Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

141 posts / 0 new
Last post
Lefty
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 4 months ago
Joined: 01/18/2006 - 10:19pm
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

Did anyone see Ron Paul completely make an idiot out of himself with his "Bombing Iraq For 10 Years caused 9/11" ??

:evil: :evil:

I think anyone taking him seriously has ended tonight!

Mike G
Offline
Last seen: 23 hours 5 min ago
Joined: 02/17/2000 - 1:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

Ron Paul the only candidate with the guts to say what he believes. The others just tell you what they think you want to hear!

lhsbluedevil200
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 10 months ago
Joined: 04/21/2005 - 12:01am
=

=

rklindell
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 11 months ago
Joined: 08/05/2003 - 12:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

Bull-[i]bleep[/i]! He never said we caused 9/11, or that we deserved it or anything like it.

He made the very valid point that if it weren't for our attempts to project our power well beyond our actual interests that we would not have made ourselves into targets for the terrorists. He is pointing out that foreign policy based upon avoiding foreign entanglements would make us all far more secure.

In future please stick to debating the issues rather than trying to toss around the usual political hyperbole. Thank you!

Dan Billings
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 8 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2005 - 12:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

[quote="rklindell"]
In future please stick to debating the issues rather than trying to toss around the usual political hyperbole. Thank you![/quote]

You should take your own advice. It might keep you out of court.

Americans rejected Paul's view of foreign policy around 1941.

rklindell
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 11 months ago
Joined: 08/05/2003 - 12:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

8)

Editor
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: 04/18/2009 - 3:43pm
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

Chris Wallace to Ron Paul: [i]Are you suggesting that we invited the 9-11 attacks?[/i]

Ron Paul: [i]They don’t come and attack us because we’re rich and weak, they come and attack us because we’re over there.[/i]

Not that I think R. Paul had a snowball's chance, etc., but is strongest answer to Wallace's question would have been a single, "No."

skf

Virgil Kane
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: 12/15/2005 - 12:44pm
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

[i]Americans rejected Paul's view of foreign policy around 1941.[/i]
Are you suggesting that Ron Paul's view of foreign policy would have meant opposing a declaration of war on Japan after they attacked Pearl Harbor?

lhsbluedevil200
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 10 months ago
Joined: 04/21/2005 - 12:01am
=

=

rklindell
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 11 months ago
Joined: 08/05/2003 - 12:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

I thought it was George W. Bush who campaigned against "nation building" in 2000...

Dan Billings
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 8 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2005 - 12:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

[quote="Virgil Kane"]Are you suggesting that Ron Paul's view of foreign policy would have meant opposing a declaration of war on Japan after they attacked Pearl Harbor?[/quote]

No. I am suggesting that Ron Paul is in the tradition of Charles Lindberg and the American Firsters who forced America to set on its hands while Hitler ran all over Europe. When Japan attacked Pearl Hernor that approach was dead forever.

Mike G
Offline
Last seen: 23 hours 5 min ago
Joined: 02/17/2000 - 1:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

Unfortunately Dan is right, most Americans feel that it is our duty as a nation to dominate the world. the democrats believe it and the republicans believe it and probably most independant voters believe it. That is why America is entangled in the world, we have such a huge debt and why so many other nations hate us.

I do not believe we as a nation need to dominate the world and have bases in a third of them. I'm damn proud of Ron tonight and will support his campaign as best I can.

You other chumps meaning Americans in general can decide whether you will vote for Guilianni or Hillary hahahahaha

LarryB
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: 02/02/2005 - 1:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

[quote="Editor"]
Ron Paul: [i]They don’t come and attack us because we’re rich and weak, they come and attack us because we’re over there.[/i][/quote]
Well, for what it's worth that is what set off Bin Laden against the west and the House of Saud- infidels in the holy land (namely western troops in Saudi Arabia).

