PEOPLE NEED TO SWITCH PARTIES 12 WEEKS IN ADVANCE OF THE PRIMARIES IN MOST STATES.
IF YOU DO NOT SWITCH IN TIME YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF YOU ARE NOT REGISTERED REPUBLICAN YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF RON PAUL DOES NOT WIN PRIMARY, NO GENERAL ELECTION ! REGISTER AS A REPUBLICAN. FIND OUT WHEN YOUR STATE HAS PRIMARIES. FIND OUT WHERE AND VOTE VOTE VOTE ! PLEASE !
WE NEED EVERY LAST VOTE ! Copy and paste this everywhere!
@Lamboragon lol you are a slave to corporate greed in America. You think what they tell you to think and you say what they tell you to say. Socialism is slavery? do you even fucking know what socialism is?
RON PAUL, WE ARE STILL WAITING FOR AN ANSWER! TELL AMERICAN PEOPLE HOW EXACTLY RU GOING TO CREATE JOBS? OK LETS SAY ALL TROOPS CAME BACK AND THEN WHAT? THEY ARE GOING TO SELL IPHONES AND BLACKBERRIES? DUDE BE A MEN, HOW RU GOING TO CREATE JOBS? POPULATION OF CHINA IS 1.4 B CHINESE WORK LIKE ROBOTS, BE HONEST TELL AMERICAN PEOPLE TO BUY UR BOOK U NEED CASH , U LOVE POWER, U LOVE CASH, U WILL NEVER CREATE JOBS, U HAVE NO ANSWER!
It doesnt matter if its blowback. al Qaeda is still a fascist cult organization. Their methods are still mass murder of innocents and their objective is still a stone age society, doomed to failure and suffering for all that people within it. It is disgraceful for anyone to take a neutral position in this war against evil. "Non-interventionism" is the sanction of evil. Doing nothing about evil makes you morally culpable.
In all this game, the devil is the victim, is the scapegoat, will be acused of everything cause the GOD don’t want any rivals*. Conclusion: live at the full in the freedom of GOD (praying in a right form,following the INSTRUCTIONS in the Bible - keeping the 10 commandments - including keeping the Saturday as the 7th day etc.) instead of in the incapacity and limited power of devil cause he is just a temporary puppet.
Rudys just playing on the ignorance of the crowd not finding out the real truth so he trys to pull the I was the mayor of New York City patriotism card to try and make Ron Paul look bad..fucking prick. He knows the truth.
The Republican debates: I want two Guantanamo Bays... fuck it, I want 5 more. I WANT MORE TORTURE!!! NO, FUCK IT, I WANT TO INVADE SYRIA AND IRAN NEXT!!!
Ron Paul was the only sane, non-neo-con fucko in the room.
@maddingo12 It is fairly ridiculous how they talk of balancing the budget out of one side of their mouths and then doubling the size of the fleet out of the other.
The Constitution and Bill Of Rights were created to inhibit the federal government and keep it from becoming too powerful. Because they knew a federal government that's too powerful is tyrannical. And Socialism doesn't work. Look at the pilgrims. They landed and attempted to set up what can only be described as a socialist community. It failed miserably, and then replaced it with a fairer, more Bible-based proto-capitalism which succeeded.
@fluff125 You act as though an economic system determines the amount of personal freedoms you have. Sorry, but that is a very poor understanding of politics. Government spending on healthcare, education, etc. does not a totalitarian state make. Your view probably best represents what exactly is wrong with United States voters today, which is a general lack of understanding, willful or not, to the reality of politics. Come back when you have an elementary understanding of political science.
@zak19b7 Come off your high horse. "Political science" is bullshit. Politics is not science.
If you really think a socialist country can be freer than a capitalist country, then I suggest you read the founding fathers. In a socialist country, the government has as much power as it wants to redistribute wealth, crack down on tax evaders and even free expression.
@fluff125 You're mistaken. For one, no not a hard science, but there are quantitative trends in politics. Second, and I repeat this, SOCIALISM is an economic viewpoint, not a political system. Yeah, it supports high spending and redistribution of wealth, but it leaves open room for democracy, authoritarianism, etc. And I won't get off my high horse, because the problem with the US is the very fact that people like you won't go out and get a proper understanding of politics. Makes me sick.
@fluff125 And to continue, yeah, the Netherlands and Canada are both freer than we are. They have leftist economic policy, but personal freedoms, the ones that I, as a libertarian, fight for, are much greater in those countries than they are here. And to be clear, I'm not a socialist. Ron Paul is one of the few politicians that cites actual economic policies rather than pandering to idiots when arguing economics, and I agree with that. Capitalism works as long as you stay outta the market...
@fluff125 But the funny thing is, both the left and "right" in our country advocate leftist economic policies. I would've agreed with the Tea Party movement if it wasn't hi-jacked by idiot Christian fundamentalists who only understand that they don't want to pay taxes, and not the economic fundamentals underlying the idea of a free market. Read the Wealth of Nations, or some Keynes, and get a diverse understanding of different systems of the economy and you'll understand what I'm saying.
@fluff125 but I think what makes me laugh the most about your comments and just shows your ignorance on the topic is your citation of the founding fathers. One, the founding fathers were as split as we are today. Alexander Hamilton's Federalists and Jefferson's republicans, ever heard of those? They hated each other. Hamilton wanted a huge federal government. He's still a founding father though, right? And yet a huge federal government would indeed limit your freedoms.
@fluff125 but to finish this off, I'll quite disrespectfully say this. I believe it is you who should re-read the founding fathers, and attempt to form a greater understanding of concepts that underlie political systems. Until then, save the politics for adults, thanks.
Yeah Ive never see anyone so proud to have let his city, under his watch, get bombed and its citizens killed. Its kinda part Guilianis fault i think, all these service people rip get killed with a second plane. Thats fuckin disgraceful
@D1E5ECT Rudy Guiliani is an idiot. If your entire platform for Presidency is "9/11/Terrorists", which his was, and you don't get laughed off the debate platform, then something is seriously wrong. The 2008 Republican debates, honestly, were hilarious. It was sad to see how far the GOP had fallen since Reagan, but the entire talking points consisted of 9/11 and Terrorism references, and ad hominem fallacies. Ron Paul brought good arguments but no one takes him seriously. Its sad for America
@zak19b7 Ron Paul made such good arguments that some Republicans tried to ban him from future debates and succeeded in doing so. After this debate he was declared the winner much to Hannity's disbelief who he then proceeds to shit on. It's sad when someone who makes so much sense is banned because he veers from the script. Essentially, he beat the Republicans at their own game and got in trouble for it.
Do none of you understand the symbolism of hitting the WORLD TRADE CENTER?
If Islamic radicals attacked the US solely because of our affairs in the middle east, then why bomb Madrid? Why target other western European countries which so regularly condemn the supposed American Imperialism? Stop trying to get your understanding of world affairs from fucking comedians and creationists. Go read a fucking book.
@wilkja they attacked everywhere else because they also were in the middle east..even s.korea had troops in iraq, the us brought everyone else to iraq with them..
@wilkja you are a jackass. They attacked Madrid because Spain had soldiers in Iraq. Now they don't and they no longer threaten them. How hard is that to understand?
How would we respond if arabs were building bases in Wyoming, Alabama, California, New York, Montana and (your state here)? We just might get pretty pissed.
You make the moronic mistake of comparing a democracy to a dictatorial theocracy. The Iraqi people waved in the streets and gave roses to the soldiers as the US and British tanks rolled in. They loathed Saddam.
The opposition are fascist militant religious groups and counter-revolutionary baathist soldiers.
Make no mistake, If you lived under Saddams Iraq you would welcome ANY foreign liberation aide (militarity or not) that you could get.
Wow, Ron Paul is a great American. He makes some brilliant points. I wish I could have known more about him during the election. Rudy is no hero. He didnt do anything significant.
9/11 was carried out by a rouge element of the military industrial complex as a pretext for war and to usher in a new world order. It's called globalism and a one world government.
And if what you say is true, and previous US administrations did give Saddam the gas he used to kill the kurdish people... does that not increase our responsibility to step in and correct such a horrible lapse in judgement?? Your logic has more holes than a cullender.
@mots35 You mean the same people that were stupid and short-sighted enough to support Saddam in the first place should be trusted to take another swing at reconfiguring the region? Great plan.
I would say the invasion of Iraq was about 11 years delayed. We should have taken Saddam out in 1992 when he was in our crosshair. And even then, you could not use the word "preemptive"..."prompt may be more suitable.
But instead, we let him establish legitimacy again, and kill many more that 100,000.
The point is, jihadists attack EVERYWHERE! because they claim to have gods final word and then look around at their failed state AND exports the frustration in the form of violence.
Another question.. If the creators of southpark were attacked (like all the other cartoonists and filmmakers) would you set up the cry that they brought it on? that is is their blowback? I would sincerely hope not.
@mots35@mots35 Blowback has nothing to do with speech. Blowback relates to foreign policy. I'm assuming you didn't watch the video. I am all for exposing the fallacies of their radical beliefs. We should never stop doing that. As a Libertarian, I am in full support of freedom of speech. What should we stop doing? We should stop waging war in the name of world democracy, and in the name of oil. To say we should stop criticizing these radicals is like saying we should ban the first amendment.
What are you talking about? did you read my comment? you didnt even attempt to refute my point about "premitive" strike and the myraid of the reason for EVERY WESTERN country to oppose Bathism and support the democratic movement of the Iraqi people.
