Republican candidate Ron Paul should have your Democrat or Libertarian Vote

[HybridSS]

Originally Posted by M4gikSt1ck

I see you danced all around the fact we supported the clerics and radicalized them in Afghanistan to fight the Soviets now the Soviets are gone and they want us out. Its called blowback and its not a secret, this it what our own CIA intel tells us.

Iraq wasnt a bastion for these radicals prior to us being there. Our presence is recruiting more radicals faster then we can kill them. To them this is another Christian crusade and there treating this as a jihad. We can never win this war without a political element and its not going to come through occupation.

side note: This is how the lame steam media plays Dr. Paul and of course the Neo Con propaganda machine picks up on.

watch the end of this video,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoeoc-E9DXk

I will be voting for Ron Paul in 08, not only because I agree with his position on the many issues but I dont need the paid for media making decisions for me.

Im not dancing around anything. The US made some STUPID mistakes in the past. Im sure we will make them in the future. Past mistakes do not change our current mission as far as Radical Islam is concerned.

How we approach Iraq is very important. It cant be done strictly with the military and yes political action is paramount as well.

But it cant be done SOLELY on a political basis either. You must have a combination of the two.

[M4gikSt1ck]

Originally Posted by HybridSS

Im not dancing around anything. The US made some STUPID mistakes in the past. Im sure we will make them in the future. Past mistakes do not change our current mission as far as Radical Islam is concerned.

How we approach Iraq is very important. It cant be done strictly with the military and yes political action is paramount as well.

But it cant be done SOLELY on a political basis either. You must have a combination of the two.

LOL, I agree with that but we have been in Iraq for 4 years now in a military position the Maliki Govt doesnt was us there, the Iraqi people dont want us there so how can we ever reach a political round table if it only appears we are there in a military capacity. This policy we have in Iraq just isnt working but its not for the lack of trying. At some point we need to draw a line in the sand and leave, I think that time is now. We are still in Afghanistan, we do have a presence in the region. But to take Afghanistan (Which i support) then Iraq under the pretenses we went under, now we have our sights set on Iran?

Come on, how can you seriously rationalize this to make any kind of sense especially under the "spreading democracy" doctrine.

I will entertain this Iraq occupation for just a minute.
IF we stay and I say "IF" we need to withdraw combat troops pull back to our bases we have there. Let the three factions fight it out, (because that what these people do anyways) then deal with the victors. But thats just my idea if we were really serious about Iraq. Thats ultimately going to happen anyways....if history is any guide to there religious and political past.

[Tripw0l]

Originally Posted by HybridSS

Whatever your opinion is of how we got to iraq. Wether there was a "fear machine" that reved us up or not. The simple fact is that Islamic Fundametalsts are out there.

So what if they're out there? There's going to be more and more as time goes on with our occupation, we're giving them a cause to fight for.

Originally Posted by HybridSS

Iraq is a large part of thier focus at this point. They want as many "Islamic States" as they can grab. Obviously an "Islamic State" Is one that the Religion and ruling Govt derive thier power from the same place. Fanatical religion. Fanatical religion governing the country.

Oh let's talk about fanatical religion for a moment. What about our president's guiding light that is his faith. Perhaps you should watch a movie called Jesus Camp and see just how fanatical OUR local religions can be and are growing to be...it's disturbing. We should be seeking people based on their intent to harm the United States and not turn this into a problem about religion otherwise we ARE just on another crusade for tyranny.

Originally Posted by HybridSS

There are efforts all over this globe currently to entrench that radical Islamic sentiment in the local population. Its THEM who are actively and forcefully attmepting to change and control people through out the world.

Really? Because I think we're doing the same thing through attempting to put trade embargoes on countries that openly oppose or disagree with Bush's empire mission.

Originally Posted by HybridSS

This war was coming for a very long time...in so many ways. We just screwed it up on how we made an entrance into it.

