Jump to content

Ron Paul For President


Yohan Roux
 Share

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3490 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

I can assure you here in Europe, we don't feel threatened by Iran...that's just poppycock!

Sure you might point to the fact that Iran have sponsored Terrorism , but then again the CIA have sponsored Coups and placed despot Dictators & Regimes into power around the globe for the best part of 60 years. Not to mentioning arming thsese same despot regimes.....weapons to the Afghan Mujahdeen for example (in the hands of the Taliban) or providing weapons to Saddam to use against Iran. I consider the U.S  a greater threat to world peace, with their under-the-table deals they keep doing....than the Mullahs of Tehran!

You forget to mention that Israel has around 200 Nukes and are not a signed member to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

US Oil reserves are in the Gulf of Mexico & off the Atlantic...it's not that easy to extract compared to Land, especially with such turbulent weather system in that region.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 123
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

So we are going there.  Israel is looking out for itself.  They nukes and they did not sign a nuclear treaty.  Why would they do such a thing and have the United Nations tell them what they can or can not do to protect themselves.  And if Europe doesn't feel threatened by Iran why are they so eager to settle this recent threat of Iran closing (or attempting to close) the Strait of Hormuz?  The US can take care of itself should Iran do such a thing......can Europe?  Actually, my question should be would Europe?  The US gets none of Iran's oil.  The lose of Iranian oil would mean little to us except that it would put pressure on the price of oil worldwide...........we're in better shape than most should oil prices sky rocket.  Our economy would suffer but not completely collaspe.  Can you say Italy, Spain or France would survive?  It would be a hope and prayer at best.  Without leverage to negotiate you (Europe more than the US but all of us) you are at Iran's mercy..........give them a nuke and after Israel you're next on the targeting priority.  It's about oil (unnecessarily) but 10% of the oil controled by a fanatic with a nuke is a recipe for disastor.  You can't isolate yourself in today's world. 

The CIA and covert interventions are much different than an overt nuclear attack against a country and it's population.  Iran as stated numerous times it wants to wipe Israel off the face of the map.  Such a bold and blatant threat has to be taken seriously.  Allowing the country that make such a threat a means of actually wiping a country off the map is foolish.  You are argue all day and that won't change the facts.

I really don't think Ron Paul would completely pull back from a situation like Iran and their nuclear desires but he has hinted that he would.........and that is my only concern with him as President.  I'm not here to discuss Iranian nukes.  It was an example of my concerns.  You seem to be trying to make it a US caused problem.........and it won't wash with me.  Politicians are a sleazy bunch (in a general way.......not all are baffoons but enough are that it spoils the bushel).  Ron Paul seems to be one of the least sleazy in this country........but being a nice guy is not necessarily a good thing when it comes to national defense ("War is hell" is not just slogan......it's a fact that must be faced with strength and the will to be just as mean as your enemy).

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

There is no difference in Iran having a nuclear weapon and North Korea having a nuclear weapon...........zero, zilch.  North Korea has nuclear weapons already and it's a huge threat to the world.  So because of that and North Korea having the weapon we should just throw up our arms on Iran?  How about Vensuela and Hugo Chavez.......lets shrug our shoulders on that too.  How about Syria?  I could go on but you get the message.  When you countries run by tyrants who have no regard for human life you just can't sit idly by while they threaten to destroy anyone they disagree with.  Isreal, Pakistan, India, France, the UK, Russia and China at least have some regard for their citizens and have some working relationship with the world at large....they are not likely to indescriminately toss some nuclear bomb at one of their adversaries.  Iran has openly vowed to wipe Isreal off the map and there's every reason to believe that they will as soon as they believe they can do it.  In Iran's and North Korea's case you are not dealing with rational people.  North Korea is a problem but there's nothing we can do about it now except deal with it.........Iran would be another problem but there is something we can do about it.  We should have learned from our experiences in North Korea (but we wanted to talk about it and that's how well that worked out). 

I'm afraid Ron Paul would want to talk about it.........that worries me.  But over our present President, I'll take my chances with Dr. Paul any day.

Perhaps we should just cut to the chase here.

What's going on with Iran involves real concern about nuclear weapons for one reason and one reason only. A nuclear armed Iran prevents Western powers from forcing regime change. For Israel, it puts the relationship squarely into the category of US-Russian relations since the Cold War - esssentially, a policy of mutually assured destruction. Just so happens that this is the best argument FOR a nuclear armed Iran that there could be, as the only reason nobody has been nuked since 1945 is because the countries that would be nuked would nuke back.

There can be no raping a country for oil without forced regime change. No funneling its populace into the consumerism of the usurping country. No strategic foothold on territory within critical striking distance of China and Russia. No Middle Eastern monopoly for the West. That is the reason Iran is a "problem".