@mots35 The best way to spread democracy is to not spread it militarily but to simply just live it. Lead the example and others will surely follow. Iran is on the brink of a revolution. People are taking to the streets and demonstrating--much like the tea party movement--in an attempt to take back their government from the clutches of Ahmudinajad. As a conservative I believe in personal responsibility. I don't believe it is my country's responsibility to be every other countries line of defense
Again, you clearly know nothing about Saddams iraq. Iran is much larger, Tehran is much larger and more populated than Iraq. Under Saddam it was death to own even a typewriter for a long time, let alone a cell phone or satellite dish. Makes it a bit tougher to spread revolution. Like I previously stated, you would have to understand the scale of genocide taking place to fully comprehend.
@mots35 ...the same can be said for the invasion of Kuwait. Kuwait's lack of self defense shouldn't constitute a dilemma on our part here at home. Our current foreign policy continues to bankrupt us. Our current defense budget (almost $670 billion) is more than every country's defense budget combined. These numbers are fiscally irresponsible. Having over 800 bases in over 100 countries spreads our military out too thin leaving our borders left wide open for attack.
You cant rise up in a vaccume. Count your blessings you dont live under a sadist like saddam and read up on the torture and rape he imposed.
Secondly, what you propose was already tried. We tried to sponser an uprising of the kurdes. 50,000 - 100,000 were all wiped out in what was known as anfal. or "spoils of war".
Learn the history. Watch the last minutes of this video. Ron Paul has no leg to stand on when asked if we should have let the genocide continue.
@mots35 What are you talking about? The US didn't sponsor the Kurds during their uprising - we were too busy throwing money and weapons at Saddam for his attack on Iran. In fact, the US was among those countries who, in August 1988, near the end of the Anfal slaughter, voted against condemning Iraq for human rights violations. Your history is woefully inaccurate.
Your about 3 years off. It was 1991. They voted for resolution 688. You just didnt notice because our idea of support back than was the equivelant of a highschool cheerleading routine. I am much in favor of our course of action now. AND YES. The same people who came up with the previous plan. Only a fool like yourself would think we cannot possibly improve and that because we failed once we should relieve ourselves of all responsibility. MORONIC THING TO SAY.
@mots35 ...and because our military is spread out so thin, we leave our borders and ports wide open for attack. Our current military empire causes our government to spend 56 billion dollars a year on a wasteful dept. of homeland security which does a poor job doing what our own military is supposed to do. As for Bin Laden? It is highly doubtful he is still lurking in the same area 8 years after 9/11. I've planted my seed. Doesn't look like you and I will agree. I'll give you the final word
@mots35 It was a pleasure sparring you on this issue. Thanks for your input. I promise to watch your video so long as you promise to watch my video on blowback. Just keep in mind who it was that armed Saddam in the first place. Also, study our founding fathers and why they fully supported a non-interventionist foreign policy. Thanks for keeping the argument somewhat civil. Usually when I debate neo-conservatives on this issue, they just spout nonsense like "you liberal". Peace out homie
As a matter of fact, Our founding fathers did the same as i'm suiggesting. Our FIRST quarrel with the muslim world was in the late 1700's when they were taking american sailors as slaves. When Jefferson went to England to meet the ambassador and ask why they took us as slaves he said "because the Qu'ran gives us the right. you are infidels" to which Jefferson sent in the Navy. Now was that blowback? Learn your history brother.
Bin Laden has said many things regarding his motives. Regardless of his motive, the bottom line is this: We (the USA) have over 800 military bases in over 100 different countries. That is called military imperialism no matter how much you try to spin it. Bin Laden has used our preemptive invasion of Iraq as a highly effective recruiting tool. Its no wonder the entire muslim world hates us. The problem w/ neo-conservatives is they think we can spread democracy militarily w/out creating blowback
actually, that is not what he said. maybe you should do a little research as well?
the primary reason for the tourist bus bombing in balle, the UN office bombing in Iraq, and the third reason bin laden listed for the 9/11 attacks was that we reversed course on genocide in east timor.
@mots35 No matter what we as a nation do or don't do overseas there are always going to be radical Muslims who want to destroy our way of life. I can certainly validate the desire to want to take arms and fight overseas. However, the primary objective when fighting an enemy is to decrease their forces. Our preemptive war in Iraq has increased the ranks of terrorism exponentially. Why? Probably b/c our preemptive war has killed over 100,000 Iraqi civilians. Might that anger a few Muslims or two?
Preemptive? Preemptive really? You cant be serious? You cannot possible be that foolish and be posting it online for all to see. Do you know nothing of Iraq and the years leading up to the invasion?
Well, let me enlighten you.
1) Genocide (a broad stroke but there are too many groups dead to name)
2) violation of non-proliferation
3) giving aide and comfort to known terrorist organizations (abu Nidal, al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia
well the netherlands might be under attack from islam in the future. but the netherlands and the rest of western europe is not the US nor is isreal and it is not in our interest to be tied to either country. hope for the best for both countries. but lets not get americans killed over either
@mots35 no, but he didn't name any islamic countries as being more free than america, so what's your point? he's got a point, that there are plenty of other countries in the world where people live happy, peaceful lives without having to endure oppression of any sort(meaning they are free nations), but those countries are never targeted by the "terrorists," whoever they may be. there are free countries closer to the middle east than america, but the terrorists prefer the distant target?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Let me just say I would be VERY concerned if China was building a facility the size of the Vatican in the Gulf of Mexico... not because they were building something so big, but because they were building it in a body of water.......... DOH
So Iran wants Nukes to start bombing people. Lets say thats true. They know if they do that they will be turned into a parking lot. So if they wanted to commit global suicide, I think they would just start invading countries , which, is what we do.
They think they are getting 72 virgins! They want to be turned into a parking lot, and take everyone else with them. It's called martyrdom. Look it up. And also look up eschatology.
Eschatology, the events up to the end of the world. Right, Im aware. However if I was to have just landed on this planet and you asked me which country was trying to start the end , I would look at the US. We are the only country to use nukes on Japan. The whole 72 virgins thing, the bigots need a new talking point, nobodys buying that one anymore. And you mention martyrdom, whats the difference in that and sending some 18 year old kid into a rat hole to die in the name of patriotism?
so you are saying muslims do not explicitly say that they welcome the end of the world AND 72 VIRGINGS?... they are not actively trying to usher in the apolalypse through martyrs (ie down syndrome girls with backpacks full of explosives)?? Hezbollahs flag is not a picture of a mushroom cloud?? Bin Laden did not say its ever good muslims duty to control nukes?
hmmm.. i must have been mistaken then. .. YOU MASOCHISTIC MORON
Lol, yes insults, thats usually wear these uneducated rants lead from the right. I wasnt even going to call you out on the whole "...AND 72 VIRGINGS?" thing....by the way Tex, what is a Virging?
Still not as funny as you saying Virgings man, thats was pretty funny. I dont think anyone on here is going to change your mindset, so Im gonna step aside and wish you and yours a happy christmas and good new year. Im not going to throw any moron or idiot comments like you did. Anger man, it will consume you.
@hollars1 While I have major issues with the concept of martyrdom, I completely agree with you. What is done, is pumping the head of some retard full of concepts and ideals, give that person a method to destroy and sending him out to murder for someone else. Thats pretty much war, be it with suicide bombs or an airplane.
So to confirm, you would not look at the culture supporting acid attacks, beheadings, stonings, homophobia, misogyny, suicide bombings, sharia law, eschatology, the 12th imam, global jihad, 72 virgins in heaven for martyrdom, civil war, mosque bombings, and genocide in numberous countries...
NO You'd look more at the US huh? sounds like a fool to me.
@mots35 There will always be crazy people that want to destroy instead of build, but they are few. Most people destroy for political reasons. As long as there is intervention in the middle east, the crazy ones are able to recruit and persuade people to do there bidding by giving political reasons. Al qaeda would have very little following if they didnt have actual offenses to preach about. They are our enemies, but our policies only help them recruit. Intervention is making us MORE unsafe.
Those "few" are 1% of the muslim population. Which translates to 15 million people. not so "few"...
As for recruiting, in 2008 al-Qaeda "recruited" two down syndrome girls, strapped them in explosives, and had them walk into a building; killing 99 people.
They don't need an aggressive foreign policy or ANY foreign policy to commit crimes against humity. They target frustrated and uneducated, and tell them whatever they want... and there is absolutely NO SHORTAGE.
You do realise that this region became more radical the more foreign influence was foisted upon them. It was building for a long time. Unfortunately one of the methods that can be used to keep power is religion. It has been harnessed as a bulwark against foreign and especially American interests in the middle East. This monster was created by the Western world.
America as an entity lacks the ability to imagine itself in another position. In your minds always the 'good guy'.
There may very well be a large faction of Americans who think as you say, that the US can do no harm. I hope I didn't give you that impression, and I hope the group of extremely intellectual neo-con/struasian philosophers who have the president's ear don't either.
Without conceit for my macro point about islam, I can give you an example of US war crimes: The arming of indonesia leading to the genocide in east timor.
That is the problem with the world we inhabit. America is for all intents and purposes the police on an international stage. To push the metaphor a little further they are crooked cops. Both sides are horrible. Post modernism has left us in a place where you can't criticise religion but the truth is those lunatic clerics are also unfit to lead and stunting progress (intellectual and otherwise) in their own countries. It's an energy consuming position to think both sides are twats.
I don't necessarily disagree with you conceptually, though that isnt the way I'd choose to word it.
What I know, and what I'm never willing to capitulate from is: Western civilization, democracy, rule of law; is better than islam, theocracy, and sharia. This is not just a culturally relative view. MORALLY/HUMANLY one is better.
The theocratic group is at odds with democratic society, and while US/western world may not be perfect; its a hell of a lot better than its alternatives.
