Amazing Ron Paul Ad

[Dagless]

 

[MustafaMc]

It is hard to believe that a candidate for the US presidency would have the courage to say what is obvious, but no one is ready to admit publicly without being declared a traitor.

 

[Roasted Cashew]

If only, if ONLY they elect this man.....that would be a great day INDEED!:rock:

 

[Ramadhan]

Great ad!

But the establishment will try their hardest to derail him and ppush him off the cliff.

 

[جوري]

They're already calling people who endorse him openly 'racists and homophobic' .. they're happiest I guess with their cash and gas coming from blood money while professing to uphold freedoms they don't actually have and are keen robbing others of...

 

[Cabdullahi]

he will have to change his views if he becomes president

 

[Dagless]

he will have to change his views if he becomes president

That's just it; he almost certainly won't. That's what most of the rich guys are scared of and why he gets no coverage. He's been saying the same stuff since the 80s. I think the only thing he's changed his mind on since then is the death penalty.

 

[IslamicRevival]

This has to be one of the best videos ive seen. Ron Paul is a brave man, very very brave.

 

[Gator]

Well, if Texas had no functioning government and an insurgent force that was killing far more civilians than the chinese troops, and that if the insurgents gained power to impose a brutal totalitarian theocracy, and knowing that the Chinese would leave if things settled down, I would have no problem with Chinese troops in Texas.


Plus the ad is also flawed becasue, um well let me see, Obama pulled the troops out of Iraq.

 

[Dagless]

Well, if Texas had no functioning government and an insurgent force that was killing far more civilians than the chinese troops, and that if the insurgents gained power to impose a brutal totalitarian theocracy, and knowing that the Chinese would leave if things settled down, I would have no problem with Chinese troops in Texas.

The government was not functioning because they removed it and then decided to stay for almost a decade! What about Pakistan? Yemen? Saudi? and everywhere else there are bases.

Plus the ad is also flawed becasue, um well let me see, Obama pulled the troops out of Iraq.

Not really. There are still military bases all over Iraq, not to mention the thousands of "contractors" there who are not bound by any laws. What about Afghanistan?

 

[جوري]

Well, if Texas had no functioning government and an insurgent force that was killing far more civilians than the chinese troops, and that if the insurgents gained power to impose a brutal totalitarian theocracy, and knowing that the Chinese would leave if things settled down, I would have no problem with Chinese troops in Texas.


Plus the ad is also flawed becasue, um well let me see, Obama pulled the troops out of Iraq.

People who have lived side by side for millenniums not ever having paid attention to 'national identity' all of a sudden at each other's throats takes a little creative directing from an outside force, have a read at Robert Fisk's the World through Syrian lens.
Secondly Sharia'a isn't a totalitarian theocracy .. perhaps when you're studied in sharia can you come and discuss in which ways it is until then I get rather bored with inane platitudes that are being peddled by the ignorant (yourself included) of something they haven't the slightest clue about.
and um, let's see America pulled its troops with a vatican size 'embassy, black water mercenaries and managed to instate a corrupt Shiite president over a sunni majority, he's already hurling accusations at the sunni vice president.. so their divide and conquer is very much alive and well.. encouraging the kurds to get their own country, ironically killing the Kurds who don't who don't subscribe to nationalism and generally left it dirt poor, with 20% of its population below poverty line supported by women whose husbands were killed at the hands of animalistic debauched voyeurs from the American army so now they're either left to beg or prostitute..
And you have the audacity to write here and not be remotely embarrassed at the level of ignorance and racism you display?

indeed will wonders ever cease!

best,

 

[Gator]

The government was not functioning because they removed it and then decided to stay for almost a decade! What about Pakistan? Yemen? Saudi? and everywhere else there are bases.?

Iraq was wrong. I didn't want to go in, I was against it, I thought it would go badly. But once we were in, I believe we couldn't just pick up and leave. The bloodbath that would have ensued had we left in 2004 or 2006 would have be a disaster.

Pakistan: Let's say the US had a region (Texas) that was not under control of any sort, harbored a large horrific theocratically motivated insurgency that not only threatened a neighboring state, but threatened the US. Do you think that I would have a problem with the Chinese sending drones to kill them? No.

Saudi: There is no troop presence in Saudi Arabia. Are you saying that the Saudis don't have a functioning government, is occupied by a huge american army which is patrolling the streets?

Yemem: There is no large troop presence in Yemen. See above.

Not really. There are still military bases all over Iraq, not to mention the thousands of "contractors" there who are not bound by any laws. What about Afghanistan?

Um are you saying that there is still military bases all over Iraq, with a large american force still stationed in them?