You claim that in Iran and North Korea you are not dealing with "rational" people. What you are dealing with in Iran is people who have not invaded a neighbor in 200 or more years. People who have had chemical weapons in their inventory for years as well - yes, WMD. How many of those weapons have leaked to the open market? Where are all the "irrationals" who bought VX filled bombs and went to town on enemies like Israel and the U.S.? It hasn't happened. Not one time, and the same people who control the chemical weapons in Iran would be in control of the nuclear weapons. 

This so called risk of a nuclear weapon from Iran falling into the wrong hands is no greater than the same thing happening with a warhead from one of the nuclear superpowers. In fact, there are still nukes unaccounted for as a result of the breakup of the Soviet Union. Weapons grade Anthrax from U.S. facilities disappeared just a few short years ago and has not been accounted for. You've never heard a thing about Iranian WMD's that "were just here a minute ago". That such problems are a certainty is poppycock fearmongering by NATO.

No matter how many times Western media and its viewers attempt to spin what was said about "wiping Israel off the map", it will never change the literal translation of what was actually said, to the dismay of those who spread this myth. Curious though that nobody ever spins it as "Iran wants to wipe JEWS" off the map". Why? Because the largest population of Jews outside of Israel is in Iran. Apparently, the only time there's difference between talking about wiping out bad leaders and wiping out civilian populations is when it's the West doing the talking.

Nobody with any understanding of Israel's behavior over the past 45 years would ever be contrasting them with a country they wanted to criticize for attacking everyone who disagrees with them. That is all Israel has done since inception;  land grab, practice apartheid and low grade racial cleansing against Palestinians, war with their neighbors. They have done it unilaterally and they have done it constantly and they have also committed every offense credited to Iran that is getting Iran labeled a rogue terrorist state in search of nukes. Assassinations, attacks on neighbors, 40 years of refusal to sign the NPT and allow UN inspections of their nuclear facilites, maintaining close working relationships with known terrorist orgs, including training, logistics, finance, and equipment support. They toured US inspectors through a fake nuke plant to placate the UN after refusing international scrutiny. Who is the "problem" again?

And with all of the West's concern about such proliferation, Israel has never been taken to task for illegally starting a Middle East arms race. Never. US presidents won't even answer questions about it.

I agree that we should learn from North Korea's handling. That is, to be reminding ourselves of why forced regime change in a strategic area surrounded by our adversaries,facing a formidable standing army and a country with no interest in becoming another springboard for our Imperialistic globalist financial agenda is a fool's errand that will break us financially and bring our children home in body bags, if we're lucky. And if we're not, it will bring WW3.

As the only country in the history of the planet to have ever used nuclear weapons irresponsibly, we need to get off our high horse. Americans need to start getting their foreign policy lessons somewhere else besides Team America World Police. And Ron Paul is not afraid to say it and mean it. It's him on the ballot or I write him in like last time. Or else I don't vote at all in this (faux) bi-partisan dictatorship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Yohan Roux wrote:

The first recording of the birth is about 4000bc, Mary was a human female, she was liked by one of the gods, he mated with her and produced the first modern man, in the story a god means a person from the stars and not some mythical being, there were 13 of these gods and they all mated with the females here and created the first 13 families of modern man, the story is on many tablets from about  4000 bc in Iraq, since the Iraq war the USA have disallowed any further digging and the church is not happy about these tablets, last I heard nearly all these tablets were collected up and taken to Israel and the Vatican, only in the last few years has the language on these tablets been understood, it seems that the Hebrews copied these stories edited them a bit so it looked as if they were about them and added them to their bible, but the story's come from 1000's of years before the Hebrews.

The reason the gods came here was for gold, they traded gold in their world, we did not use gold or have any use for it, but they taught us how to farm and gave us weapons in exchange for gold, all these stories can be found in the middle east now that the languages have been deciphered. Also they found an exact Jesus story to from about 1000 bc, even the same dates, this guy was born 25th of dec, he had 12 followers, healed the sick and was nailed to a cross at Easter time and rose 3 days later, his name was mithras a Persian, why the hebrews should want to steal a very old story and make out it is modern i dont know, but they wont now let people look at the tablets.

 

PS an even older city was found from 10,000 bc, the odd thing about this city it has carvings that are of things that were not there,the city is in southern turkey, but war has stopped all digs there, this city has things on the walls that are amazing, but it could be years before anyone gets to dig, last i heard there was a small team there, but it is US, so the church will have the last say as to what we will be allowed to know.

from what i have read..and i'm not all fresh on it..but most don't believe Christ was born in december..

most think it was in autumn sometime..

i'm not christian myself..but i've read on it..there are some good stories in religions..i love history and all that..

but the reason people don't believe he was born in december was because things just wouldn't line up with all those people being there that time of year..that and some other religion..i think pagan that celebrated the birth of the sun around that time..something like that..it's been awhile and i am just going off memory.. hehehe

what i know is that religion was abused by some pretty evil people using that book for their own greedy manipulating reasons and still is today..

i don't put much faith in much of it really..only the reality that stems from it.. the aftermath

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes October 4bc, that was the date of the census, all people had to be in there home town during October 4bc to be counted and taxed, was a new tax system bought in by Augustus, he changed lots of things including the calendar 4 years later.