I think we are basically on the same page. I think most religions are used to keep people in line (Islam especially) but they are always open to interpretation. The Qur'an contradicts itself in may places much as the bible does. It must therefore be interpreted. It is an ideology. Any ideology no matter how pure and noble it's end goals are, can be subverted. The people who follow choose how closely to adhere to it. In it's ideal form Western civilisation is far better to my mind.
Right. I think the tide shifted for me when theo van gogh was murdered and the threats were made to danish cartoonist (& most recently the Southpark episodes).
That was a direct assult against one of the few things that is intrinsically good; the cornerstone of civilizations and western democracies. For a group to try to reach out and strip freedom of expression based on a religion's feeling of entitlement to never be criticized must never be allowed.
One of the downsides of radicalising a section of the populace is they demand extremes. Surely someone high up realises in the long run that killing artists in Europe is going to turn people against them. The kind of people who would have shown sympathy to their cause in the past. It has only hurt their cause. Purely from an objective stand point it's baffling. But that goes back to what I said about common sense and religion only having occasional meetings.
Well thats the point isnt it? These people dont have a rational self interest in their own self preservation and survival. Thats why they say "we" are weak. We dont see the beauty of death.
Well, don't because I'm not religious. I rather like this one life I have.
True enough.In my mental list of groups (that I shouldn't have because it's not pc) that need to shut up and fuck off fundamentalist muslims are right up top. Next are Christians. As annoying as they are they are just less dangerous. Culturally their impact is quite negative but there's a steep difference between trying to smother science and suicide bombing. Lesser of two evils, as funny as that sounds considering the subject matter.
Precisely. Just look at the difference in how apostasy is handled.
In an islamic republic it means death. That epitomizes what you were referring to when you talk about forced control and these regimes trying to retain power.
I appreciate this conversation. Judging by your use of "s" and "z" you are from across the pond?
I'm from Ireland. I know it seems like I'm purely anti American but I am more scathing about my own country. America is far more relevant internationally though and that's why the foreign policies worry/anger me so much. It is very difficult to imagine what Ireland could do internationally that could have a far reaching effect. That is a good thing too judging by the fuckwits we have running the country.
As a youtube conversation this is pleasant far too often it just name calling.
Yes, the routine argument I seem to run into on these Ron Paul / libertarian videos is NOT the point you make (can we trust the people running the intervention to do so appropriately), a worthy one I might add.... but rather the contrary of your concern. That is "why are we nation building? who cares if they are destabilized?"
I can't think they know much about the way the US left Afghanistan after the soviet invasion & how important it is not to abandon the incapable. Thoughts?
I agree with you. As distasteful as the situation is to leave now would be morally reprehensible. Despite how badly it has been executed and how hugely expensive the whole enterprise has been it is too late to leave. It would create a much worse situation than the previous one. Regardless of how effective his economic policies may be (admittedley I don't know that much about them), America and it's allies must stay there for the long haul..
I used to be a big fan of his economic ideas. But not so sure now. Its no doubt a hugely expensive endeavour removing religious radicals and installing a make-shift democracy. But it also should be obvious that a democratized, rational middle east would be an economic boom the likes of which we have never seen. The resources should have never been controlled by psychopathic crime families, but rather the people of the countries wanting to embark on free trade.
I agree and in a perfect world that would be the case. If there was a purely altrusitic intent behind the whole thing I'd have to find a new hobby instead of being cynical. My hobby seems safe for now. A powerful and rational democracy in the area would be difficult to control too. That being said when the government is installed even as a puppet government if it improves the peoples lot it would be progress. From there more can hopefully be achieved.
I'm not so sure. For that to hold up, you'd have to prove to me the following:
-that women dont like equal rights
-that people dont want a say in their gov
-that they dont feel dissonance in moments of religious hypocrisy
-that freedom of expression and thought isnt a sought after principle
I submit they want all these things, but it will take regime change for them to take root. coversation must be allowed for the religion to be expelled. and religion is the problem.
The way to win people over is through example. That is a difficult method though.
The less employed method is 'killing the opposition with kindness'. You catch more flies with honey as they say. If everybody in the middle East had the equivalent of a middle class lifestyle they'd be too busy paying off loans on landrovers and interior decorators to blow anything up. Nothing makes people more docile than cash. Our own countries are evidence. When things are good people are quiet.
They do, after all, hold a monopoly on the violence. They regime goes out of its way to show them at all times who's boss. I doubt very much freedom FROM religion can take root in that sort of vacuum. Possibly in Iran, but in a race against the theocracy going nuclear.
But to your last point, NO, i have no interest in "killing jihadists wioth kindness" and niether should you. Its a losing proposition, one they'd like you to adopt, so they can go about their plans. No Thanks.
The last comment was written with humourous intent. Youtube comments only allow for brevity and tone of voice is also obviously lost. It's the main reason it's so difficult to get someone to change their opinions through youtube. Your previous points are valid but I would say there are large numbers of people who are okay with being herded to a certain extent and many that are okay with just the illusion of choice.
No doubt about that. A large cross section of people would prefer to be without their minds, welcome serfdom, etc. Its our cultural project to raise them up.
It's how you're raised and what societal norms you are used to. If a women grows up somewhere that treats women as second class citizens but never has an example of how they should be treated can she hope for more? Your upbringing shapes your expectations.
I'm not saying you're definitely wrong because that area of study is huge and hotly debated. I could just as easily be wrong. Perhaps there is an innate desire in humans for equality.
It is in theory possible that an open minded religious figure could lead just as well as any politician and Sharia law could be used in conjunction with common sense. That is only theory however. Common sense and religion rarely associate. I personally rather your standard politician. Greed is a simple motive and can be predicted somewhat. The zealots are much more unbending and harder to handle.
There are degrees of wrong. That is for us to ponder over youtube comments. If you live in Afghanistan or Iraq you may not have the luxury of deciding who of the two sides is the worst before you're killed.
The fundamentalists are insane enough to take their religion to ridiculous lengths and always seem to interpret it in the nastiest way.
The West will plunder their resources and de-stabilise governments if given the chance.
Bin Ladens manifesto lists this as the #3 charge against the west and a primary reason for 9/11. Not the arming, but because the US recognized the genocide tried to reverse course it.
So, if you want to avoid upsetting these people, your foreign policy better not include stopping genocide (even though we are a named member of the genocide convention).
Well, I don't much care about the jihadist opinion. It should not/ would not change my course of action one bit.
I say arm those little nations with nukes, so that Americans cannot intervene with means of military enforcement. Nobody is going to fuck with a nation with nukes, and using nukes against another nation with nukes is just as retarded, unless they're keen to head into a nuclear ice age. Fuck America and their shitty foreign policies, I want European countries like Sweden in power of the world over the USA.
You clearly know nothing on the subject. Iran does want nuclear weapons to detonate them immediately...
In fact, you can see it daily now. Hezbollah, who recieves its financial support from Iran, has a mushroom cloud as its symbol boasted on their party's flag.
so yes they are "keen to head into a nuclear ice age"
so true.. how much money does he stand to make as the "spokesperson of patriotism", just because he "lived through the attack of Sept. 11th".. which he didn't.. that's to say bush lived through the Pentagon attack.. yeah it was near him, but seriously didn't affect him physically
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
This interview is interesting considering that Paul openly said informally that he did not trust the 911 commission report and that he knew the entire event was orchestrated by the U.S. Just shows how that even sincere and decent politicians like Paul have to cover their asses on tv.
Bullshit!!! Provide the link to whatever website you read that on. Ron Paul never said that 9/11 was orchestrated by the U.S. That shit would be ALL OVER THE MEDIA if he really said it. The 9/11 Truthers would make him into their fucking spokesperson. Nice try.
fuck guiliani and fuck all those people who claped when the guy said are you suggesting we invited 9/11... WE FUCKING DID WAKE THE FUCK UP. the bush admin lied to us and thats why were in Iraq! ther is no tie between9/11 or weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Eat your hearts out dumbass Conservatives
Saddam was a CIA asset turned villain, a familiar story in US foreign policy. he disobeyed washington,- that's why he was taken out, not to save the iraqi's. how can you claim to be liberating a people you've killed 2 million of since 1991? not gonna fly here old man.
lets see some evidence of that. That WE killed 2 million innocents. prove that statement.
That fact is we have the technology to have leveled iraq without a single US casually, but instead we trained an army to hunt down and kill jihadist. a duty in my opinion
It wasn't a service to not level Iraq. Jesus...do you think before you speak?
Choosing to not completely destroy a country and annihilate it's people is basic human decency and is the very least we should have done in the situation.
Basic human decency, Correct! and speaks to the humanitarian principles to which we approached this war. so does liberating people from oppression. you prove my point. two actions which prove a genuine humanitarian stance over a self preservation one
Maybe you missed my point on the human decency thing. It is not to be applauded that we hit a fork in the road and decided against genocide.
I think we both know that the claim that we waged war to liberate people from oppression is bullshit. Why is no action taken in Darfur if our objective is to liberate the oppressed? Don't get me wrong, I'm glad Saddam is gone because he was a bad man but the government lied to us when they said this war was for the liberation of the people.
Well, actually the neo-cons in washington did urge the govt to do something to stop the genocide.
But we didnt do that. We said we would be non-interventionalists, handle it diplomatically, talk it out, and the killers used up the time, and now there is no one left to save. And somehow you can site that example and still come to the erroneous conclusion that ron paul supports that we should have let iraq rot for longer or that we should let iran get nukes. RIDICULOUS
Look, I'm not saying Ron Paul is trying to save the people of the world I'm just saying that Bush danced from one excuse to another and his reasoning that we went in to save the Iraqis is false. That's not why we went in. Two wars start after 9/11 and members of his cabinet and his vice president are co-authors of the PNAC? Sounds suspicious to me.