This war was completely unwarranted and was a true distraction from the real war on terrorism. Don't use the terminology "we" because "we" is really just the Bush administration and they did so much more completely wrong than I'm sure that you're willing to admit. We're throwing money to the wind with contractors in cost-plus spending, not listening to Generals, forcing them to resign, putting positive spin on a war that's doomed to fail.

Originally Posted by HybridSS

That doesnt change the fact that it is a struggle that must be taken up.

You're right, that particular fact does not, the fact that we do not have the right or the responsibility to nation build in country that simply does NOT want us there....does.

Originally Posted by HybridSS

Bush and Cheneys time are just about up. IMO they did screw the pooch on many things. Mainly sound leadership.

Wait a minute, isn't that Bush and Cheney's sole purpose? To lead the country? So you're saying that they failed miserably? I agree and accept your apology .

Originally Posted by HybridSS

But the one thing I agree with Bush on is that this struggle against radical islam needs to be waged. Its probably THE most important thing we will do as a country over the next 25-50 years.

So it went from hunting down the people that did 9/11 to hunting down anyone who agreed but didn't necessarily support them. No, it wont be the most important thing that we do simply because it's been tried before hundreds of years ago. Pitting religions against each other will only give rise to the more atrocities and open us up for more attacks. Remember that report just a month or so ago about Al Qaeda being at pre-9/11 strength? We're not winning the war on terror simply because we're fighting it completely the wrong way. We're escalating their hate and determination to attack the country and honestly I expect something horrible to happen day in and day out because I don't think this administration is capable of insuring that a terrorist attack wont happen.

Originally Posted by HybridSS

Me? I cant wait for a change in leadership. Mainly due to the fact Bush is so hated it cripples some of his abilities.

So we should just all love him, allow him to do whatever he wants no matter how much it gets us into trouble. Yea, I can't wait for a change in leadership either simply because of the devout fanatical following that Bush has gained...it deeply concerns me.

Originally Posted by HybridSS

We need a fresh start.

I agree.

Originally Posted by HybridSS

Another set of eyes to look at the problem at hand and draft a paln.

good...gooooood

Originally Posted by HybridSS

But the goal will be EXACLTY the same. Stamp out radical Islam and terrorists. Hell even Hillary knows this.

WHOA WHOA, WTF HAPPENED? Why aren't we hunting down terrorists at the root instead of allowing them to flow freely into Iraq and bomb our troops? If we truly changed the plan for the better, that plan would involve us leaving Iraq, regaining strength and systematically hunting terrorist cells such as should have been the plan from the very fucking beginning.

Originally Posted by HybridSS

Fortunately for us...these groups are still small...relatively speaking. They have no where near the numbers the communists did during the cold War. They are however much more fanatical and dangerous and IRRATIONAL.

This is true to a degree. But I feel that I've already addressed this.

Originally Posted by HybridSS

So I cannot agree with you that the ONLY reason we are hanging on in Iraq is to line the pockets of Bush and Cheney. If thats all you see here you should reasses your view IMO.

Surely I don't need to reassess my view, I have. Have you reassessed your's? Really scrutinized your own beliefs? I've scanned my conscience and haven't found a good reason as to why we're still in Iraq. Our troops are getting attacked by people that hate the fact that we're there, it's perpetual motion of terrorist growth and it's only gaining momentum.

Originally Posted by HybridSS

If you have a problem that could potentially grow in size...why in the world would you hold off in addressing it? It makes no sense to me.

You're right, we have a problem that keeps growing in size and growing in cost and our government has not adequately addressed it. It's called the war in Iraq.

Originally Posted by HybridSS

And again..this is why Ron Paul and I dont agree. You dont have to get into the details of the past to identify slip ups and mistakes to understand what the correct course of action is for the future.