 

The ruling families control all sides, the funded and created the left and the right, they funded Stalin and they funded hilter, they make money from any strife, strife needs loans and arms, they supply both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

So we are going there.  Israel is looking out for itself.  They nukes and they did not sign a nuclear treaty.  Why would they do such a thing and have the United Nations tell them what they can or can not do to protect themselves.  And if Europe doesn't feel threatened by Iran why are they so eager to settle this recent threat of Iran closing (or attempting to close) the Strait of Hormuz?  The US can take care of itself should Iran do such a thing......can Europe?  Actually, my question should be would Europe?  The US gets none of Iran's oil.  The lose of Iranian oil would mean little to us except that it would put pressure on the price of oil worldwide...........we're in better shape than most should oil prices sky rocket.  Our economy would suffer but not completely collaspe.  Can you say Italy, Spain or France would survive?  It would be a hope and prayer at best.  Without leverage to negotiate you (Europe more than the US but all of us) you are at Iran's mercy..........give them a nuke and after Israel you're next on the targeting priority.  It's about oil (unnecessarily) but 10% of the oil controled by a fanatic with a nuke is a recipe for disastor.  You can't isolate yourself in today's world. 

The CIA and covert interventions are much different than an overt nuclear attack against a country and it's population.  Iran as stated numerous times it wants to wipe Israel off the face of the map.  Such a bold and blatant threat has to be taken seriously.  Allowing the country that make such a threat a means of actually wiping a country off the map is foolish.  You are argue all day and that won't change the facts.

I really don't think Ron Paul would completely pull back from a situation like Iran and their nuclear desires but he has hinted that he would.........and that is my only concern with him as President.  I'm not here to discuss Iranian nukes.  It was an example of my concerns.  You seem to be trying to make it a US caused problem.........and it won't wash with me.  Politicians are a sleazy bunch (in a general way.......not all are baffoons but enough are that it spoils the bushel).  Ron Paul seems to be one of the least sleazy in this country........but being a nice guy is not necessarily a good thing when it comes to national defense ("War is hell" is not just slogan......it's a fact that must be faced with strength and the will to be just as mean as your enemy).

And again, see? This is the conundrum that continually gets neocons like Obama and the Republican base that "opposes" him in trouble. Flip flopping and hypocrisy. What we are suppose to accept then is that Israel's right to defend itself trumps international law, but Iran's doesn't. BS.

The US cannot take care of itself in the face of an Iran led oil shortage. You really need to avail yourself of a better understanding of global finance than this, because such statements are impossibly naive. To break down the entirety of the import-export ramifications of a world shortage of the #1 export and energy source on the planet is beyond the scope of this thread but suffice it to say, not sure if serious. For a true understanding of how absurd that is, review what Obama has done with his shiny new NDAA power in direct response to what our government calls "an attempt to destabilize world finance" by Iran in their decision to start taking currencies other than the petrodollar for oil shipments. It's been declared as a threat to national security which under the NDAA, allows Obama to declare war without Congressional order. Do leaders with nothing to fear commit treasonous acts against their own Constitution like that?

What's funny is the irony. If we were the Isolationists Paul opponents claim he wants us to be, and were backed by a commodity that could not be devalued out of existence like gold, instead of being up in everyone's business trying to cram our worthless currency down their throats, we would be in a far better position to survive the destruction of the dollar. But I can assure you. What you buy oil with is what you buy everything with. How much gold or foreign currency do Americans have, and how much can we exchange our worthless dollars for after the largest holder of them dumps them on the market and switches to gold and their national currency for major international trade?

When you understand how that works, you understand the real reason we need to get rid of Iran. Doing that removes the last Middle Eastern oil rich country capable of displacing the American dollar in the oil supply. And with the NDAA in place, we aim to be able to do it without UN approval, and without Congressional order.

You can argue all day and not change the facts - this is right. Which like I stated before is why the "wiped off the map" thing is a non-starter. That's not what his translated words meant, the translation has been made available by native speakers many times, and US media will not report the actual translation. It will not disappear when you close your eyes. Everyone else will still see it perfectly.

As for covert operations not being the same as overt nuclear strike, what is your point? This is completely irrelevant. What is relevant is that Western warmongers are using refusal to submit to UN inspections as an excuse for war on Iran, while one of their main members has refused inspections for over 40 years. Deference to the UN is claimed to be a big deal, yet covert troops in foreign countries without UN decree is an international crime and there are British troops on the ground in Syria, right now. Do you think Spetznaz and Revolutionary Guard are headed to Syria right now because they had nothing to do on Saturdays? They are going to counter Western specwar teams that are on Syrian soil illegally.

If you are not here to discuss Iranian nukes then what is your raison d'etre at all in this thread? The main myth floating around about Paul is that he is indifferent to US security abroad and that Imperialism and forced regime change is a necessary component of domestic safety, Iran is an example of that, and Paul's views on Iran are dangerous. You don't want to discuss Iranian nukes because there aren't any Iranian nukes in the Middle East. Only Israeli nukes. And that blows every argument being used to justify sanctions and war.

