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.

 

Ron Paul; Let Iran Have the Bomb

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:09 AM
link   
Actually now that I think about it, we should let them have a nuke. That way they will use it on someone giving us a reason to obliterate their country off the face of the planet.

Perhaps Ron Paul is thinking ahead of the curve here.




posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:09 AM
link   
The direct use of force is such a poor solution to any problem. It is generally employed only by small children and large nations.

- David Friedman



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:12 AM
link   
reply to post by kro32
 

That's a really superficial observation. Iran is building a nuclear power grid and trying to reform. Obviously they want to compete with the U.S. and show the rest of the world an alternative form of a civilized nation different from the Western nations. They want to change and be taken more seriously. Nobody is going to nuke anyone. Its called "mutually assured destruction". Nuclear weapons are used like unloaded guns are used to rob banks. Its all to coerce someone else to comply with your demands without ever intending to go all the way. You've already chosen your side in the little game...

Not to mention public hangings aren't very far off from the electric chair. There are some states that will still execute people by lining them up against a wall and shooting them. So I guess that makes us even with Iran.

North Korea has nuclear weapons and they clearly stated that they want to destroy America. What are we doing about them? Nothing.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
Actually now that I think about it, we should let them have a nuke.


There is a problem with the world when nations employ the language of 'we should let'. A single nation has not the right to let, allow, or disallow any other nation from doing anything.

The problem with the interventionist strategy is that it ignores human spirit. Be it a Muslim spirit, Jewish spirit, Christian spirit, Buddhist spirit, or Atheist - man cannot be dominated for long and the reaction to domination is more violent than the suppression itself. Time is against all that would be tyrants.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by BirdOfillOmen
 


Iran is conducting public hangings from cranes and stoning women to death and your calling them civilized. Sure let's let em have nukes too.

That's funny


Ignore kro on any thread.

He has been proven time and time again to be a TROLL



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by kro32
 


Internet tough guys have said they would kick my ass before, should I believe them?

Iran is the equivalent of an internet tough guy, arm chair warrior, big mouthed little guy, who wants to show the world it won't be pushed around by the neighborhood bully.

In the end if we have our ***** squared away here, we will not have to worry about their flimsy plan of attack.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:16 AM
link   
Statements like this from Ron Paul is why he won't be the nominee or be elected. If we let Iran dominate the Middle East because they are allowed to have the bomb we will just have to go to war to free the other Arab countries or to protect Israel. Add in the world addiction to oil and you have all the makings of WW3.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

Originally posted by robyn
Glenn Beck characterized Ron Paul as dangerous and an isolationist.


And I characterize Glenn Beck as an idiot. Isolationism may be necessary at critical times. Like when a country is in the midst of financial ruin and blindly continues with insane military expenditures overseas. Like now.


Well put. I characterize Glenn Beck as an idiot as well. He's on an intense Isreal kick right now. And, I detect quite a lot of ego and the stink of moral superiority in his stance. IMHO he needs to make a lot more AA meetings and call his sponsor. But a lot of people listen to him and he appalingly puts himself out there as some kind a tea party, quasi libertarian leader and constitutional expert.

I support Ron Paul wholeheartedly. And, know in my gut he's right. I started this thread to work through my response to those who have bought into the fearmongering.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by BirdOfillOmen
 


Public hangings in front of children are quite a bit different than using an electric chair and some states do still have the option of firing squad but that is a choice made by the person about to die. Big difference.

I agree that North Korea should be on our hit list to get rid of their nukes. As the most powerful nation in the world we have the ability to dictate what goes on in the world.

You of course may argue whether or not we should and that's a valid arguement but we didn't become the most powerful nation by keeping our head buried in the sand and allowing everyone to do whatever they wanted too.

Nice guys finish last and if you want to remain the most powerful nation you have to throw your weight around. That's how this country was built.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by snowen20
reply to post by kro32
 


Internet tough guys have said they would kick my ass before, should I believe them?

Iran is the equivalent of an internet tough guy, arm chair warrior, big mouthed little guy, who wants to show the world it won't be pushed around by the neighborhood bully.

