Skip to comments.
Honor Veterans with a Better Budget (Ron Paul - March 2003)
RON PAUL LIBRARY (ARCHIVES) ^
| 10 NOVEMBER 2007
| RON PAUL
Posted on 11/10/2007 4:51:52 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
OH MY FREAKING GAWD, NOW HE'S DONE IT....HE'S LOST HIS MARBLES!!!
Comment #2 Removed by Moderator
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
As a twenty year veteran I can tell you he has it partially right. But the other half of the equation is that he who would be president also has to know when to employ the nations armed forces in our nation’s interests, applying military force at the right time and not waiting until it requires the full commitment of all the nation’s resources to defeat an enemy allowed to become so strong that nothing short of full-scale congressionally mandated war will protect the nation’s ability to survive.
Ron Paul is an idiot because he does not comprehend this, and he should never be allowed to be Commander-in-Chief. Our nation should never do this disservice to those who wear the uniform in defense of our nation.
3
posted on
11/10/2007 4:59:26 PM PST
by
big'ol_freeper
("Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not." ~ Thomas Jefferson)
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1923774/posts
RON PAUL ACCUSED U.S. TROOPS OF WAR CRIMES IN DESERT STORM
Ron Paul: US "military is mowing civilians down in the streets"
Ron Paul supported the PLO terrorists
Ron Paul: Israel bought Jesse Helms
Ron Paul: Traitor had direct line to President Reagan
Ron Paul: Clinton didn't cut defense enough
4
posted on
11/10/2007 4:59:35 PM PST
by
jrooney
(The democrats are the friend of our enemy and the enemy of our friends. Attack them, not GW!)
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
OMG, another useless Ron Paul thread.... stuff IT
5
posted on
11/10/2007 4:59:55 PM PST
by
geo40xyz
((Born a democRAT, Dad set me free in 1952: He said that I was not required to be a MF'ing democRAT))
To: jrooney
You can post that garbage a million times for all I care.
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
So you agree things Paul has said and done are garbage?
7
posted on
11/10/2007 5:06:46 PM PST
by
jrooney
(The democrats are the friend of our enemy and the enemy of our friends. Attack them, not GW!)
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
What about his 80s and 90s archives?
I don’t see those on the Nutter08.com site.
Why is that?
There are two Ron Paul periods:
- pre-www, where he could say what he really felt (and temporarily get away with it).
- The present day age, where it’s catching up to him.
8
posted on
11/10/2007 5:15:10 PM PST
by
jdm
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
A new day, a new bit of demagoguery from Der Paul.
So Paulbots how many times have Paul voted against increasing funding for the same Veterans that he now suddenly embraces? How many times has Der Paul voted against adequate pay and resources being provided to our Military?
But that right, don't confuse the Paulbots with facts, they have their god and they are sticking to him.
9
posted on
11/10/2007 5:15:50 PM PST
by
MNJohnnie
("Hillary is polarizing, deceitful, and liberal. And those are are her good points!" Beaversmom)
To: big'ol_freeper
"applying military force at the right time"Two things would have helped enormously 1] also pick the right place where bin Laden is and 2] have the guts to actually declare a war [not implied] per the Constitution so as to get the full backing of the nation which the troops deserve.
10
posted on
11/10/2007 5:22:06 PM PST
by
ex-snook
("Above all things, truth beareth away the victory.")
To: jrooney
So you agree things Paul has said and done are garbage? All unsubstantiated hit-pieces.
To: MNJohnnie
Paul has always supported our veterans, Johnnie. This article is from 2003.
To: ex-snook
Declaring war confers certain rights and benefits to the one with whom we are fighting. There is a reason we haven’t done so.
For instance, it would make the terrorists automatically the beneficiaries of the Geneva Convention, where we are allowed only name, rank and jihad number.
13
posted on
11/10/2007 5:28:55 PM PST
by
jim35
("...when the lion and the lamb lie down together, ...we'd better damn sure be the lion")
To: jim35
"Declaring war confers certain rights and benefits to the one with whom we are fighting. There is a reason we havent done so."Nonsense. What benefits did we confer upon Nazi Germany and Japan when we declared war on them? WW II committed the nation and that is what is lacking today [missing in Vietnam and Korea also]. Writers of the Constitution knew that war requires the full support of the nation.
14
posted on
11/10/2007 5:36:05 PM PST
by
ex-snook
("Above all things, truth beareth away the victory.")
To: ex-snook
Negative. There is a BIG difference between war and military operations. You declare war when the you need the full commitment of all national resources to defeat another nation or nations. When that situation occurs it means that your nations economy will need to be transformed to production of the means of making war...a full transformation...meaning no longer making automobiles but instead making tanks. Military operations short of war are at the direction of the Commander-in-Chief to achieve limited political objectives as one of the components of national power (diplomatic, economic, military, information). His role in directing military operations are SOLELY his as Commander-in-Chief and do not require a declaration of war.
15
posted on
11/10/2007 5:37:41 PM PST
by
big'ol_freeper
("Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not." ~ Thomas Jefferson)
To: big'ol_freeper
16
posted on
11/10/2007 5:41:05 PM PST
by
ex-snook
("Above all things, truth beareth away the victory.")
To: ex-snook
Ron Paul would have the same response...which is why he should never be commander-in-chief. Oh and by the way...Congress did declare war. Read the post 9-11 legislation passed unanimously by Congress: In response to the terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001, the Congress passed legislation, S.J.Res. 23, on September 14, 2001, authorizing the President to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons.... The President signed this legislation into law on September 18, 2001 (P.L. 107-40, 115 Stat. 224 (2001)).
17
posted on
11/10/2007 5:49:42 PM PST
by
big'ol_freeper
("Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not." ~ Thomas Jefferson)
To: big'ol_freeper
Speaking of Veterans, I have often wondered why we have VA hospitals. They are a constant source of complaints and lousy care. They are also hard to get to for most Veterans. They are understaffed, under funded and just not able to accomplish their assigned mission. Wouldn’t it make more sense to put eligible Vets on Tri-Care?
18
posted on
11/10/2007 5:51:54 PM PST
by
csmusaret
(Mnimum wage today; maximum wage tomorrow. It's the Socialist way.)
To: csmusaret
Im a twenty year vet and am not eligible to use VA services. Tricare is retirement benefit not a veteran benefit.
19
posted on
11/10/2007 5:55:39 PM PST
by
big'ol_freeper
("Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not." ~ Thomas Jefferson)
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Date of Article March 24, 2003...
20
posted on
11/10/2007 6:42:37 PM PST
by
darkwing104
(Let's get dangerous)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson