Thursday, May 24, 2007

Ron Paul was right on Iraq - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

Ron Paul was right on Iraq - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review Hearing Rep. Ron Paul recite the reasons for Arab and Islamic resentment of the United States, including 10 years of bombing and sanctions that brought death to thousands of Iraqis after the Gulf War, Rudy Giuliani broke format and exploded:

'That's really an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of 9/11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I have ever heard that before, and I have heard some pretty absurd explanations for Sept. 11.'
Meanwhile, what is this I hear about the USA and its small band of war hungry Rs in the White House doing with Iran? They (with CIA help) are going to mess with their currency. Say what!


Tom said...

Ron Paul sent a list of reading material to Rudy Guiliani, according to a Reuters article. Below is a portion of article and reason number 1,765,873 that Ron Paul less of a chance to win the Republican Nomination as the frozen head of Richard Nixon.


Paul barely registers in opinion polls of Republicans hoping to win their party's nomination to contest the November 2008 presidential election.

An obstetrician-gynecologist from the Houston area, Paul frequently strays far outside the Republican mainstream.

He voted against the Iraq war resolution in 2002 and has proposed abolishing the Homeland Security Department and diminishing the Federal Reserve. His 1988 bid for president as the Libertarian candidate drew just slightly more than 400,000 votes nationwide.

Politics 2.0 Blog said...

See also:

Ron Paul assigns Giuliani homework - CNN

Major Political Site TechPresident Article: The Rise of Ron Paul

NPR - Dark Horse Paul Runs Well on the Web

Ron Paul Web Traffic Surging Again!, Increases Web Traffic Lead on Obama, Etc.

By Rep. Ron Paul - On Patriotism - May 24, 2007

Thomas Leturgey said...

The truly funny thing is Ron Paul is a Republican. Unless Mark switches parties, he can't even vote for him.

And heaven only knows how all of these "anonymous" Ron Paul fans are Republicans, able to vote.

Me, a proud GOP dude who's most likely going to vote for Rudy.

Tom said...

Ron Paul is apparently a rude, arrogant ass. The Republican equivalent of John Murtaha

EdHeath said...

Well, first, it is not so much the Trib saying Mr. Paul was right as it was Pat Buchanan saying that. FWIW. But his take sounds very much like what I understand to be the case, that Bin Laden was reacting to Americans in Saudi Arabia and American support for Israel. I hadn't heard that Bin Laden was sympathetic to Iraq, but he surely could have been.

Jonathan Potts said...

First of all, I'm trying to figure out how a supporter of Guiliani can call another candidate rude and arrogant. I mean, those are Guiliani's defining characteristics, and I don't say that as a criticism of what he accomplished in New York. It's a statement on his personality.

Second, there is a difference between trying to explain a horrible act and trying to excuse a horrible act. I thought that five years after 9/11 we could finally have a reasonable conversation about our Middle Eastern policies and the proper response to terrorism, but I guess I was wrong.

Thomas Leturgey said...

You are talking about the Middle East, a region when compared to the relative sophistication of the West, is a land of lunatics. I thought there would be a moment of peace 30 years ago with the Peace Accord, but that was only a blip on the radar screen.

Not all of the Middle East is murderous monsters, but they are the headline grabbers.

My argument is a nobody like Ron Paul has the audacity to "school" someone like Guliani. That's reminiscent of Murtha, who has done nothing by bully his constituents for decades, going rouge to somehow land in the history books beyond Cambria County.

Jonathan Potts said...

Wait--what are Guiliani's foreign policy credentials? I'm sorry, but just because he was mayor of the city that suffered the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history doesn't mean he is any more qualified to speak to the roots of that terror than a Texas congressman.

I don't think Paul or anyone else is suggesting that you can negotiate with bin Laden or anyone who has decided to become a terrorist. But there may be steps we can take to ensure that we aren't creating more terrorists, or generating sympathy for them in the Middle East.

Thomas Leturgey said...

Well we certainly aren't going to change each other's minds.

The fact of the matter is, Ron Paul barely registers on any kind of legitimate polls and at a year older than John McCain, will never, and I say NEVER come close to winning the Republican nomination.

And he appears to be needlessly arrogant to boot.

Mark Rauterkus said...

As most know, I am a 'party switcher.' I have been a "D" - a "R" - and am now most home withing the ranks of the "Ls."

So, I would have NO problem going to the "R" side before the "R" primary so as to vote FOR Dr. Ron Paul, should that come to be the case in the spring of 2008. But, that is a long time away.

Then, I'd switch back.

It cost nothing to switch parties. And, it feels good to switch when the reasons are presented.

I switched to vote against others too.