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

Skip to comments.

Exposed: Ron Paulís Foreign Policy Ignorance and Naivety
Pajamas Media ^ | 9-15-2011 | Raymond Ibrihim

Posted on 09/15/2011 10:03:56 AM PDT by smoothsailing

Exposed: Ron Paul’s Foreign Policy Ignorance and Naivety

Did it never occur to the congressman that al-Qaeda could be, um, lying when he regurgitates their talking points?

September 15, 2011

by Raymond Ibrahim

Among other qualities, a good presidential candidate must be knowledgeable and able to think outside the box; equally important, he must not be naive or gullible — certainly not swallow everything the enemy says hook, line, and sinker.

During the recent Republican candidate debate, Congressman Ron Paul exhibited his ignorance and gullibility when the panel was asked: “Do you plan to decrease Defense spending, to balance spending, or do you believe high spending is essential to security?”

After Paul explained how he was “tired of all the militarism that we are involved in,” and his plan on cutting back, he said, “But we’re under great threat, because we occupy so many countries. … The purpose of al-Qaeda was to attack us, invite us over there, where they can target us … but we’re there occupying their land. And if we think that we can do that and not have retaliation, we’re kidding ourselves.”

This is, of course, an old and well known narrative.

By questioning Paul, however, Rick Santorum exposed the latter’s naivety when it comes to the goals and motives of al-Qaeda:

On your [Paul’s] Web site on 9/11, you had a blog post that basically blamed the United States for 9/11. On your Web site, yesterday, you said that it was our actions that brought about the actions of 9/11. Now, Congressman Paul, that is irresponsible. The president of the United States — someone who is running for the president of the United States in the Republican Party should not be parroting what Osama bin Laden said on 9/11. We should have — we are not being attacked and we were not attacked because of our actions. We were attacked, as Newt [Gingrich] talked about, because we have a civilization that is antithetical to the civilization of the jihadists [full transcript here].

After rejecting Santorum’s thesis, Paul made his fatal blunder:

Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda have been explicit — they have been explicit, and they wrote and said that we attacked America because you had bases on our holy land in Saudi Arabia, you do not give Palestinians fair treatment, and you have been bombing — [audience booing] I didn’t say that. I’m trying to get you to understand what the motive was behind the bombing.

This exchange clearly revealed Paul’s lack of knowledge concerning the nature of the enemy. After all, it’s one thing for some Americans to believe that the source of all conflict is the United State’s presence in some countries, it’s quite another — it’s dangerous — for a potential president to think, and speak, this way.

Ironically, Paul even contradicted himself: minutes earlier, when discussing the need to cut back on the military, he complained that we had a military presence in 130 countries — bringing to mind the question: why haven’t these countries lashed out?

But what’s worse is Paul’s naivety — that he would actually swallow and regurgitate verbatim the propaganda al-Qaeda has been dishing for years: thus “Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda have been explicit — they have been explicit, and they wrote and said”; and “I’m trying to get you to understand what the motive was behind the bombing.”

Did it never occur to the congressman that al-Qaeda could be, um, lying? Had he bothered to juxtapose al-Qaeda’s propaganda to the West — which indeed does amount to blaming U.S. foreign policy for their terrorism — with the other things “they wrote and said,” he would have learned their ultimate motives.

For example, for all his talk that U.S. “occupation” is the heart of the problem, shortly after the 9/11 strikes, Osama bin Laden wrote to fellow Muslims:

Our talks with the infidel West and our conflict with them ultimately revolve around one issue — one that demands our total support, with power and determination, with one voice — and it is: Does Islam, or does it not, force people by the power of the sword to submit to its authority corporeally if not spiritually? Yes. There are only three choices in Islam: [1] either willing submission [conversion]; [2] or payment of the jizya, through physical, though not spiritual, submission to the authority of Islam; [3] or the sword — for it is not right to let him [an infidel] live. The matter is summed up for every person alive: Either submit, or live under the suzerainty of Islam, or die. (The Al Qaeda Reader, p. 42)

This medieval threefold choice, then — conversion, subjugation, or the sword — is the ultimate source of conflict, not U.S foreign policy (see also “Reciprocal Treatment or Religious Obligation,” which compares al-Qaeda’s messages to the West with its internal messages to Muslims, documenting all the contradictions).

