Posted on 09/13/2011 5:07:39 AM PDT by rightwingintelligentsia
Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul was hushed by deafening boos from a crowd of Tea Partiers at Monday's GOP Presidential debate, after suggesting America's foreign police played a role in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
Mr Paul attempted to position his argument to slash military spending, contending that occupation was the 'real motivation' behind acts of terrorism by Muslim extremists against the U.S.
But a provocative retort from presidential candidate, Pennsylvania lawmaker Rick Santorum, instead drew wide support, after he dismissed Mr Paul's comments as 'irresponsible'.
Prior to the Tea Party debate, Mr Paul, 76, had reflected on the U.S. response to the 9/11 attacks in his weekly Texas Straight Talk column.
He argued that 'the attacks of 9/11 deserved a response. But the manner in which we responded has allowed radicals in the Muslim world to advance a very threatening narrative about us and our motivation in occupying their lands.'
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
. . and most of us who weren't that aware of politics until decades later never knew what happened.
It's our inheritance from WFB and his CIA cronies.
Which, as you just admitted, means Dr Paul did simply restating Al Qeda propaganda as fact. He did do exactly what the story say he did. Dr Paul regurgitated post 09-11Al Qeda propaganda almost verbatim.
Only problem, has has been made abundantly clear to you on thread after thread over the years, your feelings about Iraq and Afghanistan as expressed above have utterly no base in fact.
Your feelings are not facts, learn the difference.
You really need to educate yourself on this topic then. The leadership of the Palis have made clear they will never make peace with Israel under any conditions.
They have no legitimate grievances. Their only grievance is Israel exists. That is not a legitimate grievance
So he did EXACTLY what this story said he did. He uncritically repeated Al Qeda post 09-11 propaganda as fact. Spin as hard as you want, the fact remains he did do it.
And just what might those so-called "legitimate"grievances be?
That Israel exists?
Your complete ignorance of military logistics is showing when you make those sorts of simplistic sweeping nonsensical statements.
Glad you have feelings. Quit confusing them for facts.
Not exactly. I won’t argue with the fact that Ron Paul obviously is an apologist for America, but I will watch it again, but as far as I recall he never said Palestine was treated unfairly (as the original poster to whom I replied said), though, he did say a number of other things. The Palestine subject was brought up when he started naming the things which Al Qaeda gave as the cause of the attack, he didn’t say that was the reason (though, he did with other things, like our military presence there).
In any event, I don’t want to turn this thread into a straining at gnats and swallowing camels quibble. I merely said it’s important to correctly identify what he said. I disagree with Dr. Ron Paul on a variety of issues, the cause of Al Qaeda’s attacks being only one.
No matter what happens anywhere in the world, the Dinocon dogma is the same "Hide out in Fortress America and do nothing".
It amazing how in a post 09-11 world the Dincons still cannot wake up to the plain fact that there is no place for them to hide anymore.
These foes will come to you if you do not go get them 1st. These foes have no desire to "live and let live".
We can project force from our home soil faster than any other Nation on Earth.
We do NOT need to be in their back yards "Nation Building".
As you stated yourself, he simply regurgitated the Al Qeda propaganda lines with NO challenge or question. He stated them as fact without any sort of critical thought.
He did exactly what the story say he did.
I was not referring to the story, I was posting a subsequent comment to a commenter. Thank you for your opinion, it’s noted.
Comparing September 10, 2001 to September 12, 2011...can you name any Middle Eastern countries in which Islamism is significantly weaker than it was ten years ago?
An ignorant opinion strongly felt is still an ignorant opinion. Screaming it louder will not magically change your feelings to facts.
The Greater Israel movement in no way excuses the Greater Palestine movement to abolish the state of Israel “from the river to the sea.” Likewise, the Greater Palestine movement can not excuse Greater Israel. I am not playing a moral equivalency game here. Far better to build a house where it does not belong than blow up a cafe or a bus. But it is not necessary for the Israeli settler movement to be as morally bad as Hamas or Islamic Jihad for the movement to still be morally bad.
In a perfect world, both “greater” movement would be defeated simultaneously. But the world is far from perfect, as it always has been, and Palestinian society is more dysfunctional and corrupt than Israeli society. So the Greater Israel movement is being defeated before the Greater Palestine movement, if only because the intifada has been largely walled off from Israel proper. (Critics of Israel’s security fence should acknowledge that it is the very thing that makes Israeli withdrawal even possible.)
I think some, though not all of the West Bank settlements have their issues as well and much of it is caught up in Israeli politics. See this article.
IMO, Israel isn't perfect and isn't 100% right. They're our friends and we should treat them as such, but good friends sometimes have to give tough and unpleasant advice. Just my $0.02.
Modern economic-political reality? You mean because the world is so much more dangerous now than when isolationism was considered a mainstream policy?
Even though it isn't true. The world was incalculably more dangerous 250 years ago when isolationism was preached far and wide.
Presidents were preaching isolationism when Indians were scalping men, women and children on the frontiers. They were preaching isolationism when the Ottoman Empire was a great world power. They were preaching isolationism when a cholera epidemic could wipe out an entire town's population in weeks and 1 in 10 women died in childbirth.
They were preaching isolationism because even with all those dangers, they knew a government ever expanding its martial circle was the bigger danger.
I don't believe this one bit. I'm guessing that the number, if true, includes any country where a military uniformed US officer has once stepped foot in, or has an office in. Paulhroids would like one to believe that we have military conflict involving US troops in 138 countries.
Ron Paul Drones - The Jihad's Useful Idiots
Do you fact check your own links and beliefs?
Nope. It means that the Dems had a lot more kooks in the race they could vote for so the Kook Vote was spread thinner.
Curiously enough, I’m not a supporter of Dr. Paul’s as far as his Presidetial bid is concerned. Thanks for outing yourself as just another ‘bot though.
Does the name “Emannual Goldstein” make you angry?
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.