Who cares what reason he chose? the FACT is it was the right move AND he had a myriad good of reasons to choose from. I'M OKAY WITH HIM SITING DIFFERENT ONES!
And I'm not so sure a great deal of his reasoning didnt involve liberating Iraqis. I'm not so sure how you claim to have perseptive powers that I don't, but anyone who claims with such certainty to know the unknowable... i'm very skeptical of.
You're ok with him unsure which lie he should stick with then? I have to ask, did you read the PNAC?
I call those perceptive powers thinking. Whether I'm right or wrong that's what the evidence points to. Bush never was that good with the press or the approval of the people so maybe he did have noble intentions but chose to keep trying to find that magic reason that would appease us.
not which lie. There were perfectly legitimate, valid, truthful reasons to go in. Why do you insist on making such a cheap analysis of this? why dismiss a threat as nothing when its glaring you in the face?
As it happens we have a similiar problem on the horizon. Iran is getting closer to possessing nukes. Would you allow that? or would you accept the consequences of saying NO you cant have them?
Well you failed to answer me. Have you read the PNAC?
As for Iran, I don't see anything wrong with them trying to build nukes under the CURRENT global situation. Imagine for a minute that the United States was the country trying to develop nukes and all these countries that despise the US and have nukes are telling us not to build them. Are we going to listen? Of course not. All nations need to band together and destroy all nuclear weapons, including Iran.
There is something wrong with Ahmadinejad getting nuclear weapons. I'm sorry. That is a MORONIC thing to say. Maybe you would like to live in a boardering country once they have them? We know what Ahmadinejad would do if he got a nuke. A theocrat, holocaust denier. How can you know so little about this topic??? You show off your naivety making such a stupid statement.
The Project for a new Amer Cent. made the right call on Iraq for the many reasons i listed below.
Time after time you fail to see my point. I was saying going to war with Iran is not going to help any more than our negotiations are working right now. If we go to war with them what are they going to want to build? Strong weapons.
The PNAC is as near fascist as you can get in a democracy.
No. You fail to see my point. We can do as you suggest, ask nicely, and watch as they eventually get a bomb and then dictate orders to us and the surrounding countries.
OR we can say, NO the day will never dawn when you have a nuke, and demolish their nuclear facilities via air strikes and accept the probable consequences of saying that an irrational theocratic dictator.
You dont have to like your options, but you have to ask yourself, which would be worse?
Again, not what I said. I didn't suggest that. I suggested nuclear disarmament on a global scale. If nobody has any nuclear weapons then it becomes a lot easier to tell who is making them for aggressive purposes. If everyone were disarming their weapons and Iran were building theirs I would agree that military actions may be necessary but right now its a toss up. Are they building them because they feel threatened or because they intend to threaten?
I don't believe our government has any moral opposition to using them (we still use DU rounds) we are just held to higher standards.
And if that is true that does change things but I had not heard that before. And I'd need to hear it from somebody that doesn't make up their "facts" (such as Glenn Beck, Micheal Savage etc.)
Jeeezzz, well there is your problem. You just need to do a bit more research :). I'll help you get started...
Named party leaders swore on a stack of Qur'ans that they dont want nukes. Right after tearing up every treaty they have ever signed and later punctuated by Ahmadinejad who admitted "this to vindicates our nuclear program"... woops, slip of the tongue...
And also, stop going on about Ahmadinejad being a holocaust denier... lol. He doesn't deny it, he believes that the holocaust was blown out of proportion contradictory of the 6-8 million deaths of the jews.
i agree with your point almost in its entirety concerning the previous policy from 1991 when we had saddam on his heels on to 2000. But am i to take it that you see no difference between that and the policy of the last decade? you would have to be a complete FOOL to be making such a statement.
@Lamboragon Idiot.
Mythification 2 months ago
Gotta love when Republicans explain why 9/11 happened, soooooo funny......
PvtGermanWagz 3 months ago
Guliani and Santorum = classic stupidity
Ddstairclimber 4 months ago in playlist Liked
This has been flagged as spam show
It's not enough to say "Vote Ron Paul"
PEOPLE NEED TO SWITCH PARTIES 12 WEEKS IN ADVANCE OF THE PRIMARIES IN MOST STATES.
IF YOU DO NOT SWITCH IN TIME YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF YOU ARE NOT REGISTERED REPUBLICAN YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF RON PAUL DOES NOT WIN PRIMARY, NO GENERAL ELECTION ! REGISTER AS A REPUBLICAN. FIND OUT WHEN YOUR STATE HAS PRIMARIES. FIND OUT WHERE AND VOTE VOTE VOTE ! PLEASE !
WE NEED EVERY LAST VOTE ! Copy and paste this everywhere!
zaczattack 4 months ago
Giuliani actually sounds like a 6 year old. LOL
SputnikMedia 4 months ago
@Lamboragon lol you are a slave to corporate greed in America. You think what they tell you to think and you say what they tell you to say. Socialism is slavery? do you even fucking know what socialism is?
Jusoon 5 months ago
@Jusoon
Socialism doesn't work because you eventually run out of other peoples money.
Jeffah5 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Jeffah5 What the fuck are you talking about?
Mythification 2 months ago
Rudy is a douchebag.
justgetsome 5 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
RON PAUL, WE ARE STILL WAITING FOR AN ANSWER! TELL AMERICAN PEOPLE HOW EXACTLY RU GOING TO CREATE JOBS? OK LETS SAY ALL TROOPS CAME BACK AND THEN WHAT? THEY ARE GOING TO SELL IPHONES AND BLACKBERRIES? DUDE BE A MEN, HOW RU GOING TO CREATE JOBS? POPULATION OF CHINA IS 1.4 B CHINESE WORK LIKE ROBOTS, BE HONEST TELL AMERICAN PEOPLE TO BUY UR BOOK U NEED CASH , U LOVE POWER, U LOVE CASH, U WILL NEVER CREATE JOBS, U HAVE NO ANSWER!
democratsaresmart 6 months ago
numerology... 9/11 the "terrorist" attack in madrid happened 911 days after 9/11.
mojorisingist 7 months ago in playlist Real News
This has been flagged as spam show
It doesnt matter if its blowback. al Qaeda is still a fascist cult organization. Their methods are still mass murder of innocents and their objective is still a stone age society, doomed to failure and suffering for all that people within it. It is disgraceful for anyone to take a neutral position in this war against evil. "Non-interventionism" is the sanction of evil. Doing nothing about evil makes you morally culpable.
athabascka 7 months ago
Look, everyone... Look very closely behind Rudy and the rest. I think I can see hands protruding from their puppet asses!
thecrimsonfloyd 7 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
rudy is a god dam idiot...
davycrocketful 7 months ago
Comment removed
jonizzzzzzzzzzz 7 months ago
@jonizzzzzzzzzzz no I'm pretty sure you are the idiot.
SurlytheCLown 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
RON PAUL ,HE DOESNT CARE ABOUT CHILDREN DYING FROM
AIDS IN AFRICA OR WOMEN BEING STONED IN IRAQ AND AFGANISTAN?
HE IS NOT HUMAN, PSYCHOS HAVE NO EMPATHY TO OTHERS, MOST OF THEM WANT TO BE GOD AND
THEY ARE NARCISSISTIC!
democratsaresmart 8 months ago
oh giuliani what the fuck are you talking about
dannyana92 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
In all this game, the devil is the victim, is the scapegoat, will be acused of everything cause the GOD don’t want any rivals*. Conclusion: live at the full in the freedom of GOD (praying in a right form,following the INSTRUCTIONS in the Bible - keeping the 10 commandments - including keeping the Saturday as the 7th day etc.) instead of in the incapacity and limited power of devil cause he is just a temporary puppet.
diptdipt 8 months ago
1:19 lmao
cemb415 9 months ago
Rudys just playing on the ignorance of the crowd not finding out the real truth so he trys to pull the I was the mayor of New York City patriotism card to try and make Ron Paul look bad..fucking prick. He knows the truth.
NosoCOMINSOON 9 months ago 5
@NosoCOMINSOON haha no i'm fairly certain that guiliani is just not that intelligent. Turns out many politicians aren't.
565144 7 months ago
If those people hate our freedom so much, wouldn't they just try to copy our freedom?
I mean what do they benefit from in attacking us for our freedom?
They hate us for our freedom? I can't believe that bullshit was peddled in the 21rst century.
gundamWWW 9 months ago 2
brilliant point about the netherlands, gonna remember that one
KoojaYooba 9 months ago
Rudy Guiliani is a piece of SHIT-BUILDURBURGER-CHARLATAN-SLUT-WHORE, without being too personal folks!?
Peace;]
lovosazul 10 months ago 3
Great point about the Netherlands, Switzerland, etc.
dukenthaylor 10 months ago
The Republican debates: I want two Guantanamo Bays... fuck it, I want 5 more. I WANT MORE TORTURE!!! NO, FUCK IT, I WANT TO INVADE SYRIA AND IRAN NEXT!!!
Ron Paul was the only sane, non-neo-con fucko in the room.
maddingo12 10 months ago 54
@maddingo12 It is fairly ridiculous how they talk of balancing the budget out of one side of their mouths and then doubling the size of the fleet out of the other.
MandragGanon 2 months ago
@maddingo12 He was the only non neo con in the whole room.