The good news is that, if Paul is ignorant and naive regarding al-Qaeda and its motives, based on all the loud booing he received, increasing numbers of Americans are not.

Raymond Ibrahim, an Islam specialist and author of The Al Qaeda Reader, is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum. To receive his articles, sign up on his mailing list.


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: campaign4liberty; cutandrun; liebertarians; pauliban; paulqeda; ronpaul; ronpaultraitor; traitorpaul
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-81 next last
Photobucket

1 posted on 09/15/2011 10:04:01 AM PDT by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing
& everyone else's policy has been working so well.

I'm just saying put'um all in straight jackets.

Not that that wouldn't cause more unemployment( our only growth industry).

2 posted on 09/15/2011 10:12:46 AM PDT by de.rm ('Most people never believe anything you tell them unless it isn't true."-Groucho Marx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing
Ron Paul’s Foreign Policy Ignorance and Naivety

We need more of the Bush/Perry foreign policies, like with Mexico for instance.

Foreign policies with Mexico, have proven to be a win win for Americans.


3 posted on 09/15/2011 10:14:00 AM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Where did you get that picture of Paul. Quite frankly, I’m not sure I’ve ever seen him smile. Not only is he a crank, he’s a mean angry crank!


4 posted on 09/15/2011 10:15:21 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

You’re kidding! Right?


5 posted on 09/15/2011 10:17:06 AM PDT by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

“We need more of the Bush/Perry foreign policies, like with Mexico for instance.”

You do know that Paul has no problem with open borders with mexico, didn’t you?


6 posted on 09/15/2011 10:19:52 AM PDT by Beagle8U (Free Republic -- One stop shopping ....... It's the Conservative Super WalMart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Paul/Bachmann 2012.

We bring the crazy!


7 posted on 09/15/2011 10:21:25 AM PDT by SaxxonWoods (.....A man eventually wears the face he earns.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

LOL!

Great graphic. Paulsen had a lot more going for him, at least he was funny.


8 posted on 09/15/2011 10:22:23 AM PDT by jazusamo (His [Obama's] political base---the young, the left and the thoughtless: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing
On a serious note, we should continue with our great foreign polices. What a great benefit they have been!

We spent trillions in Iraq and Crapistan and now our gas prices are really cheap, we sent our manufacturing to Communist countries, which really improved our economy here, all while the government looted the American treasure to support these great foreign polices. Now America is broke, the dollar is near worthless, millions homeless, jobless etc. It's wonderful!

Everywhere you look, people in other countries are in the streets waving American flags, and chanting USA is great!

9 posted on 09/15/2011 10:26:57 AM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Ron Paul for Secretary of Treasury!

(He’s generally sound on economic matters, indeed more so that most of the GOP field, but would be a disaster if allowed anywhere near foreign policy or defense policy.)


10 posted on 09/15/2011 10:30:31 AM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
You’re kidding! Right?

No, I'm being very serious here.

11 posted on 09/15/2011 10:31:07 AM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

Even if Paul is wrong on foreign policy, his philosophy makes a lot more sense than the neo-cons and liberals. The last 10 years should be proof enough for anyone.


12 posted on 09/15/2011 11:06:01 AM PDT by demshateGod (The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Great graphic. Paulsen had a lot more going for him, at least he was funny.

Thanks! Paulsen was funny, Paul is just nuts.

Photobucket

13 posted on 09/15/2011 11:29:24 AM PDT by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: demshateGod

These foreign policies have worked out so well, Americans will likely be exchanging cans of food instead of gifts, this Christmas.


14 posted on 09/15/2011 11:30:03 AM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SaxxonWoods
Paul/Bachmann 2012. We bring the crazy!

LOL, that'll work, or maybe....

Photobucket

15 posted on 09/15/2011 11:33:15 AM PDT by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

Sigh.....


16 posted on 09/15/2011 11:45:43 AM PDT by demshateGod (The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: demshateGod

Meanwhile, enjoy the funny pics others post, since they have little to say.


17 posted on 09/15/2011 11:47:35 AM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2
Osama Bin Lauden would have done well by attacking us on 9-11, IF the American people were as weak kneed cow-towing ignorant and feckless as Ron Paul.

