Ron Paul has NEVER "blamed America". He has blamed American foreign policy mistakes -- policies which you don't set and neither do I. The CIA itself coined the term "blowback" for these unintended policy consequences -- consequences like arming Osama bin Laden's mujahedin against the Soviets in the 1980's only to have them boomerang and turn into the al Qaeda who attacked us on 9/11. That same conclusion in the 9/11 Report and it is nothing controversial -- the problem is that Ron Paul is the only candidate who talks about it. The rest of the candidates seem to keep following the "they hate us for our freedom" nonsense which is REALLY "blaming America" -- blaming our very existence for being the motivation for the attack -- attributing 9/11 to al Qaeda "just being jealous of us". How stupid is that, if you think about it?
My father was also a WWII vet (who as a 7yr old during WWI took a German bullet in the leg), husband is a decorated AF Vietnam Vet, brother-in-law is a retired Army Colonel and nephew is an Army Captain who served in Iraq. I am not "anti-military", quite the opposite, I am very pro military which is why I don't want to see one drop of our heroes blood wasted on unwinnable wars that have absolutely nothing to do with "protecting America", but have everything to do with protecting globalist business interests and some State Department hack's pipe-dream. And when you call them on it, they throw the "you are blaming America" shield up to hide behind. Well it's about time that Americans quit protecting these interests that are using us as human shields for their policy screw-ups!
I am sick of US foreign policy being outsourced to NATO, the UN, the Arab League and everywhere except where the decisions belong -- with Congress. I am sick of American politicians trying to "run the world", when they can't even manage the US & her interests properly. And, so is Ron Paul.
Even King Obama knew it was good for us to get rid of OBL, Cut and Run disagreed.
Again, you are just making that one up. Ron Paul was the first Congressman to specifically target the extraction bin Laden ten years ago as a priority less than a month after 9/11. He also supported rapid and succinct action against Afghanistan. Instead we let bin Laden go for ten years, got ourselves mired in Iraq, and ignored Afghanistan until the problems eventually bled into Pakistan.
So here we are today, with three thousand casualties from 9/11, ten thousand of our soldiers dead, and what have we won? Name me one thing that we have won from Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya? How are we better off? Sorry, but I'm with George Patton on this one: "No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country." Afghanistan & the Taliban could have been brought to their knees & punished with an air war that napalmed every poppy field in the country, without every setting one US boot on the ground. The poppy fields are their sole means of livelihood. The Afghans would probably have taken out bin Laden & the Taliban for us, for having brought such a calamity down on them.
But then again, the globalists wouldn't have made $Billions off of contractors, supplies and the rest of the war machine -- and that would have been "bad for their economy"./S