And if you truly believe war is hell then from where does such a cavalier indifference to starting another one come? It is very difficult to claim the motivation of the West is compassion while claiming we need to be as heartless as we accuse our enemies of being. Perhaps the new slogan should be a re-imagining of "kill them with kindness"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice twist....Iran has nothing to gain by closing the Straits of Hormuz.....sorry i'm not inclined to believe the State Dept propaganda machine.....it's as credible as the WMD stories used to attack Iraq the 2nd time around.

" Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations said closing the Strait of Hormuz, the passageway for about a fifth of the world’s oil trade, is an option if his country’s security is endangered. “There is no decision to block and close the Strait of Hormuz unless Iran is threatened seriously and somebody wants to tighten the noose,” Ambassador Mohammad Khazaee said on the Charlie Rose show, according to a transcript of the interview. “All the options are or would be on the table.

Iran has no history of being an aggressor State since the 1800's, there's no mileage into believing it has plans to occupy any neighbouring Arab state or attack Israel. US are stoking the fires again.....fixing another bogus excuse to intervene militarily. The neo-Cons and the Military Corporations no doubt are rubbing their hands!!

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speeches about wiping off Israel (2005) were rants regarding the treatment of the Palestinians. He might be the Iranian Prime Minister, but he does not hold real power. The Ayatollahs run the show in Iran....and Ahmadinejad is currently out of favour with Ayatollah Khamenei. (At a news conference on January 14, 2006, Ahmadinejad stated his speech had been exaggerated and misinterpreted.)

Europe buy their Oil from a variety different Oil Producing countries including a lot from war-torn Libya. We're not paranoid over Iran as the Republicans are. Again, Iran is not an aggressor State....I see the U.S more of a threat to world peace, by throwing it's weight around in the Middle East when it really isn't needed. They need to stay out of that region...which has already witnessed 4 wars in the last 20 years.

So according to you, Israels' nukes are for self-defence.....but if Iran possesses Nukes it would be seen as threatening the region? I fail how you can justify one country arming itself with nukes but not the other! (prferably neither country should have them)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Rene Erlanger wrote:

Nice twist....Iran has nothing to gain by closing the Straits of Hormuz.....
sorry i'm not inclined to believe the State Dept propaganda machine.....it's as credible as the WMD stories used to attack Iraq the 2nd time around.

 
Europe buy their Oil from a variety different Oil Producing countries including a lot from war-torn Libya. We're not paranoid over Iran as the Republicans are. Again, Iran is not an aggressor State....
I see the U.S more of a threat to world peace, by throwing it's weight around in the Middle East when it really isn't needed. They need to stay out of that region
...which has already witnessed 4 wars in the last 20 years.

 

 

Saddam Hussein told an FBI interviewer before he was hanged that he allowed the world to believe he had weapons of mass destruction because he was worried about appearing weak to Iran.  Hussein, in fact, said he felt so vulnerable to the perceived threat from "fanatic" leaders in Tehran that he would have been prepared to seek a "security agreement with the United States to protect [iraq] from threats in the region."

So much for US State Department propaganda, huh?

 

The US is throwing its weight around cleaning up the mess left by the British and French after their attempts at colonization failed subsequent to the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"...

They need to stay out of that region...which has already witnessed 4 wars in the last 20 years.

..."

--------------------------------------------------------------

I can agree with that in principal.  But the problem is we can't.  We import more oil from Saudi Arabia than anyone else in the world (yeah, I've heard and understand that age old argument......... but I'm not wanting another derail on this thread).  We can't get out of the region because we need that oil for our survival (just as Europe needs that oil.......you can't live without it anymore than we can).  It's a shame that we (the United States) put ourselves in that position by shutting off our domestic supply.........it should have never happened but it did and here we are.  That was not the fault of the Republican party......but, yes, the party was complicite with it's do nothing for the past 40 years.  Ron Paul is not being realistic when his advocacy of letting the Middle East settle their problems among themselves........they haven't been able to so for several hundred years so what makes Ron Paul think they can now?  If the Middle East wasn't so oil rich the Middle East could have all the wars among themselves the want and it would not threaten the rest of the world......the facts make it very different.  The US, Europe, Asia, and most of the rest of the world have a very vested interest in keeping the oil safe for each other (like it or not, for the forseeable future oil is going to be the engine for the economies of the entire world......it must be protected).  Iran certainly has been an agressor since the fall of the Shaw some 40 years ago......the region has been on constant turmoil since.  The excuse is Israel........it's a religious thing and it won't change anytime soon.

