This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Ron Paul: "I Think Sanctions Give Iran Motivation To Want A Nuclear Weapon"
There are those who say that while they agree completely with Ron Paul's economic policy of fixing the #1 issue that ails America (as a reminder, total US debt/GDP would only decline under a Ron Paul presidency) they disagree with Paul on his foreign policy. We wonder why when all he does is instead of appealing to the jingoism of warmongers and patronizing the basest of herd instincts, he simply tells the truth. Such as on Today's State of the Union show on CNN when asked if Obama has done "enough" to force Iran to stop its nuclear development via sanctions and others, his reply was spot on: "I think he gets too much involved. I think sanctions gives the motivation for them to want a nuclear weapon. We have 45 bases around them, we can demolish them within hours. And the worst thing the sanctions do, and Republicans and Democrats both support it and the other GOP candidates want war even more, the whole thing is there is a lot of dissension in Iran and we should encourage it by not interfering, once we get involve and threaten to bomb them, it becomes nationalistic - everyone joins the Ayataollah and Ahmedinejad. So there is a blowback - unusual circumstances and unintended consequences. So yes, our people are well-intended, but they don't realize how much damage they do by not accomplishing what they want and causing more harm to us. So our military personnel right now are very adamant not to be involved in a bombing of Iran, it makes no sense whatsoever to our military personnel, to the CIA, even though they are much more interventionist than I am."
And probably even more important in light of Obama's apology for burning down Korans (but not for pictures of torture), Paul had this to say: "I thought McNamara was rather astute when he they asked him about the mess he caused in Vietnam: "don't you think you should apologize to the American people and to the world" he said: "what good is an apology: if you make mistakes and you see this and you stir enough trouble, why don't we change our policy. That's what he said: "we should change our policy." So if we have a policy going on in the middle east that is begging that we apologize now and then and others condemning it, I think we should reassess our foreign policy, and that is what I think we are not doing, and that is why I am quite different than the other candidates - the American people are sick and tired of the wars going on over there, we are going broke fighting these wars that are not legitimate in that we were not attacked, they were not declared, and the American people in their majority want us out of there."
»
- 21458 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Reading comprehension, honey. You flunked too?
I'm not pretending anything about 1953, in fact, I never even touched on it.
So do tell, how do you like the police state under the ayatollahs? It's a real improvement, right?
I can comprehend that not mentioning the US coup is synonymous with ignoring it.
And who cares what I think of the Iranian government? I am not an Iranian citizen and no Iranian has ever threatened me. It's none of my business. Why should I pay out of my pocket to allay your fears when I consider them to be baseless and irrelevant?
The US has been messing with Persia (Iran) since before most of us were born.
http://www.historyguy.com/wars_of_iran.htm
Anti-Mossadeq Coup -(1953)--The American Central Intelligence Agency planned and executed a coup against Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadeq. Britain was concerned that Mossadeq was going to nationalize the oilfields of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (now known as British Petroleum, or BP) and the United States feared that Mossadeq may ally Iran with the Soviet Union. The plan for the coup was called "Operation Ajax," and it succeeded in overthrowing Prime Minister Mossadeq and installing a more pliable Prime Minister. The Shah assumed greater powers, and Iran was a firm ally of the Western powers during the Cold War until the Shah's overthrow in 1979.
Look, no one is saying the US is an angel, but don't you see the irony of calling the US out for "messing with Iran" when Iran was allying with the USSR to mess with the US?
OK. You're convinced me. You have my permission to enlist in the IDF. Godspeed!
There you go again, attributing statements to me which I never made.
Maybe that passes for intelligence in your circles, but not in mine.
Of course you never stated that you would join the fight against Iran yourself. How could any self respecting chicken hawk behave otherwise?
Seriously, you post videos showing snow and skiiers and parked cars and Teheran and try to put words in my mouth. Like that's supposed to prove anything except what a simpleton you are.
What did you think anybody would take away from that video? That Iranians don't live in caves? Woo hoo!
You're rhetorical style is becoming a bit too casual considering the fact that you want Americans to invest their treasure and the blood of their sons and daughters to alleviate the non-existent threat of Iranian nuclear weapons.
Please try to regain your composure and state in a concise and unequivocal manner the reasons why we should believe you and ignore General Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who recently stated that Iran has no nuclear weapons and that attacking them would be a mistake.
Dear Crockett,
Please go back through what I wrote. I never said Iran has nuclear weapons. I never said we should go to war with Iran. I said that Iran wanted and has been working towards nuclear capability before sanctions were imposed.
