The Ron Paul Chronicles

[Optional]

Quote from Trader666:

I'm all for these to some extent but to the right extent, whatever that is. But I don't know and neither does Ron Paul. He's already said he'd overrule his generals. That would be his prerogative as commander-in-chief but he shouldn't do that unless he knows better and he does NOT. If he were wise he'd give guidance and ask them to come back and tell him how they recommend doing what he wants and the potential consequences although there will always be unforeseen ones. To keep them honest he could form a team of retired military who share his views whose job is to sharpshoot and ensure he gets both sides. That wouldn't go over well but it would go over better than summarily overruling commanders on the ground.

No one man on the planet has a clue which troops can be brought home and which countries it is in the best interests of the United States to "meddle" with politically, economically, or militarily without first getting the best objective input available... and even then it's only a best guess because there are so many variables and potential consequences.

Your concerns are logical. No one know anything 100%. If they did they would be traders and not politicians. But we should follow the law and the law is clear.

 

[pspr]

Ron Paul 3rd in Iowa. Not that it matters. Santorum leads Romney buy less than 100 votes with 93% counted.

 

[Optional]

Quote from pspr:

Ron Paul 3rd in Iowa. Not that it matters. Santorum leads Romney buy less than 100 votes with 93% counted.

2 liberals. Vying for the Republican Iowa Caucus. Amazing!
Conservative 3rd.
I think it's clear what is going on in this country.

 

[Trader666]

What specifically within the context of what we were talking about did you have in mind?

Quote from Optional:

But we should follow the law and the law is clear.

 

[377OHMS]

Quote from AK Forty Seven:

Other then Romney Paul polls best against Obama.Paul is the only candidate that will take democrat votes from Obama

Who would you vote for in a general election between Paul and Obama?

 

[rew]

Let's fact check that devastating "anti-Paul" video.

Is the Council on Foreign Relations very powerful and influential? Yup. Pretty much anybody who's anybody in Washington, D.C. is in it, as are numerous corporate leaders and academics:

http://www.cfr.org/about/membership/roster.html

Every other country on Earth that had slavery ended it without a civil war. So Ron Paul is right, there were better ways to end slavery than to fight a civil war that resulted in 600,000 American deaths.

Did Israel encourage the creation of Hamas? Israeli official Avner Cohen says so:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123275572295011847.html

We did indeed bomb Iraq for years before 9/11 (throughout the Clinton administration) and the sanctions did result in thousands of Iraqi deaths. Bin Laden did list that as one of the reasons for his attack on our country.

We attacked Iraq, which had no nuclear weapons. We are threatening to attack Iran, which at present has no nuclear weapons. On the other hand, we treat North Korea with much more circumspection, and don't attack them, despite their being ruled by a cruel dictator who starves his own people. North Korea has some crude nukes.

So, yes, Iran might well conclude that they'd get more respect from the U.S. if they had a few nukes of their own.

Ron Paul 100. Jon Huntsman 0.

 

[Trader666]

Actually I put it up because I'm a Twilight Zone fan and thought it might start some interesting conversations.

But let me correct your bottom line:

Ron Paul: 0 chance of becoming president, Jon Huntsman: 0 chance.

Quote from rew:

Let's fact check that devastating "anti-Paul" video.

Is the Council on Foreign Relations very powerful and influential? Yup. Pretty much anybody who's anybody in Washington, D.C. is in it, as are numerous corporate leaders and academics:

http://www.cfr.org/about/membership/roster.html

Every other country on Earth that had slavery ended it without a civil war. So Ron Paul is right, there were better ways to end slavery than to fight a civil war that resulted in 600,000 American deaths.

Did Israel encourage the creation of Hamas? Israeli official Avner Cohen says so:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123275572295011847.html

We did indeed bomb Iraq for years before 9/11 (throughout the Clinton administration) and the sanctions did result in thousands of Iraqi deaths. Bin Laden did list that as one of the reasons for his attack on our country.

We attacked Iraq, which had no nuclear weapons. We are threatening to attack Iran, which at present has no nuclear weapons. On the other hand, we treat North Korea with much more circumspection, and don't attack them, despite their being ruled by a cruel dictator who starves his own people. North Korea has some crude nukes.

So, yes, Iran might well conclude that they'd get more respect from the U.S. if they had a few nukes of their own.

Ron Paul 100. Jon Huntsman 0.

 

[Optional]

Quote from Trader666:

What specifically within the context of what we were talking about did you have in mind?

The Constitution states clearly and eloquently how we should deal with situations like Iran. Everyone needs to pick it up and read it.

 

[AK Forty Seven]

Quote from 377OHMS:

Who would you vote for in a general election between Paul and Obama?

Paul

 

[Ricter]

Quote from AK Forty Seven:

Paul

To me this defies understanding, unless it's not sincere and is actually an attempt to shed the Obama-no-matter-what label some around hear think you wear.