The Contractors are bound by Iraqi laws as the SOF agreement has ended. There are few of them with more than half truck drivers and food preparers.

There's a scheduled pullout from Afghanistan in place.

The bottom line is the US has left Iraq and will leave Afghanistan.

 

[جوري]

Iraq was wrong. I didn't want to go in, I was against it, I thought it would go badly. But once we were in, I believe we couldn't just pick up and leave. The bloodbath that would have ensued had we left in 2004 or 2006 would have be a disaster.

Really? How do you figure?
Survey ..................Violent deaths .....Excess deaths
ILCS .................... 180,000
Lancet 1 ..............400,000 ..................580,000
IFHS .....................350,000 ..................840,000
Lancet 2 ..............1,370,000 ..............1,480,000
ORB .....................1,370,000

http://archive.truthout.org/how-many-iraqis-did-we-liberate-from-life-earth62112
those are the stats with the U.S in.. of course with a carte blanche to kill scholars and scientists!

Pakistan: Let's say the US had a region (Texas) that was not under control of any sort, harbored a large horrific theocratically motivated insurgency that not only threatened a neighboring state, but threatened the US. Do you think that I would have a problem with the Chinese sending drones to kill them? No.

We don't peddle in American concocted theories when it comes to human life unless of course you're the U.S.. obviously the U.S created the whole WMD fiasco for their own self-interest. There are no borders between Muslims, those are western created and imposed and every attempt to reunite has been nipped in the bud by foreign mercenaries.

Saudi: There is no troop presence in Saudi Arabia. Are you saying that the Saudis don't have a functioning government, is occupied by a huge american army which is patrolling the streets?

It doesn't have to be patrolled in the very literal sense-- willful ignorance or just under-educated in the art of war?

Yemem: There is no large troop presence in Yemen. See above.

What was your 'American ambassador' doing in Yemen when the people marched bare foot to protest your pawn Saleh? let me quote pls.
''calling the Taiz march a provocative act, shortly before troops opened fire on protesters''
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/29/us-yemen-saleh-immunity-idUSTRE7BS0M420111229

your see above is an epic fail as is everything you write!

Um are you saying that there is still military bases all over Iraq, with a large american force still stationed in them?

How exactly would you view it, in your uber strategic mind?

The Contractors are bound by Iraqi laws as the SOF agreement has ended. There are few of them with more than half truck drivers and food preparers.

And that showed brilliantly before when food was being dispensed with bombs all the same.
http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1030-11.htm

There's a scheduled pullout from Afghanistan in place.

Do get back to us with that one and let's know how successful that was!

The bottom line is the US has left Iraq and will leave Afghanistan.

The bottom line is your full of it and have no place discussing politics..

best,

 

[Dagless]

Iraq was wrong. I didn't want to go in, I was against it, I thought it would go badly. But once we were in, I believe we couldn't just pick up and leave.

Of course they should have picked up and left. Who are they to tell people what type of government to have or how to live? If anyone should have helped it should have been the Arab league, not the people who invaded and killed people.

The bloodbath that would have ensued had we left in 2004 or 2006 would have be a disaster.

Phew, you sure avoided that landmine.

Pakistan: Let's say the US had a region (Texas) that was not under control of any sort, harbored a large horrific theocratically motivated insurgency that not only threatened a neighboring state, but threatened the US. Do you think that I would have a problem with the Chinese sending drones to kill them? No.

It has a population and is under control just fine. Are you saying Pakistan don't have a government? How is it an insurgency when it is Pakistani's living in Pakistan? How did it threaten the US? You can't just go around bombing people you "think" maybe a threat. If you have no problem with Chinese drones killing your own people on your own soil then that's your shortcoming.

Saudi: There is no troop presence in Saudi Arabia. Are you saying that the Saudis don't have a functioning government, is occupied by a huge american army which is patrolling the streets?

Yemem: There is no large troop presence in Yemen. See above.

Occupation is of many forms. Bombing Yemen from US bases inside Yemen is no different from soldiers shooting people. Just because it's done via remote control doesn't make it somehow legitimate.

Um are you saying that there is still military bases all over Iraq, with a large american force still stationed in them?

I don't know the exact number but there are meant to be 2 US bases which will be manned (so yes I suppose someone is there to man them) not to mention a few thousand troops in Kuwait who are ready to go back in if there are problems. They are planning on staying there for a few months.

The Contractors are bound by Iraqi laws as the SOF agreement has ended.

Nothing will happen to them. They don't have the man power to go about arresting contractors for random murders.

There are few of them with more than half truck drivers and food preparers.

Yes, if there's one thing Iraq doesn't have it's truck drivers and food preparers. Lucky the US stepped in.

There's a scheduled pullout from Afghanistan in place.