Agreeing with Ron Paul in principal is one thing......his determination to withdraw completely from the region (whether or not we should have been there in the first place is irrelevant now (we are in a corner that I believe we never should have gotten ourselves intod).  It's a real world that must be faced.  Ideally the live and let live philosphy is wonderful........too bad the human race is incapable of doing such a thing.  We (the US) is doomed if the Middle East sinks to nuclear war......and if you think Europe or the rest of the world is safe you really need to start thinking on your own.  The US presence in the Middle East does cause resentment.......but we have no choice.  If we leave and Iran gets their nukes do you think Europe is safe?  If you do, I heard you can buy a raffle ticket for the Queen Mary docked down on Long Beach for a buck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


PudgyPaddy wrote:


Rene Erlanger wrote:

Nice twist....Iran has nothing to gain by closing the Straits of Hormuz.....
sorry i'm not inclined to believe the State Dept propaganda machine.....it's as credible as the WMD stories used to attack Iraq the 2nd time around.

 
Europe buy their Oil from a variety different Oil Producing countries including a lot from war-torn Libya. We're not paranoid over Iran as the Republicans are. Again, Iran is not an aggressor State....
I see the U.S more of a threat to world peace, by throwing it's weight around in the Middle East when it really isn't needed. They need to stay out of that region
...which has already witnessed 4 wars in the last 20 years.

 

 

Saddam Hussein told an FBI interviewer before he was hanged that he allowed the world to believe he had weapons of mass destruction because he was worried about appearing weak to Iran. 
Hussein, in fact, said he felt so vulnerable to the perceived threat from "fanatic" leaders in Tehran that he would have been prepared to seek a "security agreement with the United States to protect [iraq] from threats in the region."

So much for US State Department propaganda, huh?

 

The US is throwing its weight around cleaning up the mess left by the British and French after their attempts at colonization failed subsequent to the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

 


I'm not inclined to believe anything that your State Dept releases. For years and right up to the build up of the Iraqi Invasion,  Saddam's regime denied having WMD.  Now when Saddam is about to meet the hangman...he confesses to a FBI agent regarding false WMD claims due to Iran's threat! Yeah right.....how convenient!! I think you watch too much Fox News!

Saddam was afraid of Iran?.......yet not afraid enough to start a 8-year war with Iran in the 80's, which ended in a stalemate.

I do concede that the Brits & French re-drawing the post-WW2 map created many issues in the Middle East......Iraq and Libya being good examples.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

"...

They need to stay out of that region...which has already witnessed 4 wars in the last 20 years.

..."

--------------------------------------------------------------

I can agree with that in principal.  But the problem is we can't.  We import more oil from Saudi Arabia than anyone else in the world (yeah, I've heard and understand that age old argument......... but I'm not wanting another derail on this thread).  We can't get out of the region because we need that oil for our survival (just as Europe needs that oil.......you can't live without it anymore than we can).  It's a shame that we (the United States) put ourselves in that position by shutting off our domestic supply.........it should have never happened but it did and here we are.  That was not the fault of the Republican party......but, yes, the party was complicite with it's do nothing for the past 40 years.  Ron Paul is not being realistic when his advocacy of letting the Middle East settle their problems among themselves........they haven't been able to so for several hundred years so what makes Ron Paul think they can now?  If the Middle East wasn't so oil rich the Middle East could have all the wars among themselves the want and it would not threaten the rest of the world......the facts make it very different.  The US, Europe, Asia, and most of the rest of the world have a very vested interest in keeping the oil safe for each other (like it or not, for the forseeable future oil is going to be the engine for the economies of the entire world......it must be protected). 
Iran certainly has been an agressor since the fall of the Shaw some 40 years ago......the region has been on constant turmoil since.  The excuse is Israel........it's a religious thing and it won't change anytime soon.

Agreeing with Ron Paul in principal is one thing......his determination to withdraw completely from the region (whether or not we should have been there in the first place is irrelevant now (we are in a corner that I believe we never should have gotten ourselves intod).  It's a real world that must be faced.  Ideally the live and let live philosphy is wonderful........too bad the human race is incapable of doing such a thing.  We (the US) is doomed if the Middle East sinks to nuclear war......and if you think Europe or the rest of the world is safe you really need to start thinking on your own.  The US presence in the Middle East does cause resentment.......but we have no choice.  If we leave and Iran gets their nukes do you think Europe is safe?  If you do, I heard you can buy a raffle ticket for the Queen Mary docked down on Long Beach for a buck.

Yeah....but it's not your Oil, it's belongs to the Middle Eastern countries. They can sell the Oil to whom ever they please....and the U.S has no rights or claims on Iranian Oil. The only problem with instability of those Arabian countries, is that it hikes up the Oil prices (e.g recent Libyan civil war).....which has a knock on effect on the world's economies.

Iran has not been an aggressor state at all....they were fed up with the U.S meddling in their internal affairs, like propping up the Shah for the sake of Oil contracts,...so the Ayatollahs when they came into power stopped that exploitation of their natural resources.The only war they were involved in recent years was started by Saddam in 1980.