Michelle Anderson
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: 11/03/2003 - 1:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

[quote="Dan Billings"]Americans rejected Paul's view of foreign policy around 1941.[/quote]

I still don't understand this thinking. Was that a good thing or a bad thing?

We haven't do so well in foreign policy in the interim. Not that we would necessarily do better if we changed our policy. I think it's an unknown.

But that thinking -- not just from you, Dan, but in general -- seems to me to be irrelevant.

Dan Billings
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 8 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2005 - 12:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

[quote="Michelle Anderson"]I still don't understand this thinking. Was that a good thing or a bad thing?

We haven't do so well in foreign policy in the interim. Not that we would necessarily do better if we changed our policy. I think it's an unknown.

But that thinking -- not just from you, Dan, but in general -- seems to me to be irrelevant.[/quote]

It's relevant because Paul is trying to sell something that Americans long ago rejected. That is no way to win an election.

Of course, Paul is not actually running to get elected so maybe it isn't relevant.

rklindell
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 11 months ago
Joined: 08/05/2003 - 12:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

No, Dan. You are quite wrong. Ron Paul has stated over and over that we should declare war and fight to win when our legitimate interests are at stake - as they were in 1941 (but not in 1940).

Michelle Anderson
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: 11/03/2003 - 1:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

[quote="Dan Billings"]No. I am suggesting that Ron Paul is in the tradition of Charles Lindberg and the American Firsters who forced America to set on its hands while Hitler ran all over Europe. When Japan attacked Pearl Hernor that approach was dead forever.[/quote]

So, it is the opposite of the tradition that got us into to suicidally buy into the vehement anti-American UN; Viet Nam mess, and the messier pullout; stringpulling in Iran, and numerous third world countries; proxy wars in Afghanistan and Korea; the Bay of Pigs and the missile crisis; and massive "blowback" situations.

I think both positions have serious consequences, but both also have their positives.

However, Dr. Paul seems to be against THIS war on Constitutional grounds, not on isolationist or pacifist grounds.

And many Americans agree with him. The blank check written to wage war on a concept rather than a government does not seem to me to be Constitutional. I'm not a Constitutional expert, but then again, neither do our elected officials seem to be.

Hildy Johnson
Offline
Last seen: 8 years 2 months ago
Joined: 04/19/2007 - 4:53pm
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

[quote="Dan Billings"]

It's relevant because Paul is trying to sell something that Americans long ago rejected. [/quote]

Americans also long ago rejected the concept of personal responsibility. I guess by your reasoning we should all just give up then, join hands, and go signing merrily down the drink?

Dan Billings
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 8 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2005 - 12:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

[quote="rklindell"]No, Dan. You are quite wrong. Ron Paul has stated over and over that we should declare war and fight to win when our legitimate interests are at stake - as they were in 1941 (but not in 1940).[/quote]

I have no doubt that Paul would have been in favor of war after Pearl Harbor.

But the approach to international affairs that he suggests -- which was the dominant approach in this country in the 1930's -- lead to the death of many Americans in World War II.

A little more entanglement in foreign adventures a little earlier would have been wise, IMO.

Michelle Anderson
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: 11/03/2003 - 1:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

[quote="Mike G"]Unfortunately Dan is right, most Americans feel that it is our duty as a nation to dominate the world. the democrats believe it and the republicans believe it and probably most independant voters believe it. [/quote]

Source? Even ephemeral evidence?

LarryB
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: 02/02/2005 - 1:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

We were in a de facto state of war well before Pearl Harbor. My father was building US airbases in Greenland as early as June, 1941.

Dan Billings
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 8 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2005 - 12:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

[quote="Michelle Anderson"]Source? Even ephemeral evidence?[/quote]

One question that has been asked since 1947 taps into whether Americans are basically internationalist or isolationist: “Do you think it will be best for the future of the country if we take an active part in world affairs or if we stay out of world affairs?” In the late 1940’s, this question was asked three times by the National Opinion Research Center, with an average of 69 percent telling the NORC that the country should play an active part in world affairs.

