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.

 

THE IOWA GOP DEBATE- Your reactions ATS?! *LIVE*

page: 19
13
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by haarvik
 


He can borrow one of our banners, LOL!

If you didn't try it yet, mine is clickable! It goes to the Ron Paul Rock Anthem!!




posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Romney keep getting praise because they are what the political establishment wants right now, for whatever reason that is. Just like Gov. Perry now that he is running. They are what the establishment wants, which is exactly what is BAD for the country.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


I just wish I could figure out how to get the whole image to show up instead of cutting it off!



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by haarvik
 



Yes, and yes to both of you...
Everyone in ear shot of me has heard about Ron Paul.
but you are right, the primary election is the election in 2012 for us Paul supporters.
I stand corrected....oooh, there is edit feature...(now where is that erase button)


How do I get a banner for my signature?


edit on 12-8-2011 by Res Ipsa because: I want a banner.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by haarvik
reply to post by Res Ipsa
 


How about supporting him now? How about spreading the word? If you truly wish him to be president, then start now...don't wait for some primary. If we don't get his name and message out now, it will be too late in the primaries!


This is very true, the Primaries are more important in terms of getting Dr. Paul elected. In the very least get a bumper sticker that will spread his name as you drive around town.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by TupacShakur
 


When a nuke goes off in Israel , how long before a nuke goes off in New York City?
----------
You should watch a movie called The Peacemaker.
It can fit in a backpack.

edit on 12-8-2011 by Eurisko2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 


There are no backback / suitcase nukes. That was a Russian rumor during the cold war, there might have been 1 or 2 prototypes, but they weren't successful, and they also weren't powerful.

A "dirty bomb" is the scare tactic of today, but they only damage a few square blocks, and then poison the area for awhile. (Still a pretty bad scenario). BUT, dirty bombs are so easily detectable, there is no way one could get into the country without some help from the government. If we are ever the victim of a dirty bomb and/or nuke, you can rest assured our own government is to blame!

Right now the whole country is handing over their liberties without a fight, at the behest of the MSM, FEMA, DHS, and other government entities. All the "terror" is coming in imaginary form from those outlets. The terror is ongoing, but it isn't foreign made, it is made right here in our own television studios!



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by haarvik
 


Cut out the words you have in it and it should work.
Not enough space



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 01:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 



When a nuke goes off in Israel , how long before a nuke goes off in New York City?
----------
You should watch a movie called The Peacemaker.
It can fit in a backpack.
....That's stupid. You're saying that if they develop nukes, they might attack us with them.

Well, the thing about that, is WE HAVE THOUSANDS OF THEM! What are they going to do, detonate a nuke in NYC, and what's going to happen then? They would be wiped off the map! There wouldn't be a trace of Iran left on the globe, worst case scenario being mutually assured destruction depending on how many nukes they have, but the same arguments were made during the cold war.

America needs to mind their own business and I will continue to repeat that over and over again, because we are not the police of the world. It's unfair that we feel that we can have as many nukes as we want, but a country surrounded by nuclear capable countries can't even develop one. Maybe they just want to develop it for the respect that comes with that kind of power, maybe they just want it as an insurance policy in case another country decides to nuke them. Why they want to develop nukes is irrelevant, because it's their country, not ours.

Leave it up to the country and the people within it to decide whether or not they should develop nukes, not people within another country.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Blue_Jay33
 


Thanks! Was really getting to me!
Now it looks like it should, nice and shiney!



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 


There are no backback / suitcase nukes. That was a Russian rumor during the cold war, there might have been 1 or 2 prototypes, but they weren't successful, and they also weren't powerful.

A "dirty bomb" is the scare tactic of today, but they only damage a few square blocks, and then poison the area for awhile. (Still a pretty bad scenario). BUT, dirty bombs are so easily detectable, there is no way one could get into the country without some help from the government. If we are ever the victim of a dirty bomb and/or nuke, you can rest assured our own government is to blame!

Right now the whole country is handing over their liberties without a fight, at the behest of the MSM, FEMA, DHS, and other government entities. All the "terror" is coming in imaginary form from those outlets. The terror is ongoing, but it isn't foreign made, it is made right here in our own television studios!


Oh, well that's relief. Wait! What in the world is this???
- Tactical Nuclear Bomb -

It's rumored the old Soviet union sold a few of these on the black market for
$200 million each to Al Qaeda.
Yield = 100 Kilotons
That's 5 times Hiroshima.
----------
Small enough to fit inside a standard refrigerator.
- Soviet Tactical Nuke at bottom of the Page -



edit on 12-8-2011 by Eurisko2012 because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-8-2011 by Eurisko2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 



Small, two-man portable, or truck-portable, tactical weapons (sometimes misleadingly referred to as suitcase nukes),


From your link.

"Two-man, truck portable." That is a far cry from a backpack nuke.

Sure, they are smaller and more powerful than before, but they are not backpack or suitcase sized, and they are still extremely detectable. Here in Florida, we have portable units on our Highways that can detect the radiation inside someone's body from a typical Nuclear stress test, and they can detect it from a rest stop, in a moving vehicle on the interstate!!