NosoCOMINSOON 2 months ago
68 people don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics.
orangekrush90 1 year ago
The Constitution and Bill Of Rights were created to inhibit the federal government and keep it from becoming too powerful. Because they knew a federal government that's too powerful is tyrannical. And Socialism doesn't work. Look at the pilgrims. They landed and attempted to set up what can only be described as a socialist community. It failed miserably, and then replaced it with a fairer, more Bible-based proto-capitalism which succeeded.
EricTheAcktor 1 year ago
"Because that's what he fucking said" oh so true
MrCalib96 1 year ago 3
All of the countries he listed were socialist. I have trouble seeing how they are "freer" than the US.
fluff125 1 year ago
@fluff125 You act as though an economic system determines the amount of personal freedoms you have. Sorry, but that is a very poor understanding of politics. Government spending on healthcare, education, etc. does not a totalitarian state make. Your view probably best represents what exactly is wrong with United States voters today, which is a general lack of understanding, willful or not, to the reality of politics. Come back when you have an elementary understanding of political science.
zak19b7 1 year ago
@zak19b7 Come off your high horse. "Political science" is bullshit. Politics is not science.
If you really think a socialist country can be freer than a capitalist country, then I suggest you read the founding fathers. In a socialist country, the government has as much power as it wants to redistribute wealth, crack down on tax evaders and even free expression.
fluff125 1 year ago
@fluff125 You're mistaken. For one, no not a hard science, but there are quantitative trends in politics. Second, and I repeat this, SOCIALISM is an economic viewpoint, not a political system. Yeah, it supports high spending and redistribution of wealth, but it leaves open room for democracy, authoritarianism, etc. And I won't get off my high horse, because the problem with the US is the very fact that people like you won't go out and get a proper understanding of politics. Makes me sick.
zak19b7 1 year ago
@fluff125 And to continue, yeah, the Netherlands and Canada are both freer than we are. They have leftist economic policy, but personal freedoms, the ones that I, as a libertarian, fight for, are much greater in those countries than they are here. And to be clear, I'm not a socialist. Ron Paul is one of the few politicians that cites actual economic policies rather than pandering to idiots when arguing economics, and I agree with that. Capitalism works as long as you stay outta the market...
zak19b7 1 year ago
@fluff125 But the funny thing is, both the left and "right" in our country advocate leftist economic policies. I would've agreed with the Tea Party movement if it wasn't hi-jacked by idiot Christian fundamentalists who only understand that they don't want to pay taxes, and not the economic fundamentals underlying the idea of a free market. Read the Wealth of Nations, or some Keynes, and get a diverse understanding of different systems of the economy and you'll understand what I'm saying.
zak19b7 1 year ago
@fluff125 but I think what makes me laugh the most about your comments and just shows your ignorance on the topic is your citation of the founding fathers. One, the founding fathers were as split as we are today. Alexander Hamilton's Federalists and Jefferson's republicans, ever heard of those? They hated each other. Hamilton wanted a huge federal government. He's still a founding father though, right? And yet a huge federal government would indeed limit your freedoms.
zak19b7 1 year ago
@fluff125 but to finish this off, I'll quite disrespectfully say this. I believe it is you who should re-read the founding fathers, and attempt to form a greater understanding of concepts that underlie political systems. Until then, save the politics for adults, thanks.
zak19b7 1 year ago
@fluff125 new zealand & canada are socialist? look up the definition of fascism....the USA is the ultimate bastion of fascism.
shut up! look it up, then shut up again.
kaizy1 1 year ago
Yeah Ive never see anyone so proud to have let his city, under his watch, get bombed and its citizens killed. Its kinda part Guilianis fault i think, all these service people rip get killed with a second plane. Thats fuckin disgraceful
D1E5ECT 1 year ago
@D1E5ECT Rudy Guiliani is an idiot. If your entire platform for Presidency is "9/11/Terrorists", which his was, and you don't get laughed off the debate platform, then something is seriously wrong. The 2008 Republican debates, honestly, were hilarious. It was sad to see how far the GOP had fallen since Reagan, but the entire talking points consisted of 9/11 and Terrorism references, and ad hominem fallacies. Ron Paul brought good arguments but no one takes him seriously. Its sad for America
zak19b7 1 year ago
@zak19b7 Ron Paul made such good arguments that some Republicans tried to ban him from future debates and succeeded in doing so. After this debate he was declared the winner much to Hannity's disbelief who he then proceeds to shit on. It's sad when someone who makes so much sense is banned because he veers from the script. Essentially, he beat the Republicans at their own game and got in trouble for it.
scottyb453 10 months ago 5
Rudy is full of shit, would this guy shut up and let Ron Paul speak?
Gonji 1 year ago
Do none of you understand the symbolism of hitting the WORLD TRADE CENTER?
If Islamic radicals attacked the US solely because of our affairs in the middle east, then why bomb Madrid? Why target other western European countries which so regularly condemn the supposed American Imperialism? Stop trying to get your understanding of world affairs from fucking comedians and creationists. Go read a fucking book.
wilkja 1 year ago
@wilkja they attacked everywhere else because they also were in the middle east..even s.korea had troops in iraq, the us brought everyone else to iraq with them..
runeoner 1 year ago
@wilkja you are a jackass. They attacked Madrid because Spain had soldiers in Iraq. Now they don't and they no longer threaten them. How hard is that to understand?
eneffect 1 year ago 28
This has been flagged as spam show
Rudy Giuliani : Someone who's been through the attack of september 11.. so if a tsunami hit new york Giuliani is gonna turn out to be a geologist ?
CrazyKing570 1 year ago
mmm
jacasforever 1 year ago
THEY HATE US BECAUSE....
UH....
THEY JUST DO, OK?! STOP MAKING ME THINK TOO HARD!
LaughingMage 1 year ago
STOP PRIVATE BANKING THE FEDERAL RESERVE!!! CONVINCE RON PAUL & DENNIS KUCINICH TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT OF USA IN THE YEAR OF 2012!!!!!!
YoungIvyScholar 1 year ago
How would we respond if arabs were building bases in Wyoming, Alabama, California, New York, Montana and (your state here)? We just might get pretty pissed.
pchtermino1 1 year ago
@pchtermino1
You make the moronic mistake of comparing a democracy to a dictatorial theocracy. The Iraqi people waved in the streets and gave roses to the soldiers as the US and British tanks rolled in. They loathed Saddam.
The opposition are fascist militant religious groups and counter-revolutionary baathist soldiers.
Make no mistake, If you lived under Saddams Iraq you would welcome ANY foreign liberation aide (militarity or not) that you could get.
mots35 1 year ago
Giuliani a liar? I'd have never thunk it.
jas16899 1 year ago
shhhhhhhh. don't tell canada.
ffwoodycooks 1 year ago
Wow, Ron Paul is a great American. He makes some brilliant points. I wish I could have known more about him during the election. Rudy is no hero. He didnt do anything significant.
tommyemiliano 1 year ago 4
9/11 was carried out by a rouge element of the military industrial complex as a pretext for war and to usher in a new world order. It's called globalism and a one world government.
ThennyDlux 1 year ago
ty david cross
MirageScience 1 year ago
Rudy is such a douche.
lastrange123 1 year ago
@corysoulier
And if what you say is true, and previous US administrations did give Saddam the gas he used to kill the kurdish people... does that not increase our responsibility to step in and correct such a horrible lapse in judgement?? Your logic has more holes than a cullender.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35 You mean the same people that were stupid and short-sighted enough to support Saddam in the first place should be trusted to take another swing at reconfiguring the region? Great plan.
guysmiley00 1 year ago
@corysoulier
I would say the invasion of Iraq was about 11 years delayed. We should have taken Saddam out in 1992 when he was in our crosshair. And even then, you could not use the word "preemptive"..."prompt may be more suitable.
But instead, we let him establish legitimacy again, and kill many more that 100,000.
Preemptive? What a fucking foolish thing to say.
mots35 1 year ago
@corysoulier
The point is, jihadists attack EVERYWHERE! because they claim to have gods final word and then look around at their failed state AND exports the frustration in the form of violence.
Another question.. If the creators of southpark were attacked (like all the other cartoonists and filmmakers) would you set up the cry that they brought it on? that is is their blowback? I would sincerely hope not.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35 @mots35 Blowback has nothing to do with speech. Blowback relates to foreign policy. I'm assuming you didn't watch the video. I am all for exposing the fallacies of their radical beliefs. We should never stop doing that. As a Libertarian, I am in full support of freedom of speech. What should we stop doing? We should stop waging war in the name of world democracy, and in the name of oil. To say we should stop criticizing these radicals is like saying we should ban the first amendment.
corysoulier 1 year ago
@corysoulier
What are you talking about? did you read my comment? you didnt even attempt to refute my point about "premitive" strike and the myraid of the reason for EVERY WESTERN country to oppose Bathism and support the democratic movement of the Iraqi people.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35 The best way to spread democracy is to not spread it militarily but to simply just live it. Lead the example and others will surely follow. Iran is on the brink of a revolution. People are taking to the streets and demonstrating--much like the tea party movement--in an attempt to take back their government from the clutches of Ahmudinajad. As a conservative I believe in personal responsibility. I don't believe it is my country's responsibility to be every other countries line of defense
corysoulier 1 year ago
@corysoulier
Again, you clearly know nothing about Saddams iraq. Iran is much larger, Tehran is much larger and more populated than Iraq. Under Saddam it was death to own even a typewriter for a long time, let alone a cell phone or satellite dish. Makes it a bit tougher to spread revolution. Like I previously stated, you would have to understand the scale of genocide taking place to fully comprehend.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35 ...the same can be said for the invasion of Kuwait. Kuwait's lack of self defense shouldn't constitute a dilemma on our part here at home. Our current foreign policy continues to bankrupt us. Our current defense budget (almost $670 billion) is more than every country's defense budget combined. These numbers are fiscally irresponsible. Having over 800 bases in over 100 countries spreads our military out too thin leaving our borders left wide open for attack.
corysoulier 1 year ago
@corysoulier
You cant rise up in a vaccume. Count your blessings you dont live under a sadist like saddam and read up on the torture and rape he imposed.
