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.

 

Is the Tea Party dropping Bachman for Ron Paul??

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zanti Misfit
reply to post by Rothbard
 


President Eisenhower WARNED the American People about the Power of the HAWKS to Create Misery with their Constant Meddling in Foreign Affairs , have we Forgotten his Candid Insight on that Subject Today ? I Hope Not........



edit on 16-12-2011 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)


Power corrupts and Absolute Power corrupts Absolutely. We were doomed after they took out JFK.




posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by jeichelberg
reply to post by Rothbard
 


The drones are already flying over our soil....seabag thinks we are winning the war on terror...once the final terrorist is killed, he is convinced the drones will stop flying overhead...
The war on terror is an excuse to have perpetual war, take away the freedoms of the people of the United States and fill the bankers pockets. We the people are cannon fodder. When I was a child I too was a Neo-Con Republican then I put away childish things and became a man.
edit on 16-12-2011 by Rothbard because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 10:14 PM
link   
I wondered about this as well. But when I heard him say that if his advisors told him of a real threat, he would look at it, then go to Congress to declare war if he felt the need to.
I don't know about you, but I want my Commander-In-Chief to be level headed but willing to open a can of woop-ass as needed! I feel he's that man.
As far as Iran goes...nuke = deterrent. They are not stupid.
And since when does diplomacy equal weakness?
This isn't your first "talk me into supporting RP" thread seabag.
Many of your brothers and sisters who've been there see whats going on better than us and are disgusted with our foreign policy.

What say you?



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 10:18 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 



Why should I not be so concerned about Ron Paul’s foreign policy? Why should I not be scared that he is totally cool with allowing the biggest sponsor of terrorism in the Middle East (Iran) acquire nuclear weapons? Why is it OK that Iran, the country that has threatened to destroy the US and our ally Israel, be allowed to have such a weapon? What is his policy toward China and their aggressive trade practices? Put me at ease!! I know there are enough of you on here!!


Personally, I think Ron Paul's policy of "staying out of it" would work perfectly. Iran doesn't want a nuclear weapon, but they are surrounded by American military bases, the world's most powerful army is pointing at them. If I were them, I would want a super weapon too, in fact, I would want two of them! The reason these Muslim countries want to hurt us, is because our soldiers and out bombs are killing them. Think about it like this:

Say that America did not have the nuclear power, but Canada did, and Canada was threatening us all the time, and bombing and killing our women and children, smashing our infrastructure and communications. We would react, would we not? America needs to take care of HER OWN PEOPLE, and stop being the world's police force, bringing Democracy at the point of a rifle barrel.

A good mission for the American National Guard should be guarding our borders, sea ports, power plants, chemical plants, against any possibility of attack. Mostly we need a military presence on our border with Mexico. It's not the Mexican People I am worried about either, it is Extremists from other Nations who are using South
America for training camps, for operations against America.

America also needs to wean itself from the nipple of Middle East Oil. America has more Natural Gas than all of the Middle East. If our power plants were converted to CNG, our emergency generators, automobiles, buses, semis, and anything else that runs on fossil fuels could run CNG, it burns cleaner, and hotter than gasoline. We own this CNG, a large part of it lies under Ohio, where I live. I hear HHO bonds nicely with CNG too.

I agree with Ron that America should stay out of other people's business and take care of our own. What America needs is a return of American made goods. America needs to come up with a new, better than any other computer motherboard, and we need steel production, and car production. Like someone in another therd said, we need to break up Walmart, and donate the land to the city it stands on. Bring back small business, and jobs for everyone, instead of soldiers for the latest war. That's my take on the matter.



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Iran nuking Isreal would be the same as commiting suicide!!! Iran SURELY knows that droping a nuke on Isreal, or anyone else for that matter would mean retaliation. Do you or anyone else believe they are ready to end thier existence? Or do they want a deterrent like all superpowers.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 12:12 AM
link   
Here's a little food for thought...

edit on 17-12-2011 by imawlinn because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Sooner or later they will get it anyway. That's inevitable. I agree with Ron Paul on the point we had 30k nukes pointed at us and it wasn't by a bunch of guys in sheets and sandals. The focus should be on defense against those weapons. Have we really accomplished anything other than pissing off the entire arab world, the chinese, the russians? Sooner or later the other kids on the block are going to get together and give us a bloody nose. This is a situation where our presence is only making things worse. Lets not forget all the backdoor deals being made by politicians with this military action. Cheney set up no-bid government contracts for guess what company. There is more going on than us non-professional politicians realize I bet.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 01:45 AM
link   
reply to post by maddog99
 



I wondered about this as well. But when I heard him say that if his advisors told him of a real threat, he would look at it, then go to Congress to declare war if he felt the need to. 
I don't know about you, but I want my Commander-In-Chief to be level headed but willing to open a can of woop-ass as needed! I feel he's that man.