In the end if we have our ***** squared away here, we will not have to worry about their flimsy plan of attack.


I believe the hostages that were held for a very long time would disagree with you that they are just internet tough guys.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


Hmmm why would they attack us? Maybe because they said they would?

I don't think allowing a country who says they want to see your destruction have nuclear weapons is a wise idea do you?



haha, so did North Korea. So did Germany.So did Japan. So did... Well.... too many to name but you get the point. we have heard similar things from countries much more dangerous to the US, than Iran and we are still here and just fine... So far..... Imagine that.

What I think is the not so wise idea, is living in fear of something that wont happen to you...

Common sense time.... Let's dig through all the fear and propaganda fed to us by the MSM.

Iran will never attack us. Okay? Yes, their government hates us..... They have every right to....

We have been bullying them and trying to control and manipulate them since the 1950's.

Here is the thing though.The people of Iran are smart.... They don't put up with bullies and have always been able to run us out of their country, despite our best efforts....

Here is the deal.... if a country wants to invade us and do damage to us, they will do it with or with out nukes and you know it...

Don't believe me? Ask Osama Bin Laden, will you?

Nuke or not, we are not any more or less safe.... That is the truth....

Well, actually I have an idea... Give every country in the world nukes right?


Hey, the very fact that both the Soviet Union and the US were capable of destroying each other,that.... kept them destroying each other....


Thats it!... The solution to world peace... Give every one a nuke..... Mess with me and I nuke your house


No? Well.... Then how about this... Be afraid of things that may actually happen...You are more likely to be killed by a family member than you are to be nuked by Iran....

maybe you should never speak to your family again....

Iran wont invade the US....Nukes or not.


Now, if you STILL wish to live in fear.... Well,sorry to hear that...
edit on 12-8-2011 by gimme_some_truth because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by robyn
Link
Scary thought, right? My initial reaction was one of fear. "They''ll seek to destroy us! That reaction is possibly the result of listening to a little to much media fearmongering or possible it's justified. If it is justified then what is the best approach to minimize the risk?

In the wake of last night's Iowa Republican debate, the consevative talk show hosts and other media are beginning to weigh in. Glenn Beck characterized Ron Paul as dangerous and an isolationist. He went into a diatribe concerning Isreal's security. Is the current situation in Israel vis a vis Iran analogous to WWII Nazi oppression and genocide? Is Ron Paul a Churchill or a Chamberland?


Rick Santorum said “Iran is not Iceland, Ron. “It’s been at war with us since 1979.



Paul said it is natural for Iran to want a bomb as it is surrounded by countries such as India, Pakistan and Israel which all have one and with China, the United States and Russia all involved in the region. He said the U.S. should not get involved in the country’s internal affairs.



He also said that during the Cold War we still spoke to the Soviet Union, and we should have dialogue with the mullahs too. “This is likely to lead to a sixth war,” said Paul. “Yes they have some militants in Iran, but they are all around the world. Iran can’t reach America, they don’t even have an air force. Iran can’t even make enough gasoline for itself.”



He accused the other candidates of warmongering. “They are building this case just like they did in Iraq, with war propaganda. There was no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, I bet you supported that too,” he said, as Santorum nodded, agreeing he had.


There's a big difference between being an isolationist and a non-interventionist. Dr. Paul's recognizes the ill will that many of America's policies have engendered through out the world and that have made us more likely to be targeted by terrorists..



edit on 12-8-2011 by robyn because: premature post


Ron Paul is 100 percent correct here. Santorum would have us marginalize Iran to the point where we would have an excuse to bomb them at the slightest whim. Tons of nations have bombs and they aren't being sanctioned. We are a huge threat to them and every other nation but nobody has foreign bases on our soil nor do they threaten us to get rid of our bombs.

Sanctions cause war. Bases on foreign soil sew mistrust. Mistrust causes war.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:21 AM
link   
I agree with Mr. Paul on this topic....

Why is this an issue? ??? I feel it is the hardcore christians(any religion other than Islam) that is making it an issue......like a centuries old religous war......This is why we see the "bad" headlines and nothing positive coming from the region......relious beliefs coupled with the desire to rule with money=war.