Secondly, what you propose was already tried. We tried to sponser an uprising of the kurdes. 50,000 - 100,000 were all wiped out in what was known as anfal. or "spoils of war".
Learn the history. Watch the last minutes of this video. Ron Paul has no leg to stand on when asked if we should have let the genocide continue.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35 What are you talking about? The US didn't sponsor the Kurds during their uprising - we were too busy throwing money and weapons at Saddam for his attack on Iran. In fact, the US was among those countries who, in August 1988, near the end of the Anfal slaughter, voted against condemning Iraq for human rights violations. Your history is woefully inaccurate.
guysmiley00 1 year ago
@guysmiley00
Your about 3 years off. It was 1991. They voted for resolution 688. You just didnt notice because our idea of support back than was the equivelant of a highschool cheerleading routine. I am much in favor of our course of action now. AND YES. The same people who came up with the previous plan. Only a fool like yourself would think we cannot possibly improve and that because we failed once we should relieve ourselves of all responsibility. MORONIC THING TO SAY.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35 ...and because our military is spread out so thin, we leave our borders and ports wide open for attack. Our current military empire causes our government to spend 56 billion dollars a year on a wasteful dept. of homeland security which does a poor job doing what our own military is supposed to do. As for Bin Laden? It is highly doubtful he is still lurking in the same area 8 years after 9/11. I've planted my seed. Doesn't look like you and I will agree. I'll give you the final word
corysoulier 1 year ago
@corysoulier
Excuse me. The fully video is here. what i was referencing:
(w3) (dot) youtube (dot) com/watch?v=G7d_e9lrcZ8&feature=related
Learn the history. Ron Pauls only response is to say "well we let genocide happen before why not now" NONSENSE.
Who lives by a standard of "i've failed before so i can never improve"
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35 It was a pleasure sparring you on this issue. Thanks for your input. I promise to watch your video so long as you promise to watch my video on blowback. Just keep in mind who it was that armed Saddam in the first place. Also, study our founding fathers and why they fully supported a non-interventionist foreign policy. Thanks for keeping the argument somewhat civil. Usually when I debate neo-conservatives on this issue, they just spout nonsense like "you liberal". Peace out homie
corysoulier 1 year ago
@corysoulier
As a matter of fact, Our founding fathers did the same as i'm suiggesting. Our FIRST quarrel with the muslim world was in the late 1700's when they were taking american sailors as slaves. When Jefferson went to England to meet the ambassador and ask why they took us as slaves he said "because the Qu'ran gives us the right. you are infidels" to which Jefferson sent in the Navy. Now was that blowback? Learn your history brother.
mots35 1 year ago
@corysoulier
w3 (dot) youtube (dot) com/watch?v=G7d_e9lrcZ8&feature=related
12:23 to end
mots35 1 year ago
Bin Laden has said many things regarding his motives. Regardless of his motive, the bottom line is this: We (the USA) have over 800 military bases in over 100 different countries. That is called military imperialism no matter how much you try to spin it. Bin Laden has used our preemptive invasion of Iraq as a highly effective recruiting tool. Its no wonder the entire muslim world hates us. The problem w/ neo-conservatives is they think we can spread democracy militarily w/out creating blowback
corysoulier 1 year ago
I have never heard of David Cross up until now, and I think he just became my best friend.
"You know why I think that?...Because that is what he fucking said!"
AWESOME!!!!
Hey Guilliani, waging war 101...Know who your enemy is! Do a little thing called research.
corysoulier 1 year ago
@corysoulier
actually, that is not what he said. maybe you should do a little research as well?
the primary reason for the tourist bus bombing in balle, the UN office bombing in Iraq, and the third reason bin laden listed for the 9/11 attacks was that we reversed course on genocide in east timor.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35
and if you don't know what blowback is, I strongly encourage you to google:
The BLOWBACK SYNDROME: Oil Wars and Overreach
corysoulier 1 year ago
@corysoulier
Well as much I consider bin laden to be a credible scholarly resource and an all-around honest gentleman (sarcasm) -- lets test your theory....
What makes muslim fundamentalists attack in Darfur? Is it their imperialism and bases?
What makes them attack austrailian tourists? or unveiled women?
What makes them blow up MOSQUES!! they are the ones destroying mosques. not me. not us.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35 No matter what we as a nation do or don't do overseas there are always going to be radical Muslims who want to destroy our way of life. I can certainly validate the desire to want to take arms and fight overseas. However, the primary objective when fighting an enemy is to decrease their forces. Our preemptive war in Iraq has increased the ranks of terrorism exponentially. Why? Probably b/c our preemptive war has killed over 100,000 Iraqi civilians. Might that anger a few Muslims or two?
corysoulier 1 year ago
@corysoulier
Preemptive? Preemptive really? You cant be serious? You cannot possible be that foolish and be posting it online for all to see. Do you know nothing of Iraq and the years leading up to the invasion?
Well, let me enlighten you.
1) Genocide (a broad stroke but there are too many groups dead to name)
2) violation of non-proliferation
3) giving aide and comfort to known terrorist organizations (abu Nidal, al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia
4) Hostility to neighboring countries
mots35 1 year ago
well the netherlands might be under attack from islam in the future. but the netherlands and the rest of western europe is not the US nor is isreal and it is not in our interest to be tied to either country. hope for the best for both countries. but lets not get americans killed over either
mizzoulibertarian 1 year ago
David Cross is dumb, dumb, dumb.
And as a matter of fact, the Dutch have had many problems with Islam and sharia law being imposed on them as have the Danish (cartoonists!!)
What makes Darfur such a target?
Or unveiled women?
Or homosexuals?
Or Jews?
Or Christians?
Or nonbelievers?
Do you think he'd be allowed to even speak that stand up gig in an islamic country?
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35 no, but he didn't name any islamic countries as being more free than america, so what's your point? he's got a point, that there are plenty of other countries in the world where people live happy, peaceful lives without having to endure oppression of any sort(meaning they are free nations), but those countries are never targeted by the "terrorists," whoever they may be. there are free countries closer to the middle east than america, but the terrorists prefer the distant target?
gardenofskeetn 1 year ago
@gardenofskeetn
I dont think i ever said "they attack us because we are free"
in fact i know i didnt say that because its a bullshit remark.
they attack us because we arent an islamic republic and we refuse to pay jizya(islamic tax).
i will also accept southparks answer:
they cant have sex
they cant masterbate
and there's sand everywhere
mots35 1 year ago
great video, ron paul and david cross make alot of sense as oppossed to anything rudy guiliani said.
groundskeeperwilly3 2 years ago 14
@groundskeeperwilly3 - The correct word would be apposed, not opposed.
wilkja 1 year ago
They rally round the family, with a pocket full of shells.
cokejoke 2 years ago 18
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Let me just say I would be VERY concerned if China was building a facility the size of the Vatican in the Gulf of Mexico... not because they were building something so big, but because they were building it in a body of water.......... DOH
inseeisyou 2 years ago
So Iran wants Nukes to start bombing people. Lets say thats true. They know if they do that they will be turned into a parking lot. So if they wanted to commit global suicide, I think they would just start invading countries , which, is what we do.
hollars1 2 years ago
@hollars1
You aren't dealing with rational people!
They think they are getting 72 virgins! They want to be turned into a parking lot, and take everyone else with them. It's called martyrdom. Look it up. And also look up eschatology.
mots35 2 years ago
Eschatology, the events up to the end of the world. Right, Im aware. However if I was to have just landed on this planet and you asked me which country was trying to start the end , I would look at the US. We are the only country to use nukes on Japan. The whole 72 virgins thing, the bigots need a new talking point, nobodys buying that one anymore. And you mention martyrdom, whats the difference in that and sending some 18 year old kid into a rat hole to die in the name of patriotism?
hollars1 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@hollars1
wow. so thats how far the termites have spread.
so you are saying muslims do not explicitly say that they welcome the end of the world AND 72 VIRGINGS?... they are not actively trying to usher in the apolalypse through martyrs (ie down syndrome girls with backpacks full of explosives)?? Hezbollahs flag is not a picture of a mushroom cloud?? Bin Laden did not say its ever good muslims duty to control nukes?
hmmm.. i must have been mistaken then. .. YOU MASOCHISTIC MORON
mots35 2 years ago
Lol, yes insults, thats usually wear these uneducated rants lead from the right. I wasnt even going to call you out on the whole "...AND 72 VIRGINGS?" thing....by the way Tex, what is a Virging?
hollars1 2 years ago 2
@hollars1
Ha i knew as soon as i posted that, you would have NO ANSWER WHAT SO EVER and would therefore resort to pointing out my typo. predictable....
but in the spirit of pettiness... is it "wear" or where...? moron.
mots35 2 years ago
Still not as funny as you saying Virgings man, thats was pretty funny. I dont think anyone on here is going to change your mindset, so Im gonna step aside and wish you and yours a happy christmas and good new year. Im not going to throw any moron or idiot comments like you did. Anger man, it will consume you.
hollars1 2 years ago
Comment removed
roidz17 1 year ago
@hollars1, hehehe you have won the argument as soon as the opponent makes a reference to the nazis =D
Darusdei 2 years ago
That last sentence is a nice FUCKIN point!! Very well taken!!
lebaneseameer 1 year ago
@hollars1 While I have major issues with the concept of martyrdom, I completely agree with you. What is done, is pumping the head of some retard full of concepts and ideals, give that person a method to destroy and sending him out to murder for someone else. Thats pretty much war, be it with suicide bombs or an airplane.