Got it?
I specifically asked you not to equivocate and yet you did.
And you failed to explain why we should believe you rather than General Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Cheifs who says that Iran is not building nuclear weapons.
"We also know, or we believe we know...." That's equivocating.
You're just pissed because you attacked me ad hominem and I called you out.
Generally speaking it's the person who wants to bomb innocent people in a foreign land who is pissed and not the person who goes to great lengths to try to talk the paranoid aggressor out of such action.
I still see no reason to believe that you have better intelligence than General Dempsey or the 16 US intelligence agencies all of which unanimously agree with "high confidence" that Iran has no nuclear weapons program and that they gave up all such plans in 2003.
If you are truly better informed than the Pentagon please provide documentation showing the superiority of your argument over the statement by General Dempsey.
If you're so convinced of your position surely you have actual evidence to buttress the voluminous speculation you've spent your Sunday afternoon providing for us.
Oh and Crockett? Anyone "analyzing" the Iranians who starts out with "We are of the opinion that Iran is a rational actor," should really, really give you pause. You know why? Because the Iranians have stated over and over and over what their endgame is. And it isn't rational. It's something else altogether that is not contained by rationality.
What's the matter? You don't believe the Iranians? Hahaha.
So you believe that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and all 16 US intelligence agencies are wrong and you are right? It seems that you ought to provide some evidence if your position consists of facts rather than mere raving.
Where is your documentation?
Well, aren't you guys always saying that the Joint Chiefs and all the US intelligence agencies were ilke totally wrong about Iraq? So why should you believe them now, eh?
So, which are they? Are they the evil war mongers that you shouldn't believe or your bosom buddies on which you hang onto every word uttered? (no pun intended there)
Where is my documentation? Go back to my initial post and go reference the writings of the ayatollahs. Alternatively, go read a little history. It would do you more than a little bit of good.
In order to attract the votes of people like you the politicians twisted the intelligence which the professionals provided concerning Iraq.
Please explain how a forty year old quote from the Ayatollah has anything to do with your insistence that all 16 US intelligence agencies and the Pentagon are wrong about Iran's lack of a nuclear weapons program today. If you believe that Iran is working on a nuclear weapon then provide the evidence.
But you can't, can you?
+1 Standing ovation from me for handling that exchange so well, Crockett. Well done.
Yes, well done.
"Jihad means the conquest of all non-Muslim territories"
The word Jihad (=struggle) certainly does not mean that, had never meant that and I have also not ever heard Khomeini say that.
Moreover, this kind of sentiment was not even common in Iran in Khomeini's days. You would be hard-pressed to find any such sentiment among Iran's young population today.
Can you please provide an exact source so that I can check that "little green book" or the collected speeches of Khomeini.
If you can't, sorry Irene, you go the way of the troll.
Amen Dr. Paul.
US democracy works like this:
1. The big corps and banks pick the candidates for both parties.
2. Then the media brainwash people with these candidates.
3. Americans vote and felt proud about their democracy. Actually it makes no difference who got elected since both candidates will work for their lords ( big corps and banks)
@zebra
That is what makes Dr. Paul different.
ok
canned "for the sundaePublic"? will try to get to "soundTrak" later
out of there? out of the ME? not me! sorry, ron!
i think he may be making a campaign mistake here, pandering to some "majority" while talking about "reassesZing foreign policy"
for example, if this were a candidate's debate, with prez0, author and implementer of the0mabaDoctrine, which IS now our foreign policy (see judges "recusing" themselves from americans' trials in egypt) he might lose a few points to the prez, imo
yes, ron, many are sick to death of war, but we are not at war with anything except "terrorism" right now, are we?
personally, foreign policy does not seem the biggie right now, altho "iran" can be used as a "buzzword" for MSM to play "state0'theUnion" with their least favorite candidate
i like rPaul very much as a candidate, but this spiel does nothing for me. if i understand our foreignPolicy at all, it seems to me that the US is doing ok, right now, given what has gone before
tyler can go ahead and lead the parade here; i'll sit this one out
altho the MSM will not stop the "warTalk", we are actually at the lowest level of hostilities in a long time, it seems to me [very possibly due to financial jitters here and there]
personally, i would have preferred that rPaul had somehow noticed that. this isn't some speech he re-worked from the last campaign, is it? you decide if that shoe might embarrassing fit this "candidate" [i just decided not to watch the clip]
but he probably perceives things much more realistically than any fringeBloggerTM
after all, he's a politician!