It has always been this way............peace is a pipe dream for the human race........everyone wants to be king of the land and get po'd when they are not king of the land....

Let them have it....tell them to remember who has the biggest defense spending budget on the planet and give them a wink



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:24 AM
link   
I think before we can tell/demand other nations, that they cannot have nukes, we must first get rid of ours(USA). Countries like N.Korea know they need a nuke as a deterrant from the world bully and oppresser, the USA, that attacks countries at will, and has dropped 2 nuke bombs on women and children already. The world threat is not Iran(who needs a nuke), or N.Korea, it is the USA, that is totally failed as a nation itself, and corrupt in extreme.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by KINGOFPAIN
We (US) electrocute,gas and inject poison.... whats the difference?


The only needed response to that is.

How many nations has Iran attacked in the last 20 years. How many nations has the United States attacked in the last 20 years?



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by kro32
 


that's their law,not ours.we have no right to police them because we don't like the way their justice system works.

ours isn't so stellar to begin with.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


You should also note that those countries you listed who threatened us we also went to war with. So are you advocating a war with Iran?



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by KINGOFPAIN
 


There is no rulebook for how the world should act. It is a fact that whoever has the most power can dictate how other countries run and those that can take advantage of that often last longer than those that don't.

It get's old listening to all this, "it's not fair," or "we don't have the right," defeatist talk.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bramble Iceshimmer
Statements like this from Ron Paul is why he won't be the nominee or be elected. If we let Iran dominate the Middle East because they are allowed to have the bomb we will just have to go to war to free the other Arab countries or to protect Israel. Add in the world addiction to oil and you have all the makings of WW3.


www.americansforisrael.com...

“Israel is our close friend. While President Obama’s demand that Israel make hard concessions in her border conflicts may very well be in her long-term interest, only Israel can make that determination on her own,without pressure from the United States or coercion by the United Nations.

Israeli Economists Agree with Rand Paul: End Foreign Aid

The question of foreign aid is one that has pitted economists against politicians, special interest groups, and foreign policy demagogues for decades. No stranger to this controversy is Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, who like his father, Texas Representative Ron Paul (both Republicans), has proposed ending U.S.foreign aid to all countries, including Israel, a decision that has earned the scorn of numerous groups on both the Left and the Right. However, one critical aspect of the debate that has been neglected from public discourse on the topic — and that Sen. Paul may be unaware of — is the opposition of numerous Jewish and Israeli economists and religious Zionist groups to Israeli foreign aid. Like Sen. Paul, these figures believe that foreign aid is an affront against Israeli liberty and sovereignty, as well as a drain on the development of numerous sectors of the Israeli economy, such as the weapons and biotechnology industries.


Father and son are alike on this issue. Ron Paul believes in respecting national sovereignty, our own and others.



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by kro32

Originally posted by snowen20
reply to post by kro32
 


Internet tough guys have said they would kick my ass before, should I believe them?

Iran is the equivalent of an internet tough guy, arm chair warrior, big mouthed little guy, who wants to show the world it won't be pushed around by the neighborhood bully.

In the end if we have our ***** squared away here, we will not have to worry about their flimsy plan of attack.


I believe the hostages that were held for a very long time would disagree with you that they are just internet tough guys.


Curious,...where were those hostages when they were taken? For some reason I doubt they were in the USA, and I also doubt they were in what could be termed "friendly territory".
Der,...Playing with a hornets nest is stupid yeah, walking past one ten thousand miles away is harmless.
I live in a country where recently an American was taken hostage, and before him another who was beheaded, and before that two one of which was shot before being rescued. You know what? I guess America should come whoop some ass over here too. Maybe drop a few 2000 pound bombs, launch the good ol American hell fire from some unmanned drones.

I don't know I'm doing ok and I was on a train that was bombed,....Big Freaking deal man....
Sometimes kro when talking to you I swear you read like I'm speaking with William "Freaking" Kristol NEOCON extraordinaire.
Being conservative is cool, that's what I am. Being mmmm Uber Neocon is

edit on 12-8-2011 by snowen20 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join