GnosticAtheist 1 year ago
@hollars1
So to confirm, you would not look at the culture supporting acid attacks, beheadings, stonings, homophobia, misogyny, suicide bombings, sharia law, eschatology, the 12th imam, global jihad, 72 virgins in heaven for martyrdom, civil war, mosque bombings, and genocide in numberous countries...
NO You'd look more at the US huh? sounds like a fool to me.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35 There will always be crazy people that want to destroy instead of build, but they are few. Most people destroy for political reasons. As long as there is intervention in the middle east, the crazy ones are able to recruit and persuade people to do there bidding by giving political reasons. Al qaeda would have very little following if they didnt have actual offenses to preach about. They are our enemies, but our policies only help them recruit. Intervention is making us MORE unsafe.
bclarke3 1 year ago
@bclarke3
Those "few" are 1% of the muslim population. Which translates to 15 million people. not so "few"...
As for recruiting, in 2008 al-Qaeda "recruited" two down syndrome girls, strapped them in explosives, and had them walk into a building; killing 99 people.
They don't need an aggressive foreign policy or ANY foreign policy to commit crimes against humity. They target frustrated and uneducated, and tell them whatever they want... and there is absolutely NO SHORTAGE.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35
You do realise that this region became more radical the more foreign influence was foisted upon them. It was building for a long time. Unfortunately one of the methods that can be used to keep power is religion. It has been harnessed as a bulwark against foreign and especially American interests in the middle East. This monster was created by the Western world.
America as an entity lacks the ability to imagine itself in another position. In your minds always the 'good guy'.
Goobag 1 year ago
@Goobag
There may very well be a large faction of Americans who think as you say, that the US can do no harm. I hope I didn't give you that impression, and I hope the group of extremely intellectual neo-con/struasian philosophers who have the president's ear don't either.
Without conceit for my macro point about islam, I can give you an example of US war crimes: The arming of indonesia leading to the genocide in east timor.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35
That is the problem with the world we inhabit. America is for all intents and purposes the police on an international stage. To push the metaphor a little further they are crooked cops. Both sides are horrible. Post modernism has left us in a place where you can't criticise religion but the truth is those lunatic clerics are also unfit to lead and stunting progress (intellectual and otherwise) in their own countries. It's an energy consuming position to think both sides are twats.
Goobag 1 year ago
@Goobag
I don't necessarily disagree with you conceptually, though that isnt the way I'd choose to word it.
What I know, and what I'm never willing to capitulate from is: Western civilization, democracy, rule of law; is better than islam, theocracy, and sharia. This is not just a culturally relative view. MORALLY/HUMANLY one is better.
The theocratic group is at odds with democratic society, and while US/western world may not be perfect; its a hell of a lot better than its alternatives.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35
I think we are basically on the same page. I think most religions are used to keep people in line (Islam especially) but they are always open to interpretation. The Qur'an contradicts itself in may places much as the bible does. It must therefore be interpreted. It is an ideology. Any ideology no matter how pure and noble it's end goals are, can be subverted. The people who follow choose how closely to adhere to it. In it's ideal form Western civilisation is far better to my mind.
Goobag 1 year ago
@Goobag
Right. I think the tide shifted for me when theo van gogh was murdered and the threats were made to danish cartoonist (& most recently the Southpark episodes).
That was a direct assult against one of the few things that is intrinsically good; the cornerstone of civilizations and western democracies. For a group to try to reach out and strip freedom of expression based on a religion's feeling of entitlement to never be criticized must never be allowed.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35
One of the downsides of radicalising a section of the populace is they demand extremes. Surely someone high up realises in the long run that killing artists in Europe is going to turn people against them. The kind of people who would have shown sympathy to their cause in the past. It has only hurt their cause. Purely from an objective stand point it's baffling. But that goes back to what I said about common sense and religion only having occasional meetings.
Goobag 1 year ago
@Goobag
Well thats the point isnt it? These people dont have a rational self interest in their own self preservation and survival. Thats why they say "we" are weak. We dont see the beauty of death.
Well, don't because I'm not religious. I rather like this one life I have.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35
True enough.In my mental list of groups (that I shouldn't have because it's not pc) that need to shut up and fuck off fundamentalist muslims are right up top. Next are Christians. As annoying as they are they are just less dangerous. Culturally their impact is quite negative but there's a steep difference between trying to smother science and suicide bombing. Lesser of two evils, as funny as that sounds considering the subject matter.
Goobag 1 year ago
@Goobag
Precisely. Just look at the difference in how apostasy is handled.
In an islamic republic it means death. That epitomizes what you were referring to when you talk about forced control and these regimes trying to retain power.
I appreciate this conversation. Judging by your use of "s" and "z" you are from across the pond?
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35
I'm from Ireland. I know it seems like I'm purely anti American but I am more scathing about my own country. America is far more relevant internationally though and that's why the foreign policies worry/anger me so much. It is very difficult to imagine what Ireland could do internationally that could have a far reaching effect. That is a good thing too judging by the fuckwits we have running the country.
As a youtube conversation this is pleasant far too often it just name calling.
Goobag 1 year ago
@Goobag
Yes, the routine argument I seem to run into on these Ron Paul / libertarian videos is NOT the point you make (can we trust the people running the intervention to do so appropriately), a worthy one I might add.... but rather the contrary of your concern. That is "why are we nation building? who cares if they are destabilized?"
I can't think they know much about the way the US left Afghanistan after the soviet invasion & how important it is not to abandon the incapable. Thoughts?
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35
I agree with you. As distasteful as the situation is to leave now would be morally reprehensible. Despite how badly it has been executed and how hugely expensive the whole enterprise has been it is too late to leave. It would create a much worse situation than the previous one. Regardless of how effective his economic policies may be (admittedley I don't know that much about them), America and it's allies must stay there for the long haul..
Goobag 1 year ago
@Goobag
I used to be a big fan of his economic ideas. But not so sure now. Its no doubt a hugely expensive endeavour removing religious radicals and installing a make-shift democracy. But it also should be obvious that a democratized, rational middle east would be an economic boom the likes of which we have never seen. The resources should have never been controlled by psychopathic crime families, but rather the people of the countries wanting to embark on free trade.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35
I agree and in a perfect world that would be the case. If there was a purely altrusitic intent behind the whole thing I'd have to find a new hobby instead of being cynical. My hobby seems safe for now. A powerful and rational democracy in the area would be difficult to control too. That being said when the government is installed even as a puppet government if it improves the peoples lot it would be progress. From there more can hopefully be achieved.
Goobag 1 year ago
@Goobag
I'm not so sure. For that to hold up, you'd have to prove to me the following:
-that women dont like equal rights
-that people dont want a say in their gov
-that they dont feel dissonance in moments of religious hypocrisy
-that freedom of expression and thought isnt a sought after principle
I submit they want all these things, but it will take regime change for them to take root. coversation must be allowed for the religion to be expelled. and religion is the problem.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35
The way to win people over is through example. That is a difficult method though.
The less employed method is 'killing the opposition with kindness'. You catch more flies with honey as they say. If everybody in the middle East had the equivalent of a middle class lifestyle they'd be too busy paying off loans on landrovers and interior decorators to blow anything up. Nothing makes people more docile than cash. Our own countries are evidence. When things are good people are quiet.
Goobag 1 year ago
@Goobag
They do, after all, hold a monopoly on the violence. They regime goes out of its way to show them at all times who's boss. I doubt very much freedom FROM religion can take root in that sort of vacuum. Possibly in Iran, but in a race against the theocracy going nuclear.
But to your last point, NO, i have no interest in "killing jihadists wioth kindness" and niether should you. Its a losing proposition, one they'd like you to adopt, so they can go about their plans. No Thanks.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35
The last comment was written with humourous intent. Youtube comments only allow for brevity and tone of voice is also obviously lost. It's the main reason it's so difficult to get someone to change their opinions through youtube. Your previous points are valid but I would say there are large numbers of people who are okay with being herded to a certain extent and many that are okay with just the illusion of choice.
Goobag 1 year ago
@Goobag
No doubt about that. A large cross section of people would prefer to be without their minds, welcome serfdom, etc. Its our cultural project to raise them up.
Agreed. Great speaking with you.
mots35 1 year ago
@mots35
It's how you're raised and what societal norms you are used to. If a women grows up somewhere that treats women as second class citizens but never has an example of how they should be treated can she hope for more? Your upbringing shapes your expectations.
I'm not saying you're definitely wrong because that area of study is huge and hotly debated. I could just as easily be wrong. Perhaps there is an innate desire in humans for equality.
Anyways I have digressed.It's a been a pleasure.
Goobag 1 year ago
@mots35
Cont
It is in theory possible that an open minded religious figure could lead just as well as any politician and Sharia law could be used in conjunction with common sense. That is only theory however. Common sense and religion rarely associate. I personally rather your standard politician. Greed is a simple motive and can be predicted somewhat. The zealots are much more unbending and harder to handle.
Goobag 1 year ago
@mots35 continued
There are degrees of wrong. That is for us to ponder over youtube comments. If you live in Afghanistan or Iraq you may not have the luxury of deciding who of the two sides is the worst before you're killed.
The fundamentalists are insane enough to take their religion to ridiculous lengths and always seem to interpret it in the nastiest way.
The West will plunder their resources and de-stabilise governments if given the chance.
The whole thing is a gigantic clusterfuck.
Goobag 1 year ago
@Goobag Contd
Bin Ladens manifesto lists this as the #3 charge against the west and a primary reason for 9/11. Not the arming, but because the US recognized the genocide tried to reverse course it.