Know your history, Jews and Arabs (and later Muslims), lived in harmony for 100's if not 1000's of years! The problems started in that region when the Jews after WW2 migrated and then created a state in that region and pushed a lot of the native population (the Palestinians) out of their homelands. There's not much sympathy worldwide for Israel.....hence why Iran detests Israel so much!

 Why would Iran attack Europe militarily or with nukes?...makes no sense at all! Have you looked at the world map and their relative locations? What significance is Europe to Iran?

I'm not sure what sort of local media you're exposed to day in and day out! It's like Fantasy stories....best left for Hollywood movie directors!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Rene Erlanger wrote:

 

 W
hy would Iran attack Europe militarily or with nukes?...makes no sense at all!
Have you looked at the world map and their relative locations? What significance is Europe to Iran?

 

Because they said they would?! 

Just for clarity--an atttack on Israel is an attack against the world.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really having a hard time trying to figure out exactly what you have against my hesitation about voting for Ron Paul (that is the subject of this thread, isn't it?).  I stated my reasons why and you are talking about how bad my country is to the world.  I don't care what you think really.  You're a European and the only thing that matters to me about Europeans is that it's my heritage some 200 years ago and that, for the most part, Europeans are a political and military ally of my country.  I know that Europeans have major differences of opinions over what is best for the world.........but just like me those opinions are based on what is best for me (personally).  I never said that the war in Iraq was good, I never said we had any rights to Middle Eastern oil, I never said Israel is innocent of any complicity in the Middle East.  I did say Iran has been an aggressor in the past 40 years.......terror support, threatening another country with oblivion (Israel), aiding Syria, Libya, Afganistan, and recently Iraqi opposition to our war efforts (right or wrong we and, assuming you are British, your country were there at war).  Iran has threatened the world with the closing of the Striat of Hormuz.  Iran captured and held many of my country's citizens for a year (actually the very man who is "in charge" of Iran was the leader of that hostage stand off).  Your BS is wasted on me. 

I merely said I would hesitate to vote for a Presidential candidate and the reason why (entirely my opinion based my life's experiences in my country).  And you want to fight about that?  Why the chip on your shoulder?  What's it to you how I vote or why I vote?  You can not vote and you have no interest in my President so why are you arguing with me?  If you have an interest then I wonder what personal gain can you obtain?  More amunition to fire my way?  Envy?  Or are you so full of hatred for my country that you feel you must voice your opinion about my opinion (and why I think the way I do).  You don't live in this country and have no say about what I do.  The United Kingdom has elected some real dopes recently and I'm not slamming you or your country for such stupid choices.  But I'm fair game?  Get over your opinion......the doesn't matter even a little bit here on this side of the pond.

By the way, Ron Paul would push for ending foriegn aid to many countries in Europe.........GB being one of them.  You don't need our aid.  You do need our defenses though..........but my thought is you need to stand on your two feet.  Defend yourself and stop taking our money.  My economy would be much better if I didn't have to pay for something you should be doing for yourself.  And that part of Ron Paul's stance I whole heartedly support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


PudgyPaddy wrote:


Rene Erlanger wrote:

 

 W
hy would Iran attack Europe militarily or with nukes?...makes no sense at all!
Have you looked at the world map and their relative locations? What significance is Europe to Iran?

 

Because they said they would?! 

Just for clarity--an atttack on Isreal is an attack against the world.  

yeah....maybe in those Claude van Damme movies -rofl

Israel is a p!ss pot small little strip of land off the Meditterranean Sea.....has very little significance, other than it's a strong ally to the U.S. I don't think too many countries around the world would be shedding too many tears.....although as U.S allies in Nato, we'd be obliged to condem any atttacks on her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

Someone implied I was a racist because I happen to be a registered Republican (the link was that Republicans are full of racists so, therefore, I was one too).  But isn't your venom a little Anti Semite?  That's about as close to being as racist as one can get without being an actual racist.

Think about it.

This ^^

Who didn't see it coming.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Medhue Simoni wrote:

I'm a big Ron Paul fan.:heart:

 


 

I'm just gonna quote this posts..because really..who has the most rockinest song about them out of anyone in the history of ever running for office of all time..i think this one gets teh win..

it's gonna be hard to vote for anyone else.. High fives around the house!! \o/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

I'm really having a hard time trying to figure out exactly what you have against my hesitation about voting for Ron Paul (that is the subject of this thread, isn't it?).  I stated my reasons why and you are talking about how bad my country is to the world.  I don't care what you think really.  You're a European and the only thing that matters to me about Europeans is that it's my heritage some 200 years ago and that, for the most part, Europeans are a political and military ally of my country.  I know that Europeans have major differences of opinions over what is best for the world.........but just like me those opinions are based on what is best for me (personally).  I never said that the war in Iraq was good, I never said we had any rights to Middle Eastern oil, I never said Israel is innocent of any complicity in the Middle East. 
I did say Iran has been an aggressor in the past 40 years.......terror support, threatening another country with oblivion (Israel), aiding Syria, Libya, Afganistan, and recently Iraqi opposition to our war efforts (right or wrong we and, assuming you are British, your country were there at war). 
Iran has threatened the world with the closing of the Striat of Hormuz.  Iran captured and held many of my country's citizens for a year (actually the very man who is "in charge" of Iran was the leader of that hostage stand off).  Your BS is wasted on me. 