Thanks for your input.

Now that's what I need to hear! Yes, I want the same type of POTUS you described. 


As far as Iran goes...nuke = deterrent. They are not stupid. 
And since when does diplomacy equal weakness?


Iran has openly threatened to wipe the US off the map. I never said diplomacy equals weakness. Obama is the great communicator. He offered to talk to Iranian leaders with no preconditions. He apologized for America around the world. This was years ago. How long should we rely on diplomacy?
Iran is the best example of how diplomacy doesn't always work. Ask Obama! 


This isn't your first "talk me into supporting RP" thread seabag. 
Many of your brothers and sisters who've been there see whats going on better than us and are disgusted with our foreign policy.


I don't recall ever starting a thread about Ron Paul at all. I probably brought it up in a thread somewhere though. Well, I honestly believe this is the most important election of my lifetime and I want to get it right. The more I hear Ron Paul the more I like him, with the one exception. I'm feeling better about it now. I think I will try to pick up his book and read it over the holidays to shed more light on his policy goals. 



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 02:01 AM
link   
Seabag, tell me how many countries armed with US Patriot missile systems are in the direct line of sight between Iran-Israel and Iran-America?

Here's a hint: We've sold US PATRIOT Missile Defense Systems to; Taiwan, Egypt, Germany, South Korea, Greece, Israel, Japan, Kuwait, Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, and United Arab Emirates.

That answer right there will tell you how 'great' the threat of Iran really is.

And by the way, Iran is not armed with nuclear missiles, not even close...so where is the threat? Is it the same 'WMD's' Bush claimed Iraq had but had nothing to show for it when there was ZERO evidence of WMD's?


If Iran ever managed to launch a nuclear payload, we'd shoot it down before it left their borders and their people would suffer from the nuclear fallout. But like I said before, they are not even close, they don't even have ICBM's...unless you're suggesting we sold them ICBM technology.

edit on 17-12-2011 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 02:07 AM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Yea, you probably posted it...my bad...I did recall something though...I think I even called you a closet Paul supporter!


As far as diplomacy...I was talking in general...sorry for the misunderstanding. But I think diplomacy under a Paul admin. would be different...don't you?

btw, did u watch the Leno show? If you don't love Ron Paul after that, you never will.

Come on seabag! We would love to have you aboard the r3VOLution!

But it's okay if you don't. I respect your opinion and service to this country regardless who's in charge.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 03:24 AM
link   
Seeing how RP started the tea party movement they should have been behind him from the moment he announced he was running. But then again this isn't the same tea party as back then is it? I never could understand why the tea party would back a religious nut-job like Bachmann in the first place.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 03:27 AM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 





Is it the same 'WMD's' Bush claimed Iraq had but had nothing to show for it when there was ZERO evidence of WMD's?


There was evidence of WMD's in Iraq.

We had the receipts where we sold them to Iraq.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 04:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by seabag


OK all of you Paul-ites out there! I’m open to what’s best for America so lay it on me!!!

Why should I not be so concerned about Ron Paul’s foreign policy? Why should I not be scared that he is totally cool with allowing the biggest sponsor of terrorism in the Middle East (Iran) acquire nuclear weapons? Why is it OK that Iran, the country that has threatened to destroy the US and our ally Israel, be allowed to have such a weapon? What is his policy toward China and their aggressive trade practices? Put me at ease!! I know there are enough of you on here!!


For starters I would argue that you can make a better case for Pakistan, the US, Israel, NATO and it's Allies to actually be the biggest sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East. The US funded and trained Al-CIAduh to begin with. Ask yourself this question.... if the US had not funded and trained AQ in Afghanistan to fight the Russians, would they even be a factor today?

Who has Iran attacked? No One. They have bitched and moaned about Israeli Government for decades. I do agree they have probably fought through proxy, but what country has not? The US used AQ to fight a proxy war with Russia in Afghanistan. So we are to fault Iran for doing the same thing every other country on earth has done and for what? Because we disagree with them about Israel?

Pakistan has Nukes and that country is about as stable as a crackhead suffering from withdraws. Have they nuked India? No. Why? Because India has nukes too. If Iran were to gain a nuke, do you really think they would sacrifice every single person in the region to nuke Israel? I ask that, because that is exactly what would happen. If Iran fired at Israel, Israel would send a retaliatory strike right back at Iran. Israel has hundreds of nuclear weapons, and we are worried about Iran having just one?