So, if you want to avoid upsetting these people, your foreign policy better not include stopping genocide (even though we are a named member of the genocide convention).
Well, I don't much care about the jihadist opinion. It should not/ would not change my course of action one bit.
mots35 1 year ago
I say arm those little nations with nukes, so that Americans cannot intervene with means of military enforcement. Nobody is going to fuck with a nation with nukes, and using nukes against another nation with nukes is just as retarded, unless they're keen to head into a nuclear ice age. Fuck America and their shitty foreign policies, I want European countries like Sweden in power of the world over the USA.
tr1ppn 2 years ago
@tr1ppn
You clearly know nothing on the subject. Iran does want nuclear weapons to detonate them immediately...
In fact, you can see it daily now. Hezbollah, who recieves its financial support from Iran, has a mushroom cloud as its symbol boasted on their party's flag.
so yes they are "keen to head into a nuclear ice age"
mots35 2 years ago
Where are you getting your sources from ?
tr1ppn 2 years ago
You're a moron.
milpoolXXX 2 years ago
No, seriously.
milpoolXXX 2 years ago
so true.. how much money does he stand to make as the "spokesperson of patriotism", just because he "lived through the attack of Sept. 11th".. which he didn't.. that's to say bush lived through the Pentagon attack.. yeah it was near him, but seriously didn't affect him physically
jelliott0222 2 years ago
Rudy is such a tool. What a colossal bitch.
visualkei72 2 years ago 5
Just saw Cross in Milwaukee . . . best show I have seen in a decade
obrientube 2 years ago 10
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This interview is interesting considering that Paul openly said informally that he did not trust the 911 commission report and that he knew the entire event was orchestrated by the U.S. Just shows how that even sincere and decent politicians like Paul have to cover their asses on tv.
vaporarrows 2 years ago
Bullshit!!! Provide the link to whatever website you read that on. Ron Paul never said that 9/11 was orchestrated by the U.S. That shit would be ALL OVER THE MEDIA if he really said it. The 9/11 Truthers would make him into their fucking spokesperson. Nice try.
eomk 2 years ago 2
The only thing safe to say is this: 9/11 was an excuse
RazielKain 2 years ago
THANK YOU DAVID CROSS, your a saint (im an athiest just a figure of speech)
FuckOppression 2 years ago 9
fuck guiliani and fuck all those people who claped when the guy said are you suggesting we invited 9/11... WE FUCKING DID WAKE THE FUCK UP. the bush admin lied to us and thats why were in Iraq! ther is no tie between9/11 or weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Eat your hearts out dumbass Conservatives
FuckOppression 2 years ago 2
i LOVE how your sn is "FuckOppression" yet you are appearantly okay with the oppression of the iraqi people under saddam? hypocrisy at its finest.
mots35 2 years ago
you know what i love? i love how people like you pull words out of your ass and try to stuff them in other people's mouths.
wachman 2 years ago
how did i stuff words in his mouth?
mots35 2 years ago
Saddam was a CIA asset turned villain, a familiar story in US foreign policy. he disobeyed washington,- that's why he was taken out, not to save the iraqi's. how can you claim to be liberating a people you've killed 2 million of since 1991? not gonna fly here old man.
rohaynes1 2 years ago
lets see some evidence of that. That WE killed 2 million innocents. prove that statement.
That fact is we have the technology to have leveled iraq without a single US casually, but instead we trained an army to hunt down and kill jihadist. a duty in my opinion
mots35 2 years ago
It wasn't a service to not level Iraq. Jesus...do you think before you speak?
Choosing to not completely destroy a country and annihilate it's people is basic human decency and is the very least we should have done in the situation.
xsomexcrazyxmofox 2 years ago
Basic human decency, Correct! and speaks to the humanitarian principles to which we approached this war. so does liberating people from oppression. you prove my point. two actions which prove a genuine humanitarian stance over a self preservation one
mots35 2 years ago
Maybe you missed my point on the human decency thing. It is not to be applauded that we hit a fork in the road and decided against genocide.
I think we both know that the claim that we waged war to liberate people from oppression is bullshit. Why is no action taken in Darfur if our objective is to liberate the oppressed? Don't get me wrong, I'm glad Saddam is gone because he was a bad man but the government lied to us when they said this war was for the liberation of the people.
xsomexcrazyxmofox 2 years ago
@xsomexcrazyxmofox
Well, actually the neo-cons in washington did urge the govt to do something to stop the genocide.
But we didnt do that. We said we would be non-interventionalists, handle it diplomatically, talk it out, and the killers used up the time, and now there is no one left to save. And somehow you can site that example and still come to the erroneous conclusion that ron paul supports that we should have let iraq rot for longer or that we should let iran get nukes. RIDICULOUS
mots35 2 years ago
Look, I'm not saying Ron Paul is trying to save the people of the world I'm just saying that Bush danced from one excuse to another and his reasoning that we went in to save the Iraqis is false. That's not why we went in. Two wars start after 9/11 and members of his cabinet and his vice president are co-authors of the PNAC? Sounds suspicious to me.
xsomexcrazyxmofox 2 years ago
@xsomexcrazyxmofox
Who cares what reason he chose? the FACT is it was the right move AND he had a myriad good of reasons to choose from. I'M OKAY WITH HIM SITING DIFFERENT ONES!
And I'm not so sure a great deal of his reasoning didnt involve liberating Iraqis. I'm not so sure how you claim to have perseptive powers that I don't, but anyone who claims with such certainty to know the unknowable... i'm very skeptical of.
mots35 2 years ago
You're ok with him unsure which lie he should stick with then? I have to ask, did you read the PNAC?
I call those perceptive powers thinking. Whether I'm right or wrong that's what the evidence points to. Bush never was that good with the press or the approval of the people so maybe he did have noble intentions but chose to keep trying to find that magic reason that would appease us.
xsomexcrazyxmofox 2 years ago
@xsomexcrazyxmofox
not which lie. There were perfectly legitimate, valid, truthful reasons to go in. Why do you insist on making such a cheap analysis of this? why dismiss a threat as nothing when its glaring you in the face?
As it happens we have a similiar problem on the horizon. Iran is getting closer to possessing nukes. Would you allow that? or would you accept the consequences of saying NO you cant have them?
mots35 2 years ago
Well you failed to answer me. Have you read the PNAC?
As for Iran, I don't see anything wrong with them trying to build nukes under the CURRENT global situation. Imagine for a minute that the United States was the country trying to develop nukes and all these countries that despise the US and have nukes are telling us not to build them. Are we going to listen? Of course not. All nations need to band together and destroy all nuclear weapons, including Iran.
xsomexcrazyxmofox 2 years ago
There is something wrong with Ahmadinejad getting nuclear weapons. I'm sorry. That is a MORONIC thing to say. Maybe you would like to live in a boardering country once they have them? We know what Ahmadinejad would do if he got a nuke. A theocrat, holocaust denier. How can you know so little about this topic??? You show off your naivety making such a stupid statement.
The Project for a new Amer Cent. made the right call on Iraq for the many reasons i listed below.
mots35 2 years ago
Time after time you fail to see my point. I was saying going to war with Iran is not going to help any more than our negotiations are working right now. If we go to war with them what are they going to want to build? Strong weapons.
The PNAC is as near fascist as you can get in a democracy.
xsomexcrazyxmofox 2 years ago
No. You fail to see my point. We can do as you suggest, ask nicely, and watch as they eventually get a bomb and then dictate orders to us and the surrounding countries.
OR we can say, NO the day will never dawn when you have a nuke, and demolish their nuclear facilities via air strikes and accept the probable consequences of saying that an irrational theocratic dictator.
You dont have to like your options, but you have to ask yourself, which would be worse?
mots35 2 years ago
Again, not what I said. I didn't suggest that. I suggested nuclear disarmament on a global scale. If nobody has any nuclear weapons then it becomes a lot easier to tell who is making them for aggressive purposes. If everyone were disarming their weapons and Iran were building theirs I would agree that military actions may be necessary but right now its a toss up. Are they building them because they feel threatened or because they intend to threaten?
xsomexcrazyxmofox 2 years ago
the US has them, status-quo fact, and do not want to use them.
Iran has stated they want one so that they can immediately detonate it.
Please recognize the difference.
mots35 2 years ago
I don't believe our government has any moral opposition to using them (we still use DU rounds) we are just held to higher standards.
And if that is true that does change things but I had not heard that before. And I'd need to hear it from somebody that doesn't make up their "facts" (such as Glenn Beck, Micheal Savage etc.)
xsomexcrazyxmofox 2 years ago
Jeeezzz, well there is your problem. You just need to do a bit more research :). I'll help you get started...
Named party leaders swore on a stack of Qur'ans that they dont want nukes. Right after tearing up every treaty they have ever signed and later punctuated by Ahmadinejad who admitted "this to vindicates our nuclear program"... woops, slip of the tongue...
mots35 2 years ago
BUT DONT TAKE IT FROM ME....
watch?v=inmGbd3Nx1w
and certainly not glenn beck
mots35 2 years ago
And also, stop going on about Ahmadinejad being a holocaust denier... lol. He doesn't deny it, he believes that the holocaust was blown out of proportion contradictory of the 6-8 million deaths of the jews.
tr1ppn 2 years ago
Comment removed
mots35 2 years ago
@rohaynes1
i agree with your point almost in its entirety concerning the previous policy from 1991 when we had saddam on his heels on to 2000. But am i to take it that you see no difference between that and the policy of the last decade? you would have to be a complete FOOL to be making such a statement.
mots35 2 years ago