I merely said I would hesitate to vote for a Presidential candidate and the reason why (entirely my opinion based my life's experiences in my country).  And you want to fight about that?  Why the chip on your shoulder?  What's it to you how I vote or why I vote?  You can not vote and you have no interest in my President so why are you arguing with me?  If you have an interest then I wonder what personal gain can you obtain?  More amunition to fire my way?  Envy?  Or are you so full of hatred for my country that you feel you must voice your opinion about my opinion (and why I think the way I do).  You don't live in this country and have no say about what I do.  The United Kingdom has elected some real dopes recently and I'm not slamming you or your country for such stupid choices.  But I'm fair game?  Get over your opinion......the doesn't matter even a little bit here on this side of the pond.

By the way, Ron Paul would push for ending foriegn aid to many countries in Europe.........GB being one of them.  You don't need our aid.  You do need our defenses though..........but my thought is you need to stand on your two feet.  Defend yourself and stop taking our money.  My economy would be much better if I didn't have to pay for something you should be doing for yourself.  And that part of Ron Paul's stance I whole heartedly support.

You don't bother reading anyone elses opinions on this thread.  Myself and another poster explained  the 2005 speech by  President Ahmadinejad that was grossly exaggerated and taken out of context....yet you're still parroting the same old tunes. Likewise the "Straits of Hormuz" quote from the UN Iranian Ambassador which you totally ignored.

I can't believe the bareface hyporcracy you come out with....after decades U.S & CIA activities in Central America and South Amercia you have the front to point fingers

Omg......"IRAN HAS THREATENED THE WORLD."!!!!......Typical American paranoia....best left as a storyline for Hollywood! I can't believe you fall for all that nonsense! It seems like the Media brainwashing machine is doing it's job successfully!

I would vote for Ron Paul...as his foreign policy is likely to slow down the amount of body bags returning back to Amercian soil!

 The U.S has 134 bases around the world, some of which are in Europe.....maybe you didn't see all the Greenham Common riots during the Thatcher years......the people didn't want American missiles here. Unfortunately, the Politicians don't listen to the people.....as most British citizens were against military intervention in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you are concerned about American body bags?   Why do I not believe that?  You are concerned about the United States being the only superpower in the world (oddly enough my President is also concerned about that).  I happen to feel somewhat safer because of the "superpower" label.  I know Iran (or any other country would not openly attack my country as long as my country carries that label........CS terrorists exempt).  Your country depends on my country's power for their peace of mind.  I actually say let you (your country) fend for itself.  Provide your own missle defense, defend your own access to oil, pay your for your unexpected natural disasters, negotiate your own peace with adversaries without my country's solid backing.  Fix your economy from total failure (like Greece).  Do it yourself.....that would make me happy because then I don't have to pay for your well being. 

What have you (your country) done to help me (my country)?  Diss me?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

Someone implied I was a racist because I happen to be a registered Republican (the link was that Republicans are full of racists so, therefore, I was one too).  But isn't your venom a little Anti Semite?  That's about as close to being as racist as one can get without being an actual racist.

Think about it.

The problems are not the native Jews who have resided in that part of the world for centuries, and lived in peace with the Palestinians and fellow Muslims......its the the Zionists who emmigrated from Eastern Europe after WW2 that have enforced their doctrine on the state of Israel. They're largely behind this slow form of ethnic cleansing and responsible for destablilised that region after WW2!

Again read the history of Palestine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

So you are concerned about American body bags?   Why do I not believe that?  You are concerned about the United States being the only superpower in the world (oddly enough my President is also concerned about that).  I happen to feel somewhat safer because of the "superpower" label.  I know Iran (or any other country would not openly attack my country as long as my country carries that label........CS terrorists exempt).  Your country depends on my country's power for their peace of mind.  I actually say let you (your country) fend for itself.  Provide your own missle defense, defend your own access to oil, pay your for your unexpected natural disasters, negotiate your own peace with adversaries without my country's solid backing.  Fix your economy from total failure (like Greece).  Do it yourself.....that would make me happy because then I don't have to pay for your well being. 

What have you (your country) done to help me (my country)?  Diss me?

What "well being" are you paying for in the UK.....are you talking about the lion's share of Nato alliance contributions? . I'd be happy if Europe formed its own military defence independent of the U.S....then we wouldn't have to be dragged into all the Wars/ Conflicts that the U.S starts around the globe.

You say fix our economy?....that coming from someone who resides in the largest Debtor nation in the world with 15 Trillion dollars.....courtesy of printing your own money, only because Oil is priced in Dollars! If it weren't for that.....you'd be screwed big time!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"...

You say fix our economy?....that coming from someone who resides in the largest Debtor nation in the world with 15 Trillion dollars.....courtesy of printing your own money, only because Oil is priced in Dollars! If it weren't for that.....you'd be screwed big time!"