He was counting on us being introspective and cowardly, like a bunch of Paul supporters.

Luckily for the future of the world we are not so lily livered and acquiescent in the face of brutality and murder.

18 posted on 09/15/2011 11:53:32 AM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Confucius might say. People who plan on taking over the world by blowing themselves up have no future. Building a world class military, like China, would have a better chance.


19 posted on 09/15/2011 12:01:17 PM PDT by ex-snook ("Above all things, truth beareth away the victory")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
Osama Bin Lauden would have done well by attacking us on 9-11, IF the American people were as weak kneed cow-towing ignorant and feckless as Ron Paul.

Oh come now...After trillions spent, draining the American treasure, occupying other countries for years, costing thousands of American lives, even the current socialist president went along with a plan to take him out.

20 posted on 09/15/2011 12:21:34 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2
And if we were never in Afghanistan we wouldn't have had the opportunity to “take out” Bin Lauden.

If the American people were as cowardly and ignorant as Ron Paul and his supporters we would have, as Osama expected, retreated from our involvement in the world rather than toppling the government that supported Osama, and occupying it militarily giving us the reach to take him out in Pakistan.

Luckily for the world the rest of the USA isn't as ignorant and cowardly as Ron Paul supporters.

21 posted on 09/15/2011 12:26:18 PM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: demshateGod

“Even if Paul is wrong on foreign policy, his philosophy makes a lot more sense than the neo-cons and liberals. The last 10 years should be proof enough for anyone.”

This is called a logical fallacy. Refer to Logic 101, freshman college level.


22 posted on 09/15/2011 12:36:00 PM PDT by SaxxonWoods (.....A man eventually wears the face he earns.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

“Paulsen had a lot more going for him, at least he was funny.”

Pat Paulsen also had the best campaign slogan evah!

“WE CAN’T STAND PAT”


23 posted on 09/15/2011 12:40:26 PM PDT by SaxxonWoods (.....A man eventually wears the face he earns.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: All

Ron Paul is not just wrong.

He’s certifiable.

100 percent Grad A loony bin.


24 posted on 09/15/2011 12:41:44 PM PDT by rbmillerjr (Beware of PaulBots tearing down good conservatives - they are deceptive weasles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
Ya don't need to occupy entire countries, for *years* or spend multiple trillions of American treasure, to take out Muslim gangsters. In fact, if those who created these destructive intrusive foreign policies, opted not to fight politically correct, "compassionate" wars, at the expense of American lives, we'd still have some respect in this world.

It was so bad, Bush's so called Homeland Security Chief Chertoff, had people wandering around the inside of his private residence, who entered the country illegally...All during wartime, while our own borders became a national security time bomb, with millions flooding into the U.S. illegally....during wartime. This is a farce.

We'll put you down for continuing these country killing, politically correct foreign policies.

25 posted on 09/15/2011 12:42:35 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2
We may not need to, but it sure helps.

Good luck taking out Osama Bin Lauden when he is sheltered and protected by the Taliban and we have no military assets in theater.

According to the Paultard delusion all we need to “take out” Muslim gangster terrorists is to retreat, lick our wounds, and stop supporting Israel - and then the mean mean bad guys will just go away and stop hating us!

Talk about weak willed fuzzy thinking politically correct cycle of violence idiocy!

26 posted on 09/15/2011 12:46:58 PM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
Our foreign policies worked out so well, while playing compassionate war with the Muslim gangs, your genius leaders decided to import tens of thousands of Muslims right into your back yard...

But that wasn't enough, so the just opened our borders during wartime, to a conga-line of millions, from God knows where, just to keep that great foreign police machine well oiled.

27 posted on 09/15/2011 12:52:29 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

Was the US in its right to invade Afghanistan, in your opinion?


28 posted on 09/15/2011 12:56:24 PM PDT by rbmillerjr (Beware of PaulBots tearing down good conservatives - they are deceptive weasles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2
So a Ron Paul style surrender and retreat, and allowing terrorist veto power over our foreign policy MUST be the only alternative!

Like I said, good thing the rest of America isn't as cowardly as a typical Ron Paul supporter - Osama was really counting on us doing exactly what Ron Paul advises - retreat and stop supporting Israel.

Do you actually think that such a display of their power over us would reduce such terrorist attacks rather than showing just how well they worked in changing US policy more to their liking?