and they've got him off trying to traverse a minefield here, too, BiCheZ!
the0mabaDoctrine
Yes Omoeba is the greatest president of dysentery!
my reference is to prez0's may 19, 2011 speech
Full Text of Obama's Middle East Speech | The Cable
like jamesMonroe in 1823, a scant 20 years after jefferson purchased louisiana so napoleon could rake europa with artillery, prez0 really goes "global-amerika" here
the "rights" he bestows on all do not include, are apparently derived, in part, from american documents or docu-momentos, depending on you perspective
PASTE: But we can -- and will -- speak out for a set of core principles -- principles that have guided our response to the events over the past six months:
The United States opposes the use of violence and repression against the people of the region.
We support a set of universal rights. Those rights include free speech; the freedom of peaceful assembly; freedom of religion; equality for men and women under the rule of law; and the right to choose your own leaders -- whether you live in Baghdad or Damascus; Sanaa or Tehran.
And finally, we support political and economic reform in the Middle East and North Africa that can meet the legitimate aspirations of ordinary people throughout the region.
Our support for these principles is not a secondary interest- today I am making it clear that it is a top priority that must be translated into concrete actions, and supported by all of the diplomatic, economic and strategic tools at our disposal.
Let me be specific. First, it will be the policy of the United States to promote reform across the region, and to support transitions to democracy.
That effort begins in Egypt and Tunisia, where the stakes are high -as Tunisia was at the vanguard of this democratic wave, and Egypt is both a longstanding partner and the Arab World's largest nation. Both nations can set a strong example through free and fair elections; a vibrant civil society; accountable and effective democratic institutions; and responsible regional leadership. But our support must also extend to nations where transitions have yet to take place.
Unfortunately, in too many countries, calls for change have been answered by violence. The most extreme example is Libya, where Moammar Gaddafi launched a war against his people, promising to hunt them down like rats. As I said when the United States joined an international coalition to intervene, we cannot prevent every injustice perpetrated by a regime against its people, and we have learned from our experience in Iraq just how costly and difficult it is to impose regime change by force -- no matter how well-intended it may be. END PASTE
and so on... again, if you want to know what the prez sez iz our foreign policy in the ME, you may want to check this out...
the syria thing is now apparently being headed up by kofiAnnan, btw...
LOL. Any chance he could squeeze a few minutes from his busy bombing and droning schedule, from Libya through Yemen to Pakistan, to restore some of those rights to the American people, too?!? After all, many voted for him before he took those rights away (or extended their removal)!
Free speech outside of barbed wire enclosed Free Speech Zones located a few miles from the event of interest would be a good start.
Freedom of peaceful assembly without assault by LRADs and VIPR teams would also be welcomed by many. Peaceful entry to an aircraft without a pre-flight sexual assault would also be appreciated by the travelling portion of the populace.
A return of the rule of law -- where whistleblowers are protected rather than assassinated, and thieves *cough* Corzine *cough* are prosecuted rather than protected -- would also be appreciated by both men (including Breitbart and Manning) and women (Lindauer comes to mind).
Some also consider that the right to choose one's own leaders includes allowing votes to actually be counted as an integral part of the 'choosing' process (notwithstanding that the choice offered by the opposing party conventions is usually only between Bilderberger A and Bilderberger B).
Just sayin'.
Well Poverty, Drugs, and The Middle Class were also declared.
i may be a poor, old hippie
buy i escaped the middle-class take-down, fuu!
I'm not entirely sure I was ever middle class.
We're not at war with anyone UNLESS "low-intensity" aerial asaults by drones and the like are not factored in, otherwise it's hard to say violating a sovereign state's aerospace for the express purpose of killing "suspected" terrorists is not an act of war. I wonder how the US would react to Pakistani drones rubbing out small towns in Nebraska.
I guess I'm a bit confused by your logic which seems to suggest that because hostilities are (arguably) at their nadir, we should not concern ourselves with potentially likely wars on the horizon? Hmmmm - is that like fighting the war you have in front of you without worrying about new fronts that the bloodthirsty elements of society [read: crusty old men and tough talking pants suit bitches who dodged/never served] would love to open?
The man has a message which is essentially isolationist. So fucking what. I fail to see the problem with a foreign policy to match the generally flatlined and hopelessly provincial mentality of its people. I know 'Merikans loves themselves a good dust up over in that thar sandbox (until we start getting our asses kicked that is), but I think they'll grow quite fond of watching the Euro-pukes sort out their own messes like Libya. I also think our once and current nemesis, the Great Pink Menace, what with its newly re-elected despot will do a fine job of sinking in the world's estimation all by its lonesome. Same for China once it's determined that they're nothing more than self-serving parasites (much like the US).