------------------------------------

Actually the biggest draw for my attention to Ron Paul is exactly that point.  That, is the one thing that makes me hesitant instead of out and out against Ron Paul as my President.  The 10 year projection for the national debt of this country is likely to grow much above that $15 tiillion that this President has embraced as how to deal with the economy.......it's insane and unsustainable (it will, if not reversed, crush this country economically).  It's a huge number.........but compared to Europe's debt is peanuts.  Our economy is much bigger than yours.  Your Euro is almost worthless (what a shame because just a few years ago the British pound was almost twice the value of the US dollar).  The US has a much better chance of survival should it all go to crap than any European country (even if all your countries united to fend economic collasp off).  You can fail and we could survive..............you won't and you know it.  Same thing with your defense......you can't defend yourselves from a nuclear attack without our help.  You can't even be assured of a sucessful defense against a conventional attack.  You're militaries are much too small........and you make up the difference with our military to fill the gap.  I don't think you would survive.......so maybe you should rethink your support for Ron Paul.  He's going to force you to take care of yourselves without our help.  Good luck with that...you ain't got the money.  Hell, we don't have the money either because a lot of out money is supporting your security (not to mention our trade deficites in your favor.....which costs me money for goods in my country where you save money)..........level the playing field and see how well you do.  If the price of a loaf of bread tripled would you be eating much bread?

I'm still hesitant about Ron Paul for my president........but I have not ruled him out at all.  You seem think it about world domination (the US)........it's not.  It's about my personal security in the world. You see, there's no country out there who's going to help me be secure.....it's all on my country.  Your country will be a great cheer leader.....that helps a little but when the ball is on my own 1 yard line and it's 4th down that really doesn't help much, does it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

"...

You say fix our economy?....that coming from someone who resides in the largest Debtor nation in the world with 15 Trillion dollars.....courtesy of printing your own money, only because Oil is priced in Dollars! If it weren't for that.....you'd be screwed big time!"

------------------------------------

Actually the biggest draw for my attention to Ron Paul is exactly that point.  That, is the one thing that makes me hesitant instead of out and out against Ron Paul as my President.  The 10 year projection for the national debt of this country is likely to grow much above that $15 tiillion that this President has embraced as how to deal with the economy.......it's insane and unsustainable (it will, if not reversed, crush this country economically). 
It's a huge number.........but compared to Europe's debt is peanuts. 
Our economy is much bigger than yours
Your Euro is almost worthless (what a shame because just a few years ago the British pound was almost twice the value of the US dollar).  The US has a much better chance of survival should it all go to crap than any European country (even if all your countries united to fend economic collasp off).  You can fail and we could survive..............you won't and you know it.  Same thing with your defense......you can't defend yourselves from a nuclear attack without our help.  You can't even be assured of a sucessful defense against a conventional attack.  You're militaries are much too small........and you make up the difference with our military to fill the gap.  I don't think you would survive.......so maybe you should rethink your support for Ron Paul.  He's going to force you to take care of yourselves without our help.  Good luck with that...you ain't got the money.  Hell, we don't have the money either because a lot of out money is supporting your security (not to mention our trade deficites in your favor.....which costs me money for goods in my country where you save money)..........level the playing field and see how well you do.  If the price of a loaf of bread tripled would you be eating much bread?

I'm still hesitant about Ron Paul for my president........but I have not ruled him out at all.  You seem think it about world domination (the US)........it's not.  It's about my personal security in the world. You see, there's no country out there who's going to help me be secure.....it's all on my country.  Your country will be a great cheer leader.....that helps a little but when the ball is on my own 1 yard line and it's 4th down that really doesn't help much, does it?

You're not very well informed are you ? The biggest trading economy in the World  is the EU  --->http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29

The total debts of the EU and US are pretty similarl, but your comparing 500 million Union vs 300 Million pop.country....per capita, you have a higher debt burden per person!

Until last year, Germany was the world's largest exporting Nation now superseded by China....compare the size of Germany to the U.S....and you say we have no chance of surviving????

I'm not woried if the Euro currency collapses....I'm sure the Germans would re-joice having their old D-Mark back! Britain wisely never ever joined the Euro currency. For Greece (and a few other troubled countries) might be better if they were not part of the Euro and returned to a devalued Drachma.

You highlight the difference in mentality....you think in terms of military might, paranoia about being attacked, asserting yourself militarily.....we don't.!  We've had our history of colonialism, we have no desire to invade countries or exert our influence in that manner.

Why should we be worried about someone attacking us......who would? We have North Africa to the south of Europe and a non-Communist Russia to the East......neither pose a threat.!

 

This is just a dumber than dumb quote ----.".you can't defend yourselves from a nuclear attack without our help." .............Once nuclear warheads are launched, there's not much chance of defending against it......and you can more or less kiss the world as we know it goodbye!! It's been a deterrent for a reason!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3490 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...