Not that I expect a rational response, but hey, stranger things have happened. :)

29 posted on 09/15/2011 12:59:12 PM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: rbmillerjr
Was the US in its right to invade Afghanistan, in your opinion?

Yes it was, but to stay for *years*, costing trillions is not acceptable and should never have been an option or strategy. So bad, now their leaders in Jackassistan complain the billions we gave them, and or went missing, was not enough, and bitched they wanted dams and other infrastructure built. All while the U.S. goes belly up.

30 posted on 09/15/2011 1:03:43 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing
The writer, not Dr. Paul, is the one confused. There are several different & distinct issues, here, which the writer has combined to make a point. But the point is not valid.

Let me respond with the piece I wrote in response to similar errors in President Bush's address on the 5th anniversary of 9/11/01: 'Clueless'--The Dangerous Intellectual Confusion Of A President.

While I am not in complete agreement with Dr. Paul on all aspects of foreign policy; even where we differ, I would acknowledge that his stands are carefully thought out. But my point, here, is not about Dr. Paul. The writer has lumped together a number of issues, that need to be analyzed separately.

William Flax

31 posted on 09/15/2011 1:11:09 PM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

Got breaking news for you, most Americans have had a belly full of compassionate wars, while spending the American treasure on foreign lands, while our own country and economy circle the GD drain.


32 posted on 09/15/2011 1:11:34 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

“Yes it was, but to stay for *years*, costing trillions is not acceptable and should never have been an option or strategy.”

So, you agree with US Foreign Policy in Afghanistan, you just disagree with the details of the strategy.


33 posted on 09/15/2011 1:21:28 PM PDT by rbmillerjr (Beware of PaulBots tearing down good conservatives - they are deceptive weasles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

Got breaking news for you champ, Ron Paul will never be the GOP nominee for President. He will never be President.

Americans are not cowards who allow terrorists a veto power over our foreign policy. Ron Paul is.


34 posted on 09/15/2011 1:29:04 PM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: rbmillerjr
So, you agree with US Foreign Policy in Afghanistan

No, I thought I made that clear. The devil is in the details.

In fact, I disagree with 95 percent of the destructive U.S. foreign policies.

We keep continue with these strategies and foreign policies, this country will not only go completely broke, but will likely end in a total collapse of our entire system.

35 posted on 09/15/2011 1:29:29 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

yeah, yeah, we get it...

America is bad.
NeoCons...
Int’l Bankers...
Jews...
Bilderbergs...

and Ron Paul the earmarks wonder can save us all...funny


36 posted on 09/15/2011 1:34:27 PM PDT by rbmillerjr (Beware of PaulBots tearing down good conservatives - they are deceptive weasles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2
So I like most others saw part of Sept. 11th attacks on TV, had the same initial reaction as most. You've heard people tell their reactions a million times no, need to rehash.

After the dust starts settling a few days later, the ID of the perpetrators comes to light, how they got here, how they stayed here, where they came from, etc. I start thinking "Wow, this is it, my country is about to come down hard on immigration. It's about to get serious. This is a huge deal".

"We're going to seal the borders, no more third-world backwards imports, no more Muslims coming by the thousands, mass revocation of visas, triple INS, Marshals, FBI, rounding up people en masse for deportation".

And I waited, and I waited, and I waited. And I thought "this is nuts, what the hell is going on? We're not going to do a thing meaningful. We went to war with Japan and even US citizens of Japanese descent had to go detainee camps, let alone non-citizen visitors. WTF!?"

Then we invaded Afghanistan. And still I thought sanity would come. Then the TSA. Borders wide freakin' open and I'm taking off my belt and grandma's getting a shakedown. Tens of thousands more Muslims pour in. Then tens of thousands more the next year. Handing out visas, green cards, citizenship day in, day out.

Then we're ramping up for war with Iraq. Same thing. By then we were even giving refugee status to people from the countries we were at war with. I'm out of my mind about it at this point. We don't even have candidates running for office that so much as mention curtailing legal immigration from Muslim nations, let alone revocation and deportation.

Then it hit me. There's something about our foreign policy that is way more than meets the eye. Don't know what it is, but, there's something sinister that we don't see. And you'll never convince me otherwise. I got eyes, and I can see what's going on.