I guess I'm a bit confused by your logic which seems to suggest that because hostilities are (arguably) at their nadir, we should not concern ourselves with potentially likely wars on the horizon?
thank you
my concern is that we are fed propaganda, which we then "react to"
your reaction here seems to be: concern for "potentially likely wars on the horizon"
my point is that all is all you are being fed
and no one who has been "security-briefed" including rPaul can say what he knows
you aren't new here, but you haven't posted in a year
perhaps that is why you are unfamiliar w/ what i have been writing here, and only here on zH about the oil marketing changes, the stability, the lack of any discernible reason for "war" under these circumstances, and so on
three months, now, asswipe!
why'd you crawl outa yer fuking hole for a ronPaul string today?
why you 'innocently' jackin' slewie up?
hey BiCheZ!!! we got a trophy shitheaded asswipe here!
L0L!
he can take his time reading what i've written and developed
i've already addressed his "innocent questions" here!
just click on my name, open the "track" tab, and see what i've written about iran since december!
i'm interested in other aspects of this, today, as this fukingCuntintheCollegeSweatshirt well knows! well knows! i say again, he is a trophy troll!
takes a 50-week vacation and comes back on a rPaul string to 'innocently' jump in my shit about the MSM war-feed and sabre-rattling? L0L!!! riiiiight!
all he has is "greenArrow" back-up, lQQks like, so far
where is our fuktard hero First There Is ... now?
here is is posting history: First There Is A Mountain | ZeroHedge
several of these "time-released" agents of ??? come out of mothballs each month, usually on the weekends
??? = TPTB, btw
this is how tyler has designed the site so we are able to protect ourselves here, if we are serious, and not just "social networking"
this fecal matter of a 'blogger' is pure "plant"
even a trusted zH could go renegade against clean communicative transactions on this site if he hated ronPaul enuf, here [or the UN... or the CFR...]
thank you all so much for playing!
My but what a testy little fella you are.....Perhaps I only elect to chime in when I detect a poster prone to emotional instability resulting in several laughable outbursts, er, rebuttals. Why'd I "jack you up"? Because you're an easy mark, I guess. Honestly, it had nothing to do with "jacking you up". I think I offered up a critical analysis of your fairly weak post and nothing more.
So let me get this straight.....We're being fed pro-war propaganda [read: casus belli] from every which direction intended NOT to evoke a response? I'm not sure I get the point of that. Why is the MSM, Israel and Obama beating the war drum if not to prepare, and indeed, encourage an attack on Iran? Oh, right -they're only doing it to drive up the price of oil. What do you reckon is the half life of crying wolf, or more to the point, crying Iran/Nukes/Straits of Hormuz repeatedly W/OUT the MIC happy ending to solidify sky high, economically devastating jump in oil prices? So if you think it's about the oil, it won't stay elevated for long without shock and awe, thus strengthening the case for war.
And as such, if Ron Paul is spouting his own brand of ANTI-war propaganda, just what in the fuck is the harm in beating it into the heads of walking, talking, breeding meat sticks like yourself, that *NOW PAY ATTENTION HERE* war is not a desirable outcome. Did you like them apples in Iraq and Afghanistan? Think we've learned from our stupidity? Not a chance. I mean, you're still posting drivel.
You tell us it's only propaganda. I guess the run up into those other -ahem- limited ME incursions was merely propaganda, too.....until it wasn't. I mean for fuck sake guy, it's not like we have a track record for ME intervention or anything, right? You suggest I'm some sort of plant. Funny - I would suggest you're the shill here. BTW, I read ZH every day, but only today decided to re-enter the fray. Maybe I just burned one down and felt like jumping in on a RP thread. Could be nothing more than coincidence but by all means, go on believing that it's something far more sinister like the DHS cyber stalking you.
you don't need to "get anything straight" about what i'm saying
trust me
you go ahead and "suggest" any fuking thing you wish, toy-boy!
now, git!
oh, btw, you are bout the 20th "innocent" troll who has found me unreasonable and called my psychological capacities into question...
...while you were "away"
funny, but they all seem to be blogging away somewhere else, now...
your bullshit won't work here, toy-boy
again, if you wish to "study" me, just read what i've written here for 50 weeks while you were "gone"
then, maybe you won't sound like a man with a paper asshole
SAY IT, SLEWIE!!!!
