Posted on 05/20/2007 6:19:09 PM PDT by Captain Kirk
he idea that the party of Eisen-hower or Goldwater would have suspended habeas corpus indefinitely, as Bush has done for “enemy combatants”, would be unthinkable. The idea that they would have tried to occupy and rebuild an entire country in the Middle East is unimaginable. They were ferociously anticommunist, but also wary of direct engagement in foreign countries and deeply suspicious of all wars.
This kind of prudence and caution was once the hallmark of the middle of the country and its Midwestern American values. Paul reminded Americans of this past. He told them that the Republicans opposed the second world war, ended the Korean war and ended the Vietnam war. Why not the Iraq war? Why not indeed.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
Heresy.
BUMP
Entry of U.S. into World War II - December 1941.
Spotted your mistake yet?
Because St. Andrew supports Ron Paul.
By their fruits (and nuts), ye shall know them*.
*Ron Paul supporters.
Not yet, please help me out. I didn’t comment about Iran. Perhaps you have the wrong poster?
We humor our politicians when we praise them for having such marvelous foresight as to invent the internet, build Boulder dam, construct the interstate highway system, etc.
I think you get my point.
There were vast numbers of Americans directly involved in WWI long before December 7.
No doubt there's some OSS guy who wrote his memoirs and included his days in Iran pre-Dec 7.
This worked the other way around too. As you know the Soviets didn't enter into the Pacific War until quite late ~ Japan was on the ropes. Still, they maintained an aggressive military posture in and around their Easternmost port facilities so that American materiel for use on the Western front could be safely unloaded and moved.
The Soviets were definitely prepared to deal with the Japanese in the Far East. Many of us have known US military personnel who were assigned to Soviet units in the Soviet Far East during that period.
These were desperate times and desperate measures were necessary. Everything wasn't as clear-cut as some today might wish.
Actually, people here posted Sullivan all the time when he agreed with them post-911.
War is hell? Is that supposed to rationalize EVERYTHING the government does? It seems like you think so.
ABSOLUTE BS!! They would have never extended constitutional or legislative rights to foreign national terrorist. And certainly would not have allowed the Geneva Convention to apply to terrorists (as Bush has done). You want to criticize Bush, there is pleanty to do so on, but not for refusing to extend habius corpous to terrorists.
#1.) Habeas corpus has not been suspended. Andrew "Does this dress make my ass look fat?" Sullivan should read up on International Law and some recent court decision's.
#2.) The idea that a pansy could devine the intentions of two real men both long dead is absurd.
This is an easy game to play: IMO if we had a 9/11 type attack on American civilians on Ike's watch, his reaction would have made W look like a pussy.
I've always admired your refusal to take the low road and engage cheap shots.
It’s time to face reality; the anti-war vote will take the next Presidency. I’d rather have a Conservative like Paul in there, and reap the benefits of rolling back the obscene spending and reeling in the government than hand over the election to Hillary or Obama and watch them finalize the socialization of the United States.
We humor our politicians when we praise them for having such marvelous foresight as to invent the internet, build Boulder dam, construct the interstate highway system, etc.
I think you get my point.
I see the point clearly. You can't find anything to support your claim that Eisenhower was responsible for the Anglo-Soviet plan for Iraq.
Small surprise there. Churchill and Stalin weren't the sort to defer carving up the near east to an American military subordinate. FDR was their coequal, not General Eisenhower.
If you bother to read Ike's memoir of his tour as SACEUR you'll learn he was a bit busy with prosecuting the war against Germany. He didn't have much spare time to spend instructing the Brits and Soviets on what to do with their territorial ambitions. Or maybe he simply forgot to include his role as master of the globe.
Bingo. Paul is the best candidate to take on Hillary. All the others will be dragged down by the war issue just as the GOP was in 2006.
Oh shut up Andrew, and get back to the bathhouse.
Thanks for the Ron Paul ping!
If you think calling a spade a spade or a fag a fag is the low road, I don’t really care.
My first reaction to the first paragraph was, “Huh?”. Then I saw what idiot wrote it.
Ah yes those same "Republicans" that spray painted "Kikes for Ike" back in 1952.
If Ron Paul keeps it up he may out-poll Daffy Duck in the Presidential election. Of course, he has no chance against the write-ins for Mickey Mouse.
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.