Anybody else who doesn't see this is a fool.

37 posted on 09/15/2011 1:38:19 PM PDT by triumphant values
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: triumphant values

Border Security and Foreign policy are two distinct issues.

Conflating the issues doesn’t take away from the idiocy of Ron Paul.

But, but if Libertarians would have their way, they’d open up the Borders, hell they don’t even believe in borders.


38 posted on 09/15/2011 1:44:29 PM PDT by rbmillerjr (Beware of PaulBots tearing down good conservatives - they are deceptive weasles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: rbmillerjr
I didn't mention Ron Paul or libertarianism at all.

Border Security and Foreign policy are two distinct issues.

Security is security. 90% of the people who read that post will get it. I'm not worried about the 10% who don't or the ones who get it and are dishonest about it.

39 posted on 09/15/2011 1:52:13 PM PDT by triumphant values
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: triumphant values

You made a ramble, not a point...lol.

...In a weak attempt to conflate the issues. Just because they are both relevant to national security, doesn’t mean they are the same issue.


40 posted on 09/15/2011 2:18:23 PM PDT by rbmillerjr (Beware of PaulBots tearing down good conservatives - they are deceptive weasles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing
and his plan on cutting back,

the Founding Fathers believed in peace through strength. Ron Paul believes that if we are nice to moslims, they will not try to hurt us. This rationality vs delusion.

41 posted on 09/15/2011 2:26:48 PM PDT by mjp ((pro-{God, reality, reason, egoism, individualism, natural rights, limited government, capitalism}))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: triumphant values
90% of the people who read that post will get it. I'm not worried about the 10% who don't or the ones who get it and are dishonest about it.

I got it and you're right, most get it. Those beating their drums while pointing towards Afcrapistan and Outer Mongolia while throwing trillions at these destructive country killing foreign polices, stand on the sidelines applauding, while the life is literally being sucked out of America like a giant vacuum.

42 posted on 09/15/2011 2:34:53 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

Well duh....

You’re a PaulBot


43 posted on 09/15/2011 2:36:39 PM PDT by rbmillerjr (Beware of PaulBots tearing down good conservatives - they are deceptive weasles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: rbmillerjr

I like your tagline! :)


44 posted on 09/15/2011 2:37:11 PM PDT by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: rbmillerjr
You made a ramble, not a point...

Well, I've seen enough of your posts over the years to know you're in the dishonest category. Your responses can be dismissed out of hand.

45 posted on 09/15/2011 2:41:49 PM PDT by triumphant values
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

They are waskly weasles.

Sad, because they are sooo sure they are right and soooo deceptive because they know their beliefs are rejected by 90 percent of conservatives.

So, they have to talk in half-truths, jumping hoops of partial truth so they won’t be seen as Paulians, thus instantly losing credibility...

Sad.


46 posted on 09/15/2011 2:44:55 PM PDT by rbmillerjr (Beware of PaulBots tearing down good conservatives - they are deceptive weasles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: triumphant values

I’ll bet my tagline hits a nerve and thus the projection.


47 posted on 09/15/2011 2:46:42 PM PDT by rbmillerjr (Beware of PaulBots tearing down good conservatives - they are deceptive weasles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
And if we were never in Afghanistan we wouldn't have had the opportunity to “take out” Bin Laden.

Notice how Paul and his Paultards get all hyped up over defense costs, but you rarely hear them complaining about the (significanlty higher) costs for the welfare/entitlement programs or other blatantly wasteful, abusive spending?

The Paul Cult is Code Pinkishly obsessed with its anti-military, anti-defense agenda.

As an aside, Paul sounds like a grouchy old coot yelling at kids on his lawn when he launches into his anti-war screeds in the debates.

48 posted on 09/15/2011 2:47:05 PM PDT by Allegra (Hey! Stop looking at my tagline like that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

EQUALS


49 posted on 09/15/2011 2:48:11 PM PDT by NYFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Allegra

Hey girl...glad to see you back in the USA...and replying to Paul supporters and making any sense is like trying to shove a noodle up fat pigs butt...it probably can be done but who wants to waste the energy...


50 posted on 09/15/2011 2:50:42 PM PDT by RVN Airplane Driver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-81 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.

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