But Who Was Right – Rudy or Ron?

Buchanan.org ^ | May 18th, 2007 | Patrick J. Buchanan

[fortheDeclaration]

He voted to fully retaliate against al-Qaida and the Taliban. He is actually very upset that we are giving billions of dollars a year to the Pakistanis, while they haven't done a thing to round up al-Qaida since the beginning of the Iraq War. Paul believes in swift, overwhelming retaliation for any attack, which is as sound a policy as you can have. He also wants the borders sealed off so that we don't get attacked again; a terrorist could walk across the southern border tomorrow and there would be no way to stop him.

There is alot of which Ron Paul says that is quite good.

I posted part of a speech (see previous post) in which he discussed the events on Sept 25, 2001.

He seems to think that the hatred against the United States was due to our 'interference' with Mid-East politics.

[fortheDeclaration]

He is very sound on the Border issue.

Border Security and Immigration Reform

The talk must stop. We must secure our borders now. A nation without secure borders is no nation at all. It makes no sense to fight terrorists abroad when our own front door is left unlocked. This is my six point plan:

Physically secure our borders and coastlines. We must do whatever it takes to control entry into our country before we undertake complicated immigration reform proposals.
Enforce visa rules. Immigration officials must track visa holders and deport anyone who overstays their visa or otherwise violates U.S. law. This is especially important when we recall that a number of 9/11 terrorists had expired visas.
No amnesty. Estimates suggest that 10 to 20 million people are in our country illegally. That’s a lot of people to reward for breaking our laws.
No welfare for illegal aliens. Americans have welcomed immigrants who seek opportunity, work hard, and play by the rules. But taxpayers should not pay for illegal immigrants who use hospitals, clinics, schools, roads, and social services.
End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S. illegally will remain strong.
Pass true immigration reform. The current system is incoherent and unfair. But current reform proposals would allow up to 60 million more immigrants into our country, according to the Heritage Foundation. This is insanity. Legal immigrants from all countries should face the same rules and waiting periods.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/html/issue-Border_fx.html

[Remember_Salamis]

That is exactly the case. In order to assume that our past actions have ZERO impact on the world's opinion of us is absurd.

Interestingly, in his pre'04 Election tape, bin Laden said the following:

" Before I begin, I say to you that security is an indispensable pillar of human life and that free men do not forfeit their security, contrary to Bush's claim that we hate freedom. If so, then let him explain to us why we don't strike for example – Sweden?"

bin Laden spent time in Sweden in the 1960s.

[tabsternager]

He’s actually making a speech right now on CSPAN; so you don’t have to wait for a position paper.

[Remember_Salamis]

Ron Paul goes further than any other candidate to protect us from terrorism and cultural collapse.

Only Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo are willing to secure a border that a terrorist can walk across, but Paul identifies the true problems with immigration: welfare-state incentives and birthright citizenship. Only Paul has called for elimination of these. How far have we strayed since Prop. 187, when a moderate GOP Gov. in California, Pete Wilson, has the courage to call for an end to welfare for illegals? Now, so-called "conservative" politicians will not call for that. They would rather import immigrants that will vote for Democrats in droves. Go figure.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul343.html

[fortheDeclaration]

That is exactly the case. In order to assume that our past actions have ZERO impact on the world's opinion of us is absurd. Interestingly, in his pre'04 Election tape, bin Laden said the following: " Before I begin, I say to you that security is an indispensable pillar of human life and that free men do not forfeit their security, contrary to Bush's claim that we hate freedom. If so, then let him explain to us why we don't strike for example – Sweden?" bin Laden spent time in Sweden in the 1960s.

Why didn't the Nazi's hit Sweden?

Bin Laden (Islamic terrorism) hits those who are a threat to their vision of world dominance.

[Remember_Salamis]

Because the Swedes were politically neutral and did not intervene during World War II — that’s why the Nazis did not go after them. By your logic, they would have been attacked regardless of their policies.

[fortheDeclaration]

Because the Swedes were politically neutral and did not intervene during World War II — that’s why the Nazis did not go after them. By your logic, they would have been attacked regardless of their policies.

That is correct, eventually they would have been, or at least brought under Nazi dominance.

Do you think otherwise?

[fortheDeclaration]

It is time for Switzerland, Sweden, Portugal and Spain to acknowledge that there were no truly neutral countries on the European continent during World War II. It is now time for those four nations to acknowledge that they were part of the Nazis’ New Order and that they bear some responsibility for the tragic history of the Thirties and Forties.
http://www.adl.org/braun/dim_14_1_neutrality_europe.asp

[elhombrelibre]

Ron Paul’s a man’s man. He’d be able to lead the Democrats to their goal. Al Qaeda in Iran wouldn’t have to worry and Iran would be triumphant.