Those who don't examine history are doomed to repeat it. If you don't examine our real progress in Iraq then you get the luxury of saying "well all of our troops aren't dead or deserted yet so we haven't quite lost". But if you do examine it and see that the area is almost as unstable as it was the day we entered you'll understand that the correct course of action is not decisive ignorance of the problem...it's getting out and re-examining our overall strategy on the war on terror. It wont ever happen under this administration because it fails to acknowledge it's faults and you can't correct a problem if you do not acknowledge that it's a problem to begin with. I know that we're in it for a while longer but I don't see Iraq lasting longer than another 18 months.

[HybridSS]

So what if they're out there? There's going to be more and more as time goes on with our occupation, we're giving them a cause to fight for.

So what if they are out there? Ok...let me rephrase. They are out there...and they are coming for us. REGARDLESS of wether we are in iraq or not. I agree we are giving them a cause to FIGHT right now in Iraq..and they come out of the woodwork. But if they werent out fighting....they would be training for the eventual fight. Gathering thier numbers. Or fighting on other fronts as they currently do. They would just have more numbers in other areas.
See...the difference between you and I is: You think the U.S. CREATES extremsists. I think The Imams and fundamentalists create the extremists. Its a religious thing.
If the US where truely the sole reason for extremists in the world...why are they on every continent attempting to indoctrinate the local populace thru fear tactics and extremist teachings? Thier goal is to forcibly apply thier belief system to the world.

Oh let's talk about fanatical religion for a moment. What about our president's guiding light that is his faith. Perhaps you should watch a movie called Jesus Camp and see just how fanatical OUR local religions can be and are growing to be...it's disturbing. We should be seeking people based on their intent to harm the United States and not turn this into a problem about religion otherwise we ARE just on another crusade for tyranny.

I actually typed another reply to the above. But figured its pointless to argue about what you wrote above. I never made a stance for or against ANY religion. Only that fanatacism is the root of the problem today. If in 10 years we end up with Christain fanatics that start strapping on bomb belts and lopping off heads...then they would be just as bad. But for the most part we do not have that issue except for the occasional suicide cults.
Your above reply seems to be your rant to hear yourself talk IMO.
Because the simple fact is there is only ONE large group of religious fanatics that have blatant disregard for the fundamental rights of humans. The Radical Muslims. Trying to bring anything else into the arguement is just an attempt to dilute the real issue.

Really? Because I think we're doing the same thing through attempting to put trade embargoes on countries that openly oppose or disagree with Bush's empire mission.

Did you really see any politics in my previous threads. You are now playing politics. Try to keep the discussion non political. Otherwise we will end up debating all past politics and it will be a waste of time. We are debating wether of not we should be engaging the enemy currently. And if Iraq should CURRENTLY be a part of that strategy. Stay focused.

I have already stated in my previous replies that the US needs to change certain things about how we approach the rest of the world. But we did NOT create religious extremism. And the fact we have practiced bad business gloabally does not dismiss us from our current responibilities to face this enemy head on.

This war was completely unwarranted and was a true distraction from the real war on terrorism. Don't use the terminology "we" because "we" is really just the Bush administration and they did so much more completely wrong than I'm sure that you're willing to admit. We're throwing money to the wind with contractors in cost-plus spending, not listening to Generals, forcing them to resign, putting positive spin on a war that's doomed to fail.

Wether the war with Iraq was warranted is debatable. No reason to even go into that. we ARE there and it IS a focal point for BOTH sides currently. We have to adress our stratagy looking at the present situation and then plan for the future. Past mistakes does not change the proper course or action for the future. You dont pull out of a poker game because you screwed up the first bet. The goal is still to win. And I do not believe the war is doomed. Its not a certainty. There are alot of options we have not yet begun to explore IMO. Again...thats why I am anxious to have Bush out and new Leadership in. If you think that if a Dem gets elected...they will just walk away...think again.

You're right, that particular fact does not, the fact that we do not have the right or the responsibility to nation build in country that simply does NOT want us there....does.