In 2002, 2004, and 2006, this same question was asked by the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations. The average proportion of respondents to these CCFR polls who said the U.S. should play an active role in the world was 69 percent.

[url=http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/04/wtprw_america.html]Source...

Michelle Anderson
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: 11/03/2003 - 1:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

At this point, Dr. Paul has 33% of the Fox News text message polls.

Not that that's an indication of overall opinions, but it certainly does not sound like his campaign is dead.

Notice: I am working on a response to the question posed in the beginning of this thread. Dan keeps distracting me! :)

Country
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 9 months ago
Joined: 05/31/2005 - 12:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

I've paid attention to Ron Paul for a couple of years and liked what he's said. But now I'm starting to think he's Ross Perot Light.

Claude Berube
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
Joined: 01/09/2006 - 10:44am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

[quote="Dan Billings"]
No. I am suggesting that Ron Paul is in the tradition of Charles Lindberg and the American Firsters who forced America to set on its hands while Hitler ran all over Europe. When Japan attacked Pearl Hernor that approach was dead forever.[/quote]

Dan,
You're right about the American Firsters. Many of them ended up volunteering for service immediately after Pearl Harbor.

Let me preface the following statement with "I do not in anyway justify Japan's surprise attack on Pearl Harbor." Okay, one of the reasons Japan used to attack the U.S. was the U.S. embargo of resources, including oil, to Japan. Today, foreign oil is one of our primary national interests. If our supply was cut off, engaging to get that flow back would be a viable option.

Also, 1941 and 2003 both seemed to prove that countries are unwilling to challenge a dictator on the rise, only when their own interests or borders have been attacked. In September 1941, most Americans opposed sending troops to Europe, this after our greatest ally, Britain, had been at war for more than a year. This is speculation, but if Hitler had succeeded in invading England, it is unlikely we would have fully mobilized or declared war until Hitler had started attacking the U.S. en masse, instead of picking off a few destroyers as he had.
Claude

Hildy Johnson
Offline
Last seen: 8 years 2 months ago
Joined: 04/19/2007 - 4:53pm
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

I agree that Dr. Paul killed any chance he has of getting into the next debate, never mind capturing the nomination. However, I think that's due mostly to his poor delivery. He stuttered. He stammered. He stood arms folded leaning on his podium, looking down as often as up.

However, on substance, he was the only one to address the 9-11 issue like an adult. The rest, especially Guliiani, were stuffed shirts ruffling their feathers and talking tough for their own self-aggrandizement. This idea that we were attacked solely because "they hate our freedom of religion" is ludicrous.

Dan Billings
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 8 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2005 - 12:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

[quote="LarryB"]We were in a de facto state of war well before Pearl Harbor. My father was building US airbases in Greenland as early as June, 1941.[/quote]

Yes. And there was lend/lease.

All too little, too late because isolationists dominated American politics at time.

Hildy Johnson
Offline
Last seen: 8 years 2 months ago
Joined: 04/19/2007 - 4:53pm
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

[quote="Michelle Anderson"]

Not that that's an indication of overall opinions, but it certainly does not sound like his campaign is dead.
[/quote]

But it's not for lack of trying. I like for FOX immediatly suggested that Paul is ahead only because this supposed second-tier candidate has the best organization for staffers stuffing the ballot box.

Dan Billings
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 8 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2005 - 12:01am
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

Scott figured out that such polls were too easy to manipulate in 2002. When is the rest of the media going to figure it out?

pmh
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 1 month ago
Joined: 12/09/2006 - 9:07pm
Ron Paul kills candidacy - "We caused 9/11"

"He is pointing out that foreign policy based upon avoiding foreign entanglements would make us all far more secure. "

As I recall, a feller named George W. made a very similar point in his inaugural address more than 200 years ago!

lhsbluedevil200
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 10 months ago
Joined: 04/21/2005 - 12:01am
=

=

Pages

Log in to post comments