Now really think about this.... Israel has hundreds of nuke. Iran may have one eventually. Does that seem like a fair trade off to you? I dont care how much you hate someone, firing one nuke at them, is not worth the hundred or so that will come back. Both countries would be turned into glass parking lots, and the entire region would be devastated for decades if not centuries due to the fall out.

On the other side of this coin, let us assume that Iran does indeed want a nuclear weapon and there purpose is not peaceful. Is it remotely possible that Iran could want a Nuke simply as a deterrent from future acts of aggression? History has already shown us that Israel and the US will violate Iranian airspace. Think back to Israel bombing Iran's facilities back in the 80's. Do you think that would have happened if Iran had a nuke? Do you think if Iran had a nuke, the US would dare fly a drone into their airspace to spy?

Before you answer that question, think about how many drones we have flown over Israel, India, Russia, China or North Korea. We do not treat Countries that can actually defend itself the same way we treat Countries who cannot. If I was in Iran I would want a Nuke, because then the West would actually stop sticking it nose into my business.

Now all that being said, can anyone show me where Iran said they wanted to destroy the USA? I been hearing this a lot during the debates, but I have not once seen Iran threaten the US. They have threatened to defend themselves, and that is a huge difference from an act of aggression.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 04:18 AM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


They don't have nukes..

Oh and Paul is all for going and getting the REAL terrorists.

PS: the country is a lot easier to defend against attacks when our troops are IN THE COUNTRY ( America ).

There is and will be huge propaganda used to scare people into not voting for Paul over this very issue.

Thank you for bringing this specific topic up. I'm not very well versed in it, i have a very basic, logic, view of it.

And i don't think it'd be an issue.

Imagine if all our troops were home protecting our borders and working here in the states..IMAGINE how our country could use that as a stepping stone to growth.





posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 04:20 AM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


And yes, Obama did say he would talk to them, but he never did.

He said a lot of things he never ended up doing.

And in the past month he's starting to look like he will do many things to stay in office, many illegal things.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 04:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by seabag


Why should I not be so concerned about Ron Paul’s foreign policy? Why should I not be scared that he is totally cool with allowing the biggest sponsor of terrorism in the Middle East (Iran) acquire nuclear weapons? Why is it OK that Iran, the country that has threatened to destroy the US and our ally Israel, be allowed to have such a weapon?


OK,Seabag............


North Korea has the COMPLETE madman with Nukes,has said he will use them against the United States,has our allies ALL around him,but yet.......he hasn't once launched. Why? Because he knows the response he will get from the rest of the world. Hes a complete madman BTW,with fanatical followers,more so,then Iran even. Israel HAS nuclear weapons,Israel has beaten all her enemy's,whenever they have come. She has many allies also. My take is that Israel surrounds its enemy's........


They can actually take care of themselves. With as much aid as we pump that country with,they could probably wipe every enemy surrounding them,without Americas help.



Maybe its time to protect our own borders. Imagine what a quarter million troops down by our southern border could do.

Iran can chant all they want,but in the end,they know,just like North Korea,its suicide to try and attack the US,or its allies. PERIOD.

I agree with Ron Paul. Our wars have to be constitutionally backed . Spying is a different story. MHO



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 05:08 AM
link   
Iran is no threat to the US. None. You have been lied to to further the agenda of the administration. Saying Iran threatened America is akin to a situation where a big bully starts harassing another kid on the playground, and when that kid simply "says" he is going to stand up to the bully, without actually doing anything, which in turn makes the bully think that he has the right to strike first.

It just doesn't make any sense. I guarantee that any problems Iran has with the US can be eliminated if the US stays OUT of Iran's business...And airspace, lol. Using YOUR logic, we should have stopped North Korea as well, as we all know their position on the US, as well as their nuclear development.

So why no invasion or hype with North Korea? Because that would not serve the interests of our administration's agenda. Why is that the US has to go spread "democracy" and "peace" to these countries, the ones where the oil comes from, when there are countless other countries that are MUCH WORSE in terms of human rights abuses, etc? WE TRADE WITH ONE OF THEM!!!

So you won't vote for Ron Paul; fine. But doing so because he is smart enough to stay away from Iran just goes to show that YOU are the one who has it backwards.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
Ron Paul picked up yet another Tea Party endorsement today. In an article for American Thinker, Russ Paladino, co-founder of the grassroots group Staten Island LiberTEA and a former staff member of the Staten Island Tea Party, has openly endorsed Ron Paul. He lays out a very good argument for Paul and hits on one of the main things that worry me most about him – his foreign policy.


