him on plenty of other issues, but he sounds exactly like the Kucinich arm of the Democrat Party when it comes to dealing with the terrorist network.

172 posted on 06/07/2007 9:56:03 PM PDT by skr (Car bombs and IEDs are the exclamation marks for the latest Democrats' talking points.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson