Tired of the Ron Paul Bandwagon???

American interventionism politics is the reason we got attacked on 9/11. If you look at it through history you will see I am right. Why did the Japanese attack America, America was blockading imports to Japan. Why did Germany sink the Lusitania, America was trading with their enemy. America tried to play isolationism but actually just pokes the bear until it bites. This is what Ron Paul is talking about when he wants to pull the bases. He wants us to stop our antagonistic actions just to justify a war. Oh and I don't know if this has been brought up yet but Ahmadeenajad is not the end all be all in Iran. Meaning, he isn't the most powerful man in Iran. Ayatollah is the most powerful man in Iran, Ahmadeenajad is a little lower on the totem pole. This means even if he "wants to wipe Israel off the map," it won't happen because the Ayatollah won't allow that to happen. So there is no real justification for fearing Iran and the nuclear assets they may or may not possess. Proactive invasions never work, history shows that to be true. Just ask the Iraqi's

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by ICanThink
I'd love to see Ron Paul in the White House, but he is too out of mainstream.
Ron Paul means completely different America and somehow different world.
And it is not OK for those who in power now.
No way he may become president, they'll stop him using all means, up to physical extermination, theoretically. Especially at his age it will look naturally. Of course it will not be needed as the american society as a whole is not ready yet for such drastic change that may bring his presidency.

Anti-war crowd elected Obama, how is RP not mainstream?

ANTI WAR?????? Really!!!!!!! Boy did they get a shock!

reply to post by seabag


I come from the planet of common sense obviously you do not. I would be more worried about the fallout from Japan's 2 reactors that have melted down than Iran having a nuclear warhead when their largest missile only has a range of 1,200 miles.

reply to post by denynothing

American interventionism politics is the reason we got attacked on 9/11. If you look at it through history you will see I am right. Why did the Japanese attack America, America was blockading imports to Japan. Why did Germany sink the Lusitania, America was trading with their enemy. America tried to play isolationism but actually just pokes the bear until it bites.

You view history through the filter of your agenda. America was dragged kicking and screaming into WW2. If the Japanese had never hit Pearl Harbor we'd have stuck to our isolationist ways.  

+This is what Ron Paul is talking about when he wants to pull the bases. He wants us to stop our antagonistic actions just to justify a war.

Selling weapons to allies is not antagonizing. If you consider it so then the USA should attack N.Korea and Russia tomorrow for antagonizing us by selling nuclear technology to Iran.

Oh and I don't know if this has been brought up yet but Ahmadeenajad is not the end all be all in Iran. Meaning, he isn't the most powerful man in Iran. Ayatollah is the most powerful man in Iran, Ahmadeenajad is a little lower on the totem pole. This means even if he "wants to wipe Israel off the map," it won't happen because the Ayatollah won't allow that to happen. So there is no real justification for fearing Iran and the nuclear assets they may or may not possess. Proactive invasions never work, history shows that to be true. Just ask the Iraqi's

The Ayatollah that said Muslims should use nuclear and chemical WMD to kill the world?

This Guy?

reply to post by CynicalWabbit

I come from the planet of common sense obviously you do not.

Really?

I would be more worried about the fallout from Japan's 2 reactors that have melted down than Iran having a nuclear warhead when their largest missile only has a range of 1,200 miles.

How much common sense does it take to understand the difference between radiation from dirty reactor water and radiation from nuclear fall out? Obviously more than your planet possesses. 

When a nuclear warhead detonates it can rise thousands of feet in the air and be spread around the world. So yes, a large enough nuke on Israel can effect the entire world. 

If a nuclear Iran decides to fire off a warhead from Hugo Chavez's back yard I'm pretty sure it could have an even bigger effect here.

You've got to think these things through before you pop off.  

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by eLPresidente

 

you seriously posted this? lol

right, presenting opinions when you COULD present facts.

How about this fact? Ron never voted to raise taxes in his decades in congress. Conservative? very.

Yet he garners supposedly 0% with these citizens for tax justice. What tax justice? LOL

There was nothing inaccurate in my post, sir. Why don’t you use your own brain and stop relying on what your fellow Paulites tell you?

He earned a 0% rating!

CTJ

When I see a group give a zero percent rating to a man that has never voted to raise taxes and consistently condemns the income tax when he campaigns on his CONSERVATIVE RECORD, it makes me use the ol' noggin. Obviously it isn't surprising that you, a supposed anti-Paul conservative would use a LIBERAL-biased rating system to judge a conservative on his conservative voting record when it comes to TAX issues.

So yes, I am using my brain, it is your own failed logic that needs some re-evaluation.


Jesus, what was that age old saying on ATS? deny............ignorance-is it?

reply to post by seabag


Oh stop, you've been debunked on Iran before, and it was by me too.

After I was done with you, you had absolutely NOTHING to say about Iran and their 'supposed' danger to Israel and America.

I would tell you to stop drinking the kool-aid but I understand that GMO high fructose corn syrup can be damn addicting.

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by seabag

 

Oh stop, you've been debunked on Iran before, and it was by me too.

After I was done with you, you had absolutely NOTHING to say about Iran and their 'supposed' danger to Israel and America.

I would tell you to stop drinking the kool-aid but I understand that GMO high fructose corn syrup can be damn addicting.

Hahaha that was great.

really just awesome, thanks for the laugh.

And yea, don't worry, this new generation of people growing up aren't going to be as duped by the media's fear mongering as the OP is.

I'm praying it'll end one day.

great reply tho, almost..epic!

reply to post by eLPresidente

When I see a group give a zero percent rating to a man that has never voted to raise taxes and consistently condemns the income tax when he campaigns on his CONSERVATIVE RECORD, it makes me use the ol' noggin.

Citizens For Tax Justice (CTJ) is a Liberal tax "think tank"

They promote higher taxes for the wealthy, businesses, incentives while lowering taxation for the lower class. The CTJ was the group that created the reports for Congress during the Obamacare debate to show that they could expand health care and magically save money. In fact the tax hikes, including the $700 fine for not buying private insurance, was all created by the CTJ.

They are funded mostly by Unions.

I'm glad Paul gets a big fat 0 from those asshats.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by eLPresidente

 

When I see a group give a zero percent rating to a man that has never voted to raise taxes and consistently condemns the income tax when he campaigns on his CONSERVATIVE RECORD, it makes me use the ol' noggin.

Citizens For Tax Justice (CTJ) is a Liberal tax "think tank"

They promote higher taxes for the wealthy, businesses, incentives while lowering taxation for the lower class. The CTJ was the group that created the reports for Congress during the Obamacare debate to show that they could expand health care and magically save money. In fact the tax hikes, including the $700 fine for not buying private insurance, was all created by the CTJ.

They are funded mostly by Unions.

I'm glad Paul gets a big fat 0 from those asshats.

Glad I'm not the only one that saw it for what it really was.



Seabag, a supposed conservative, rode a liberal organization (hard) for their opinion on CONSERVATISM.

Oh the irony...

reply to post by eLPresidente


Irony indeed.. every organization on there is hyper-Liberal or in the case of the NAACP blatantly hyper Liberal and racist.

Human Rights Campaign vote Paul down because he doesn't think gay issues are worthy of the Federal Government.

League of Conservation Voters dislikes Ron because he has a habit of voting against intrusive Federal environmental acts, and has said he would can the entire EPA.

the AU (Americans United) are against Paul because every time they manage to include new language into a bill trying to, for instance, remove the word "God" from the pledge of allegiance he votes against it. To be fair .. he votes no on everything, but they still got their panties in a bunch.

Any group that is focused on lobbying like the AU votes him down .. the US Chamber of Commerce gives him a 43% rating, the COC usually ranks conservatives high, but then again Ron always votes no sooo..

It's actually really hard to find something that Ron gets good ratings for .. the ACLU gave him 67% .. any social issue group gets a fat 0 and environmental a fat 0 (because it's simply not a federal issue!)

FAIR, which is a group against illegal immigration gave him a 100% (yay go Ron star for you)

But ya .. my point .. it's hard to get good grades and smiley faces when you always vote no.

reply to post by eLPresidente

Oh stop, you've been debunked on Iran before, and it was by me too.

I've been debunked by you on Iran?? Not hardly. At a certain point it just got ridiculous to keep repeating myself. Nothing I've said about Iran was wrong. My thread is still there. Go read it again. 

After I was done with you, you had absolutely NOTHING to say about Iran and their 'supposed' danger to Israel and America.

That's your recollection?

I would tell you to stop drinking the kool-aid but I understand that GMO high fructose corn syrup can be damn addicting.

I'm not the kool-aid drinker in this conversation. I know I'm right about RP's dangerous foreign policy and I've proven it. 
RP Debunked

reply to post by eLPresidente

Seabag, a supposed conservative, rode a liberal organization (hard) for their opinion on CONSERVATISM.