That to me is really yet to be seen. The general populace will go with who they think will win #1. because if they are on the losing side and they chose to support the US...they may get thier heads lopped off. They also want the side that will help them build a better life. We need to do much better in that area.

Wait a minute, isn't that Bush and Cheney's sole purpose? To lead the country? So you're saying that they failed miserably? I agree and accept your apology .

Quick to imply arent you. I have never said Bush or Cheney were great leaders...EVER. I am a Republican by nature. But I was never a big Bush fan. But he is not solely responible for the position we are in right now. You guys pose our options as a false dichotomy. "Bush is stupid and has made mistake so we MUST get out of Iraq". That simply is not true. There are many other optons and plans on the table...especially if we can get more competant leadership in the white house and Congress.

So it went from hunting down the people that did 9/11 to hunting down anyone who agreed but didn't necessarily support them. No, it wont be the most important thing that we do simply because it's been tried before hundreds of years ago.

LOL...gloom and doom. And yes it will be of the utmost importance that we face this and take the correct path. Because if you think that the people of those Arab nations are worthless and unchangable, and doomed to war amongst themselves and others for eternity...we REALLY should be lobbing nukes over there to go ahead and end it. But I do not believe that. I believe most human beings on the planet are capable of applying the basic fundamental truths of life liberty and pursuit of happiness. It will just take 50 years and a very very concerted effort to help them along.
Now if they where not ACTIVELY seeking to destroy other groups and countries...Id say let them be. As you say we should not be into nation building. UNLESS no other options are avalaible and its clear some action must be taken. We have to assess the level of immediate danger. And in this case its of the highest level. It would be foolish and SLEFISH to walk away now. Kind of like putting off fixing social security to the next generation. Very selfish IMO.

Pitting religions against each other will only give rise to the more atrocities and open us up for more attacks.

Whos pitting religions against each other? Not me?
This is a ONE sided religious war. Radicals against all non radicals.

We're escalating their hate and determination to attack the country and honestly I expect something horrible to happen day in and day out because I don't think this administration is capable of insuring that a terrorist attack wont happen.

Again..another point where you and I differ. I do not believe we are escalating thier hate. I believe their hate and intolerance was already there and it is a product of thier fanatical religion. Taught from an early age. Someohow we have clouded who is fundamentally right and who is fundamanetally wrong. Use basic rules of human decency and logic as a reference. You see...when you say that the US has been unfair when dealing with other countries...many Americans recognize this and would like to make a change..including myself. On the other side...they only see religious intolerance...and see no reason for change...just extermination. If we change certain aspects of US policy to be "more thoughtful", which I hope we do...the Radical wouls still make attmepts to kill us when they can. No doubt in my mind.

So we should just all love him, allow him to do whatever he wants no matter how much it gets us into trouble. Yea, I can't wait for a change in leadership either simply because of the devout fanatical following that Bush has gained...it deeply concerns me.

I never said anything remotely like that. get a grip.

I agree. good...gooooood WHOA WHOA, WTF HAPPENED? Why aren't we hunting down terrorists at the root instead of allowing them to flow freely into Iraq and bomb our troops? If we truly changed the plan for the better, that plan would involve us leaving Iraq, regaining strength and systematically hunting terrorist cells such as should have been the plan from the very fucking beginning.

I disagree again. Iraq is a central staging point currently. Much of the enemies resources ARE there. It is essential that we succeed or the Iraq of the future may be a Fundamental Islamic State with access to alot more resources than the radicals currenetly have. If you dont see how this would confound our overall efforts against radicals worldwide...then I am wasting my time here.

I know that we're in it for a while longer but I don't see Iraq lasting longer than another 18 months.

"lasting" Whats your defination of "lasting". We arent going any where. Us getting "out" of Iraq will be simply a reduction in troops when the time is right. We will not be leaving that area for years and years. Sorry to break that to you.