The bottom line is the US has left Iraq and will leave Afghanistan.

Yeah there is also a scheduled closing of Guantamo Bay too I'm sure. Saying something will eventually happen doesn't right a wrong. They need to pull out immediately. Anything less is an empty promise.

 

[Gator]

The differences on how we view the world and how it works, is kind of why I don't support Ron Paul.

Paul comes of as very honest and non-comprimising, which is what I think he is. He is definitely passionate and is outside of the political machine here in the US. I like his views of non-interventionism and not getting into wars and his support of the Palestinian cause.

But SOME of his views and policies, especially the economic and social ones, would be seriously detrimental. You can see it in the commercial above as some of its premises are wrong, some in fact and some in my opinion, and the resultant policy is incorrect.

Thanks.

 

[Roasted Cashew]

Do you think that I would have a problem with the Chinese sending drones to kill them? No

The drones kill innocent civilians and are counter productive..For every one experienced terrorist you kill, you give birth to 10 more. You provide fuel for radicals and extremists with such arrogant disregard for collateral damage. And btw, this insurgency started when the United States dragged Pakistan in to this war OF terror.

 

[Dagless]

The differences on how we view the world and how it works, is kind of why I don't support Ron Paul.

Paul comes of as very honest and non-comprimising, which is what I think he is. He is definitely passionate and is outside of the political machine here in the US. I like his views of non-interventionism and not getting into wars and his support of the Palestinian cause.

But SOME of his views and policies, especially the economic and social ones, would be seriously detrimental. You can see it in the commercial above as some of its premises are wrong, some in fact and some in my opinion, and the resultant policy is incorrect.

Thanks.

Similar to your differing views with people here too (like me) but I suppose as long as we agree on no more killing it should all work out just fine. This is why I really like the way he's managed to get "love" into the message too, because it's just the complete opposite of what's been going on so far.

He supports equality. He didn't say he would hinder Israel; just that he would let them do what they wanted and face the consequences of their actions. There is no need for US support.

Whether you agree with his other policies or not you need to look at the alternatives. Have no doubt those guys will sell out to the highest bidder.

 

[Gator]

The drones kill innocent civilians and are counter productive..For every one experienced terrorist you kill, you give birth to 10 more. You provide fuel for radicals and extremists with such arrogant disregard for collateral damage. And btw, this insurgency started when the United States dragged Pakistan in to this war OF terror.

Sometimes they do and that is horrible. But then again the drones have been pretty effective against these groups staging attacks elsewhere and killing many more civilians. And not just killing civilians by going after foreign troops, but deliberately targeting civilians. Which you obviously have no problem with.

Also, these guys didn't come out of nowhere. They have been an instrument of terror by the pakistani govt for decades. But I guess for you as long as they kill only indians and non-muslims that's ok.

Anyway, on a constructive note, I would say everyone should map out a policy the US should pursue and then detail the outcome and results of that strategy (what happens in Afghanistan, to the people, the Taliban, Pakistan, etc.). That would be really interesting.

 

[Gator]

Similar to your differing views with people here too (like me) but I suppose as long as we agree on no more killing it should all work out just fine. This is why I really like the way he's managed to get "love" into the message too, because it's just the complete opposite of what's been going on so far.

He supports equality. He didn't say he would hinder Israel; just that he would let them do what they wanted and face the consequences of their actions. There is no need for US support.

Whether you agree with his other policies or not you need to look at the alternatives. Have no doubt those guys will sell out to the highest bidder.

Yeah, but where is the Alqeda Ron Paul? or the Taliban Ron Paul? Who would say, alright let's stop the fighting and sit down at the table and get a peace plan together.

I put forward again, I would like to see the ideas about what people think is the right course of action and detail the impacts of those ideas.

 

[جوري]

I would like to see the ideas about what people think is the right course of action

Neither America nor Israel wants peace.. It is against the law to purge Jerusalem of its identity yet nearly 150+ new colonies are being built and Palestinians attacked daily under the name of 'terrorism' even though everyone knows they're civilians.. You don't see that on your 10 o'clock news do you?
Now question yourself of western interest in the region say before those awful 'talibans' and awful 'al'qaeda' came into the scene? What was British interest in Afghanistan for instance in the 1800's? which if I may state the obvious they had their ass kicked.. or the Russian interest after that? or the American interest in Iraq with the first Bush admin before those awful cave dwellers brought down WTC 7 by huffing & puffing?

if you buy into the whole 'war on terrorism' thing I pity you.. the only thing that will likely to happen is a WWIII and I think it is the only way they can rid themselves of their despotic regime and of the cancerous presence of America its poodles and the puppet master Israel..

best,