Skip to comments.Ron Paul’s Farewell Address? [ Paul defends the murder of 3,000 Americans - Treason ]
Posted on 09/13/2011 6:08:36 PM PDT by NoLibZone
After watching Congressman Ron Paul get booed at Tampa, we were struck with the thought that it could be, in effect, his last address.
The congressman from Texas had been winning his share of the Republican debates by focusing on limited government, constitutional fundamentals, and sound money, the virtues of which are thrown into ever sharper relief with each lunge by the Democrats for federal power.
But the booing he got last night was no small thing, coming as it did when he suggested that al Qaeda had attacked us because America has not only occupied Muslim holy lands at Saudi Arabia but failed to give Palestinian Arabs fair treatment, as he put it, and killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.
The audience at Tampa made it clear that it would have none of this.
No doubt its sentiment is widely shared throughout the Republican polity and even among Democrats. In Tampa it turned out to be Rick Santorum who called Dr. Paul on the point, rebuffing the Texans suggestion that America bears responsibility for the attacks the 10th anniversary of which our country has been marking with such dignity.
The way television debates work, little time was available to stretch out the talk to a discussion of Americas intercourse with the world. This is where the conversation might have turned to one of our own favorite documents, George Washingtons Farewell Address.
I repeat it, therefore, Washington wrote, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them. In other words, Washington was not an absolutist on foreign entanglements. He was for avoiding them where we were able, but for keeping our commitments.
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
Tack on to what he said on 9/11 and in the debate that he also has said the same things and worse to Iran's state press. He sure doesn't mind being a government agent of foreign interventionism when it is against our interests.
Just when you think Ron Paul just might have something good to say, he keeps talking and you’re quickly reminded that he’s a loon and nothing but a fringe candidate.
That's a popular misconception. The truth is Islamists and Muslim populations in general just don't play well with any other religion. While I agree with you that Israel is a flashpoint, it isn't the cause of most Islamic attacks against us.
Bin Laden's reasoning had nothing much to do with Israel and he was a johnnie-come-lately to the Palestinian cause. And Ron Paul's description of what happened was blatantly false. We had forces in Saudi Arabia at their invitation because Iraq invaded Kuwait (another Muslim country) and threatened to move into Bin Laden's precious Muslim holy land. And we most certainly did NOT kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's during our enforcement of the no fly zone.
Anyway, I lived in Asia - Thailand more specifically. Where Islamic borders meet up with Buddhist you get incredible violence. The southern provinces of Thailand meet up with Malaysia and is regularly a war zone. Muslims behead, bomb, and methodically slaughter Buddhist teachers, monks, etc. And your life is serious danger as a Christian there too. That has nothing to do with Israel, it has to do with Islam meeting other religions with pure violence and hatred.
As someone who has experienced it first hand, I can tell you that Ron Paul has absolutely no idea what the heck he is talking about. The man is entirely naive, spouts theory without understand the actual facts, has foreign policy positions that would put us in more danger than Obama's does, and associates himself with the most vile of people such as truthers who are still busy investigating loopy conspiracy theories.
He’s just angling for an invitation to the Big Eid dinner at the White House.
He doesn't say it to US media, but he has no problems saying it to foreign press, especially Iran's state media. Link Here
They won't take him because he wants our fiat currency to actually be tied to gold.
I agree they hate and attack everybody and if they ever managed to cleanse the world of Infidels, they would chop each other’s heads off until they were all dead, too.
But they hold a special hatred in the Koran for the Joooooos. Especially so in Israel’s part of the world. And that is where we got so “popular” with them.
What you mean, we? Kimosabe.
I was trying to be diplomatic. That’s the royal we. LOL
Ron Paul is an unabashed 9-11 “truther” who believes that 9-11 was a conspiracy, though carried out by Muslims, was set-up by insiders in the US Government.
He’s a dilly.
Yes, they hate them too. Though I do believe Jews and Christians are at least considered by Muslims to be people of the book.
Believe it or not, your standard Sunni Islamist probably focuses more of their energy on hating Hindus and Shiite Muslims than they do Jews or Christians.
One of the greatest areas of concentrated terrorism and violence is the Indian/Pakistani border regions - particularly Kashmir. Your talking about hundreds of millions of Muslims there who really couldn't give a fig about Israel, but pour endless energy into hating Hindu's.
Muslims don't play nice ANYWHERE. Israel is a flashpoint, but most certainly not the reason the world has to endure so much Islamic violence.
By chance, I started re-reading David Fromkin’s “The Peace to End All Peace” a few days before watching that debate.
Good background and perspectve.
Ron Paul doesn’t understand the two most basic tenets of classical, common law libertarianism:
1. Private property
2. The defense of private property
Our private property was attacked on 9-11 and Paul refuses to go kick ass against the trespassers to defend our property.
Ron Paul is not a libertarian. I don’t know what he is.
No, I was certainly not implying Bin Laden invited us, but the recognized and long standing government of Saudi Arabia did. Further, we had support from governments throughout the arab world for operation Desert Shield and Desert Storm. Why on earth would someone like Paul argue we should pay attention to what Bin Laden wants rather than the actual government(s) in the region.
It's a question of what their motivation was, not whether it's valid or not. Surely, we want to understand what the enemy is thinking.
I have no problem discussing and investigating what our enemy is thinking. It is perfectly clear Bin Laden turned his focus on us during that time period. But again, so what? Why on earth would we design our foreign policy around what fanatical terrorists think? Saudi Arabia was a long standing ally, as was Kuwait. We were invited in to prevent Iraq from rolling into Saudi Arabia, and to eventually expel Saddam Hussein's forces from Kuwait.
I do not believe that you think the royal family cheered the attacks. I probably have to clarify that since there is a lot of heat on this thread - not because they like us, but because it is in their best interest to maintain a cordial relationship with their customer.
I do not believe most of the Saudi leaders applauded 9-11. It's more than the fact we are customers, it's that these are status quo, filthy rich fatcats who don't appreciate their world being made more difficult. As to the sentiment of the Saudi people, I'd argue that perhaps a majority probably cheered 9-11 whether they admit it or not. But it's still more complicated than that. A LOT of people in many nations privately enjoyed seeing the big, bad United States getting its nose bloodied. When your the top dog, you just have to deal with that sort of thing.
There is a serious problem with Islamic extremism in this world. I have seen it first hand, and the arguments that it is all about Israel just aren't accurate (and are used mostly to isolate the Jewish state). Ron Paul has a very dangerous, naive view of the world - and I must say, his foreign and defense policy would put us in more danger than Obama's has.
Some sort of twisted cult leader?
Ron Paul is not a libertarian.
Perhaps, but I bet if Ron Paul left the GOP and ran for the nomination of the Libertarian Party he'd win in a walk. If the Libertarian Party is willing to crown him as its leader, as it has before, don't you think it is kinda hard to argue he isn't a Libertarian?
I think, rather, you and most of us need to realize just what Islam IS. Their hate for us and zeal to rule the world goes back hundreds of years. Their goal has not changed. It has NOTHING to do with us today - other than we exist.
Here's a man we need in a top leadership position, anywhere from the head of military to POTUS. He knows to enemy, he does not back down, he does not apologize for ‘offending’ them - he does not speak PC.
We should all listen to this over and over until we can intelligently inform others about just who our very real enemy is - and we need to get rid of their man in the WH.
How does one say it was inside job but at the same time say they attacked us because we support Israel?
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.