[M4gikSt1ck]

Originally Posted by HybridSS

I'm only going to comment on this part of the reply (had a few beers, not a 100%, )

So what if they are out there? Ok...let me rephrase. They are out there...and they are coming for us. REGARDLESS of wether we are in iraq or not. I agree we are giving them a cause to FIGHT right now in Iraq..and they come out of the woodwork. But if they werent out fighting....they would be training for the eventual fight. Gathering thier numbers. Or fighting on other fronts as they currently do. They would just have more numbers in other areas.

Radical Islam is and always be about the Jews, its about Israel not the US, if we leave then they will just go after Israel. They have no military which means they have no navy, air force they only have foot soldiers.

I feel your position lacks any factual basis, this isnt what the CIA and most of the intelligence agencies have said on middle eastern politics.

See...the difference between you and I is: You think the U.S. CREATES extremsists. I think The Imams and fundamentalists create the extremists. Its a religious thing.

The radical Imams and clerics were created by the US involvement in Afghanistan, when we supported Osama to fight the Soviets, so that also doesnt wash, i mean if you want to use our own intelligence.

If the US where truely the sole reason for extremists in the world...why are they on every continent attempting to indoctrinate the local populace thru fear tactics and extremist teachings? Thier goal is to forcibly apply thier belief system to the world.

LOL, well we have influence all over the world, Chomsky wrote a book on it "Hegemony or survival" and like it or not it actually has allot of merit given todays circumstances.

These are all distractions, focus focus focus. Dont like the policies, change the policy makers. But know this, "Govt is inherently evil, love your country but never your Govt - there is a difference" ~ Ronald Reagan

I agree with that statement.

[HybridSS]

Radical Islam is and always be about the Jews, its about Israel not the US, if we leave then they will just go after Israel. They have no military which means they have no navy, air force they only have foot soldiers.

I really think this is a naive veiw. Sure they HATE Isreal. But they hate alot of others as well. We werent in Iraq when the radicals first bombed the WTC in 93 Or Pan Am flt 93 over Lockerbee. And we werent in Iraq on 911. And we arent a part of many of the African and Eastern countries that they have infiltrated Such as Somalia, Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, , Uganda, Tanzania, Mali, Niger, Chad and Mauritania and many more. There is an assault on much of Africa right now. mainly because much of Africa is "up for grabs" so to speak. An easy aquisition for the Likes of Al Queada.

I feel your position lacks any factual basis, this isnt what the CIA and most of the intelligence agencies have said on middle eastern politics.

Maybe thats were your confusion lies. You are talking Middle Eastern Politics. I am talking Islamic Radicals...there is no "Islamic Radical Politics" because such a dialog is not possible.

The radical Imams and clerics were created by the US involvement in Afghanistan, when we supported Osama to fight the Soviets, so that also doesnt wash, i mean if you want to use our own intelligence.

Way off base here IMO. You think there were no radicals until after Afganistan/Soviet war? Who do you think the Soviets were scrapping with? Militants from the Jamiat Islami party and any other Mujahideen insurgents that came to help. The current strain of Radical ISlam has been on the rise since the 1950s.
I will interject one political jab here. You know who first authorized the use of military aid to the Afgan islamic rebels?

Jimmy Carter of all people.

Anyways....thats my position and justification for disagreeing with Ron Paul on his position of Foreign policy. Fuerther discussion would realy be beating a dead horse. So if either of you two would like to rebut...go right ahead. But dont ask any questions expecting a response. I think we have made our positions clear.

[Scott]

Originally Posted by HybridSS

I really think this is a naive veiw. Sure they HATE Isreal. But they hate alot of others as well. We werent in Iraq when the radicals first bombed the WTC in 93 Or Pan Am flt 93 over Lockerbee. And we werent in Iraq on 911. And we arent a part of many of the African and Eastern countries that they have infiltrated Such as Somalia, Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, , Uganda, Tanzania, Mali, Niger, Chad and Mauritania and many more. There is an assault on much of Africa right now. mainly because much of Africa is "up for grabs" so to speak. An easy aquisition for the Likes of Al Queada.

