It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
That point alone is debated plenty enough. On top of that, it is pretty easy in hindsight to see that we are now deeply involved in full-scale wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as a result of "going after" OBL, and then we finally got him with a small seal team in Pakistan? Why are we in two full-scale wars in two other countries, if it only took 20 guys to go kill him in Pakistan?
Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by getreadyalready
Ron Paul is going to have to explain why he wouldn't have went after Bin Laden as well....that's asking a lot for people to accept. His argument is for the rule of law...i understand....but this was BIN LADEN.
He is after all the man behind 9/11 which killed 3000 Americans.
Ron Paul was against the METHOD that was used.
Originally posted by David9176
I would like to see Ron Paul debate Obama....certainly don't care about Herman Cain though.
Despite what the previous poster said...Obama is a good debater IMO...well at least against McCain he was.
However, Obama will have to answer for extending the Patriot act and the 3 or 4(?) wars we have going on, the bailouts, etc.