Well it was funny and worth a try!

RP is no conservative on social issues. Since when is legalizing drugs a conservative position??

I don't have a problem with RP on economic issues. I'd actually like to see him as Sec of Treasury...he's well suited for that job. But he's no POTUS. 

reply to post by seabag

That’s not true. He voted for the law I posted, sir, which includes provisions for extreme cases. I’m a conservative and that view is shared by the majority, with the exception of the religious extreme. You’d be amazed what you’d do if I threatened the life of you wife if you didn’t comply…

Yes it is true. You are talking about laws he has voted for, I am talking about the things he is saying, right now. Today. Every day. While running for President.

This is the difference between you and I, I PAY ATTENTION! I actually STOP and LISTEN to what these people are saying. I dont listen to the talking heads who tell me what to think, I listen to what these people are saying and the message they are attempting to pass on to us.

Here is some RECENT information regarding Santorum's view of Abortion.
Would urge daughter to not have an abortion if she was raped
Raped? Dont get an abortion, just "make the best of of a bad situation"
Santorum: No exceptions for rape and incest

This is what Rick Santorum believes and if he had his way, it is the way we as a society should live. Unless your HIS Wife and its her life on the line, then it's OK to have an Abortion. Santorum has said that ANY doctor who performs an Abortion should be charged with a criminal act, no exceptions.


Now notice, he is specifically NOT ASKED about the life of the Mother being in danger, however he is suggesting the doctors be criminally charged. That would also include if the health of the mother is at risk, if that was NOT included, he would say so. Yet, he is not asked that question because if he was the jig would be up. The American public would NEVER support such an idea in that case.

Santorum's "morals and values" are a joke. He expects us to have one set of morals and values, while he has his own set to live by. Of course what can you expect from a man of his "morals' who launches a fundraising event known as C.U.M.

Yes, you read that correctly. It is not made made up. This is Rick Santorum's newest fundraising efforts which stands for Conservatives Unite Moneybomb.
Rick Santorum launches C.U.M.

So what were you saying again about Rick Santorum's morals and values?

And before I get warnings or being told I am misrepresenting anything, just google "Rick Santorum launches CUM" and you will get plenty of results because the blogs have now come alive with that EXACT headline and the 4th link that comes up will be to Santorum's website that I linked in this post.

reply to post by seabag

De-criminalizing drugs is actually very conservative. Throughout the vast majority of human history, drugs were legal.
The problem is, you believe you understand the meaning of conservative because there are those in the media that label neocons with that label. Prisons for profit is not a conservative position, but you will never see these neocons come out against prisons for profit.

reply to post by seabag


Actually in this case, cynicalwabbit is right. A nuclear weapon/explosion has a limited amount of material, it can only happen once, and then it is over.

The events at Fukishima have CONTINUED since March of last year. And IIRC, it's not just one reactor, it's 3.

So, for ten months now we've had 3 reactors going non-stop, while the news of their severity has been swept under the rug, AND we've had "hot" rain in Michigan reported the other day. (Google it, 561 times above "normal")

Whether it is in fact one or three is irrelevant, at the end of the day it's STILL going on, so in this instance, wabbit is correct.

DP

I'm not the kool-aid drinker in this conversation. I know I'm right about RP's dangerous foreign policy and I've proven it. 
RP Debunked

that video did nothing to put me off his foreign policy.

reply to post by wonderboy2402
the plan to control the masses, make war and build up on weapon design manufacture so far so good that is for them not so good for us TSA DHS NDAA2012 SOPA and others that will be coming, to fit the words of Bush "your with us or your against us" not if we/ us the people put a stop to it by voting a non Bush /Obama in, look at the views of Newt and Mitt Rom on them and you will see it will be the same old same old

reply to post by storkyla
yes I agree, the thing that makes them so against RP is he is not a war machine nut case, the would needs to be it's own police not the US nor do we need to be the peace keeper any more, name one war that was just true in the past 20 years we the US went in too, can you? I think not look at the records and the spins/ shrills/ Sec of State, UN res all a bunch of non proofed hearsay, mention gulf one 91' that was for oil, was it justified? or for profit making?, war has POWS were are they Git MO is that justified? Iraq were are the WMD ? now that we are out will we go back in? If so will it be Justified? what good could come out of it? loss of more US troops will it be justified? IMHOP.... NO!!!!