Imagine how quickly the radiation in a nuclear weapon would be detected travelling up our roads.

Not that an attack is impossible, just that it would take some coordination from people inside each State government, and the Federal government. It would be a conspiracy like 9/11!



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 

Detectable? What if you surround it with a sheet of lead?
------------
In the movie it was just the Plutonium trigger.
You don't have to have the entire warhead.
-------------
Go to Google: type in Al Qaeda Al Jazeera 100 kiloton and then press enter.




posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Section31
MSNBC, NBC, CBS, CNN, and ABC are all liberal leaning news networks. As a matter of fact, MSNBC's new slogan is "Leaning Forward", which mean 'progressive' liberalism. No, I will not can that garbage.


You're making an easy mistake; they're not as bat#, brownshirt, burn-a-mosque-and-blow-up-the-Murrah-building insane as Fox news is. This does not make them "liberal," it just makes Fox news utterly insane.


Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
CNN and MSNBC were ranting about Perry. I haven't seen a conservative network give their two cents.


Oh, those conservative networks you claim don't exist, huh?

Well, whatever on that score. I'd imagine the ultra-far right media isn't giving Perry airtime because he's damaging. He's advocating secession from the US, brags about killing coyotes on his morning jogs, and holds jesuspaloozas. Fox news putting the spotlight on Perry would be like a real estate agent taking potential clients out back and saying "And THIS is where the victims are buried!"



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fromabove
Bachmann was a winner because she could at least show she was consistent in what she believed and did as a congressional representative.

Cain was a winner because he could show a knowledge of economics, something badly needed in a leader today.

Paul shows the need for a strong homeland defense without saving the entire worlds problems. Start here first is the way to go.



Romney failed to prove his case but did no harm to himself.

Gingrich was at least feisty and combative but showed a knowledge of how government works stating some past achievements.



Pawlenty seemed like a punk.

Huntsman was too liberal and got caught being so.




I was disappointed that Pawlenty beat up on the one candidate most like him. Santorum also beat up on Bachmann and she was mad as a hornet, and she showed it too much. I'm certain people saw that as weakness. Paul is the only one who seems to get the whole Fed Reserve thing.
I can't remember the others names.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 


A sheet of lead might stop the dangerous majority of radiation, but it will still be extremely detectable. We have been detecting Japan's radiation non-stop since the accident.

There are specific stationary and mobile detection advices, and each type of radiation has a particular signature. They know whether it was a medical procedure, or some medicine, or an industrial device, or a something latent from manufacturing, or if it is a weapon signature.

Like I said, it is stil possible to get a small nuke, in a small SUV, and shield it pretty effectively, but for it to travel across state lines, it will take some serious conspiracy.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
Oh, well that's relief. Wait! What in the world is this???
- Tactical Nuclear Bomb -

It's rumored the old Soviet union sold a few of these on the black market for
$200 million each to Al Qaeda.
Yield = 100 Kilotons
That's 5 times Hiroshima.
----------
Small enough to fit inside a standard refrigerator.
- Soviet Tactical Nuke at bottom of the Page -

So what exactly is al Qaeda waiting for? How does Iran as a state fit into this?

Granted some Americans sure have a lot of imagination, especially when it comes to preventive attacks against imagined enemies out to attack the USA. But that imagination ought be helped from someone in Washington making the case, however stupid it may be. Unless that happens, and Obama is unlikely to help your cause what with him having coordinated from Oval Office, movie style, the taking out of Enemy No. 1, the fertile imagination will be limited to a few.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 03:32 PM
link   
I think the GOP is screwed..

They are still catering to old (40-50+) uneducated(OMG College is Elitist/Liberal) right wingers.
And we all know how far that got them in 2008.

Some will argue that it "worked in 2010 (they got the house).. I just think people care more in presidential years.

Only thing I know about Paul is that he wants/or wanted to legalize drugs.And that's he's the lead teabagger...

He's been trying for years and he has never gotten many votes...eh oh wells.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Explanation
 


You might have a reading comprehension problem.

Paul does not want to legalize drugs, he wants to take the power away from the Federal govt.

There is no such thing as a "teabagger," there is a very vocal, and very popular grassroots movement that goes by the collective name of Tea Party, and Ron Paul is someone they support vigorously, but he is technically not a part of the so-called "Tea Party caucus," which is a good thing, because that caucus, and the ridiculous "Tea Party Express" are both just GOP hi-jacked popularity contests.

The actual Tea Party is not organized, has no leader, and is not even connected from one town to the next.

You can choose to keep using disparaging and nasty misrepresentation if you like, but you will get shot down quickly, and you can choose to intentionally ignore the facts of Ron Paul, and all other Conservative and Libertarian campaigns, but you will only be successful in making yourself look more and more ignorant.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 03:42 PM
link   
In my opinion no one will look ignorant because like in his last attempts.. He will be REJECTED QUICKLY.

When I see Ron Paul supporters they all have one thing in common..

But eh if some want to waste their vote AGAIN...so be it.




top topics



 
13
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join