Well said again Al.

You forgot the Kobar tower bombings and the USS Cole.

Some will never get this and will want to continue to blame Isreal and the U.S. for why the extremists dislike us. There is not a good retort by the other side for what you have said, the subject will just get changed. You watch.

[BAMF]

I like pie.


The subject is changed?

[M4gikSt1ck]

I really think this is a naive veiw. Sure they HATE Isreal. But they hate alot of others as well. We werent in Iraq when the radicals first bombed the WTC in 93 Or Pan Am flt 93 over Lockerbee. And we werent in Iraq on 911. And we arent a part of many of the African and Eastern countries that they have infiltrated Such as Somalia, Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, , Uganda, Tanzania, Mali, Niger, Chad and Mauritania and many more. There is an assault on much of Africa right now. mainly because much of Africa is "up for grabs" so to speak. An easy aquisition for the Likes of Al Queada.

What does the bombing the WTC in 93 have to do with Iraq? They were Radical islamist and they were'nt from Iraq. Why are we in Iraq, there hasnt been any Al Qeida in Iraq until we got there, they are there because we are there. WE CAME FIRST NOT THEM, THIS IS MY POINT!!! IN IRAQ

Maybe thats were your confusion lies. You are talking Middle Eastern Politics. I am talking Islamic Radicals...there is no "Islamic Radical Politics" because such a dialog is not possible.

Sunni, Shiite's Kurds all use the Koran as the guide there religion is there political ideoalogy it dictates how they live there life.

Way off base here IMO. You think there were no radicals until after Afganistan/Soviet war? Who do you think the Soviets were scrapping with? Militants from the Jamiat Islami party and any other Mujahideen insurgents that came to help. The current strain of Radical ISlam has been on the rise since the 1950s.
I will interject one political jab here. You know who first authorized the use of military aid to the Afgan islamic rebels?

I'm glad you bring this up, Iraq was a tourist destination until we replaced the shaw in 1953, he was an elected official. There has been an anti american sentiment to some degree ever since.

Anyways....thats my position and justification for disagreeing with Ron Paul on his position of Foreign policy. Fuerther discussion would realy be beating a dead horse. So if either of you two would like to rebut...go right ahead. But dont ask any questions expecting a response. I think we have made our positions clear.

The way you pick and choose information to suit a position is normal but it is factually wrong. If you want to bring up history then go to the beginning which would be 1953. Until that time we were loved over there, Baghdad was a destination spot for Americans. You might even remember some movies that were shot in Iraq. Some old black and white films were filmed there, Im looking for a few titles now. This wasnt always a anti American area.

If you really want to get technical, shit we (The allies) carved up the region after world war 1 and even created the "national territory lines" in 1913 with no regard for the religious factions that have been there for centuries. Literally splitting some of them in half. A good example is the hills between Pakistan and Afghanistan, and where Osama has been hiding.

Again Chomsky did a "colonization" piece on the middle east, and of course you dont hear much about it because it places responsibility on the Imperialist countries such as England and the US.

This is a complicated issue but Iraq has never had any terrorist problems when Saddam was in power, His army was built with US arsenal to fight Iran, Osama gained power from our Arsenal fighting the Soviets. Why is it that our old "Allies" are now our enemies. Its bullshit, now we are going to send billions of dollars of more military equipment to arm the middle east once again.

Back on Topic, Ron Paul has the credentials to get this country back on track, His voting record is spotless and you cant say that about any other candidate on either side of the isle. He is consistent in his beliefs and his message hasn't changed in 30 years. He offers real solutions not talking points like you see from the other candidates. The fact the lame steam media isnt portraying him also says something by itself.

Maybe some need to be told what to do, or guided in some pre determined direction but I, myself dont need there help. Tell me the facts and I will make an informed decision and vote accordingly.