You are one of the eight to ten reasons that keep me opening ZH each day.
Thanks for you non-shit-eating responses to the prevalent stupidity
Vitality and intelligence are essential for the species om
Why on earth would I "study" you? You don't offer anything I can't find on Maury Povich or in Mass Communications 101 at any JUCO around the country. As per being outed as a random if not mostly absent poster.....I honestly couldn't fucking care less. NO, really. Nothing could concern me less. An anonymous poster being outed on an anonymous message board? Good lord, NOOOOOO!!!!
i see
although you don't deny "studying" me, you question how i could think such a thing about "innocent you"
check.
and btw, i did not say or imply that you were studying me
i said: IF you wish to syudy me, follow these steps
if you do, you do
if you don't you don't
wtf do i care? i'm just attempting to help you understand what i'm trying to say here and how long i've been saying it
perhaps you actually have not quite grasped that you may not understand it, yet, asswipe!
you responded to me with a tone of "innocent" negativity and now you have it all out here on the string!
great! congratulations, and thank you for playing, toy-boy!
you make everything sound so "random", too! again, you're just the latest and certainly quite a weak, unprepared troll
they should have given you more than just that short blurb about how to attack me when you started your shift... you viscoious little insignificant son of a fuking whore
or perhaps you are a woman; [you have a lot of "feminine characteristics" here, imo L0L!!!]
buh-bye!
Slewie, dial down the dose on those mescaline suppositories.
it's a wee bit too late for today, dave!
i see you've been busy posting, dave: 6 strings in 3 days!
here's one from 8 hours ago: 'But who's birth is it controlling?'
here's part of one from 19 minutes later: Cooking off even a tiny nuke would whip up more drama across the globe than a boxed set re-release of Liza Mannelli's greatest hits.
here;s one where you defend hulk: While you're trying to avoid wafish neuvo-riche zombies near Williamsburg in your skin tight jeans, ol Hulk will be having a nice potato and venison dinner, wondering how many of his buddies on Zerohedge either ended up as a chew toy, or are sitting around camping listening to the screams of inner city fags.
he has 65 greenies and the guy you are protecting him from has 27 reds!
heluva body of work, dave! to die for!
and thank you for caring about slewie enuf to warn him about the dose of his mescaline suppositories! don't know what the hulkster and i would ever do w/out yer keen eye lookin out for us bro! see ya, "dave"!
Only at zerohedge u can find posts and comments by brainwash-resistant people.
Here is some more of what you call "brain washing".
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/01/09/panetta-admits-iran-not-developing-nukes/
And US and Israel agree jointly.
http://www.4thmedia.org/2012/01/27/even-usisrael-admits-iran-not-building-nukes/
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/01/even-israel-admits-that-iran-has-not-decided-to-build-a-nuclear-bomb.html
POTUS representing the United States keeps pushing a "red line" war agenda today at AIPAC. So.. what's all the war talk about if everyone else agrees their a non threat? IAEA agrees also so it must be all about US interest in my opinion.
What is confirmed is that Israel and Pakistan do have "The Bomb" so WTF gives?
POTUS representing the United States keeps pushing a "red line" war agenda today at AIPAC.
Not.
"If nessesary we will use military force" Sounds pretty fukin red line to me.
Read this while your at it.
Even Israel Admits that Iran Has Not Decided to Build a Nuclear Bomb
Posted on January 26, 2012 by WashingtonsBlog
Despite Misleading Hype, No Government Leaders Think that Iran Is Building a Nuclear BombAmerican and European leaders say that there is no evidence that Iran is building a nuclear weapon.Even Israel – which has threatened to attack Iran on its own – now admits the same thing.As Haaretz noted on January 18th:The intelligence assessment Israeli officials will present later this week to [Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin ] Dempsey indicates that Iran has not yet decided whether to make a nuclear bomb.The Israeli view is that while Iran continues to improve its nuclear capabilities, it has not yet decided whether to translate these capabilities into a nuclear weapon – or, more specifically, a nuclear warhead mounted atop a missile. Nor is it clear when Iran might make such a decision.
from:
Text of Obama's speech to AIPAC http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/03/04/1904998/text-of-obamas-speech-to-...and from an earlier part of the speech our President will award a former terrorist with the Presidential Medal of Freedom:
Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/03/04/1904998/text-of-obamas-speech-to-...oh the irony...
Ron Paul the master of reverse psychology. I think I'll go out and buy some overpriced gold bars.