Why are we are so willing to dismiss the one candidate in this race who dares to highlight the undeniable truths about our foreign policy failures? How could it be that we are terrified to consider the concept of pulling back, regrouping, and retooling that which is demonstrably failing? It's not that our soldiers have not gone above and beyond everything we've asked them to do, and done it with heroism and honor. It's that we've seen fit to keep them deployed indefinitely in an ill-defined mission, where the concept of victory is far from clear. It is less patriotic to keep the status quo than to acknowledge our foreign policy failures and correct them. Don't we owe that much to the troops? Perhaps this is why Ron Paul is far and away the choice of active duty military in terms of campaign contributions?
American thinker.com

OK all of you Paul-ites out there! I’m open to what’s best for America so lay it on me!!!

Why should I not be so concerned about Ron Paul’s foreign policy? Why should I not be scared that he is totally cool with allowing the biggest sponsor of terrorism in the Middle East (Iran) acquire nuclear weapons? Why is it OK that Iran, the country that has threatened to destroy the US and our ally Israel, be allowed to have such a weapon? What is his policy toward China and their aggressive trade practices? Put me at ease!! I know there are enough of you on here!!


I think the best way to approach this is to listen to what Ron Paul has said about the issue and try not to rely so much on what Bachman or the MSM has said about it. Ron's typical response is diplomacy over the war machine. He likes to say "We have 12,000 diplomats. Let's deploy them instead." You have to stop and look at WHY countries like Iran say America is their enemy. We've literally been trying to get into that country for decades. We've killed more civilians in the middle east than terrorists and when you kill innocent people it makes the people around them angry... angry at us! We lived through decades with Russia ready to blow us off the map at any second but what saved us... Diplomacy! When you take a few steps back and look at the whole picture you start to see how much of our nation is funded by these wars. What is our chief export here in America? So I don't think Ron will abandon these countries completely. He will just approach the situation from the angle it should be approached. And he even said that when war is constitutionally necessary (a.k.a. CONGRESS declares war on behalf of the American people instead of the executive branch) he will support it 100%. We need to focus more on ourselves and our economy than policing the world. If America is to survive we'll have to take care of America first.

P.S. S and F for sure OP. Thanks for bringing this question out there because it needs to be addressed.
edit on 12/17/2011 by nathanscottecho because: props to OP



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by seabag

Originally posted by jeichelberg
reply to post by seabag
 


Yeah, the Swiss have really had a hard time with remaining neutral...Who said anything about pacifism?


Whether our previous foreign policy is to blame or not, we definitely have some enemies around the world now. I’ve been to many third-world countries and I have no desire for my children to grow up that way.

I’m just a bit unsettled by waiting too long to respond…that’s all. I fear Ron wouldn’t pull the trigger until we have been decimated, and that’s alarming to me. Am I wrong? Do you think America should become a pacifist nation and only strike in retaliation? I get the feeling that's exactly what Ron Paul wants. Am I wrong? I haven't read his book. I base that on public comments he's made and his debate responses.


we have adequate defense systems to stop an Iranian missile from impacting our nation. seriously, they are a non-threat in that arena. Pauls non intervention policy is perfect for a country that needs to stop policing the world and start fixing its own house. they go hand in hand. and it is one of the main reasons he is getting my vote. that and ending the fed if he can pull that off.

-



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 08:49 AM
link   
there have been a lot of countries that have vowed to nuke Iran, hell i remember back in 1980 hearing the bomb bomb Iran song on the radio during the hostage crisis, our fault then, yes we brought that on ourselves.

Israels solution to a country nearby that was hostile was to build an arsenal that would deter their enemies... now they outgun most of the middle east..excepting Pakistan and India and the Saudis however all countries involved know that starting a war would be suicide.

why is it okay for all those other countries to build a defensive arsenal, and a deterrence factor but not okay for Iran?

with all the war drums beating to the " lets destroy a people because they scare me" philosophy it would be utter insanity for Iran to do other than they are. They can not hope to deter their enemies with their forces. the only real ace that they would have is owning a weapon that other nations fear. then and only then will the war drums quiet down

there was a lot of talk about what we should do with north Korea in recent past. have you noticed that since they got the ability to nuke their neighbors now we leave them the f%$&^%$ alone?

Iran is doing what they have to do to survive in a atmosphere of hyped militarism. i do hope the get the bomb. dont hope they ever use it.
until the nations of the world lay down their destructive arsenals, they have no room to point fingers and say that other nations shouldn't have them.

after all the one nation that should never ever be allowed to have nukes should be the only nation on earth to ever use them dont ya think?



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join