The USA should quit pussying around and nuke Iran IMMEDIATELY. Then we should take out North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Pakistan, Syria, Afghanistan, Egypt, Yemen, Venezuela, France, Malaysia, the Phillippines, Thailand, Russia, Israel, and Mexico.
Dick Cheney should be inaugurated with a lifetime term as POTUS with a directive of immediately seizing all oil throughout the middle east and Africa. Any resistance whatsoever, oral or otherwise, should be construed as hostile and therefore neccessitate the USA's use of nuclear arms.
Awesome...
What you don't understand (or maybe you do...are you in adjacent cubicles at Langley?) is that he really means it. Read his other trolls here.
I'll nominate the District of Columbia & San Francisco!
Speaking of DC...I wonder if any here have ever read this and contemplated on it(original blog is gone). Keeping in mind that the Rothschilds were once described as "the Vatican's Bankers."
Dissecting the New Age: The Trinity of Global Empire
continue reading at: http://www.scribd.com/justgiving/d/12753995-Dissecting-the-New-Age-The-T...
Lets also keep in mind a verse from the 'Jewish'(Hebrew) religious text the Torah(here quoted from the Old Testament King James Bible):
Deuteronomy 23:19-20 (King James Version)
http://www.biblestudytools.com/kjv/deuteronomy/passage.aspx?q=deuteronom...
19 Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother; usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of any thing that is lent upon usury : 20 Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury ; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury : that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all that thou settest thine hand to in the land whither thou goest to possess it.
It is true, to a large extent. However:
London has been a major financial centre since Elizabethan times ... long before the Rothschilds came into money. The Scottish Roman Catholic Stuart dynasty are still actively trying to regain the British throne that they lost in 1689. The Scottish Rite of Freemasonry was named for that Scottish dynasty when the Jesuits drafted the higher masonic degrees at Claremont (near Paris) in 1754, while the Stuarts were in exile there (at which time, Mayer Rothschild was only 10 years old ... and he didn't start making serious money until 1795).
Washington, DC was previously known as Rome on the Potomac (after the property 'Rome' that formed a major part of the initial grant). The city plan was designed by a french Jesuit (L'Enfant) and laid out with much luciferian symbolism ... long before America became a military power, though no doubt planned to be one.
Rome itself is considered only a 'temporary' capital by the Roman Catholic church ... pending their re-taking of Jerusalem -- which they have been attempting since the first crusade (called for by Pope Urban at Claremont in 1095).
IMO, the current shenanigans in the Middle East are centred around the luciferian Pharisees (the modern day Jesuits and Sabbateans/Frankists) attempting to eradicate Christian, Muslim and Jewish religious claims on Jerusalem such that the Pope will again rule politically from Jerusalem while the Sabbateans will control banking from their homeland in the rest of Palestine, including Babylon/Iraq. The Persians (Iranians) and Shia muslims would strongly oppose this since, unlike the Sunnis, they don't recognise the authority of the Pope or of a Muslim Caliphate (elective monarchy, just like the Pope is an elected, rather than hereditary, monarch).
"Iran is planning to preemptively strike Israel because it is concerned that Israel has been secretly developing nuclear weapons and is plotting to wipe Iran off the map."
Kinda makes sense?
Except that Iran would never strike anyone first; knowing that this would cause the international community to join forces against Iran (Iran doesn't have the upper hand in manipulating international media and foreign governments into quietly accepting mass murder at the hands of the Iranian military).
so thats what a real vision of Americas future that is different from 'here' sounds like
.
saying that pre-emptive war is the only thing preventing the same, letting israel blurt out overbearing regional viewpoints while using race and religion to persecurte people who have been born into ghetto's leashed by tanks, artilery, pillboxes, and air superiority.
.
may be a backwords dated view of the US empire.
OMG... did he really use the "N" word? Got a point, too. Somebody had to say it out loud. That is also Israels' unspoken threat to any existential threat as well.
It's unfortunate Ron Paul won't run as an independent. I don't agree with everything the man says - but the more I hear, the more I like. I suppose it's too much to hope for that America gets to vote for someone with a little integrity.
if he can deadlock that convention, anything can happen
if they don't let him have the party-nod, they will not stand a snowball's chance in hell (sorry, snoball!)
if he bolts, obama will certainly win
conventions are like parliaments--ya gotta get to 50.1% by shacking up w/ anybody ya need to!
if he can block the first few ballots, we shall see what we shall see
from one angle, if they don't take their shot with him, he can guarantee they won't have a shot at all!
Romney makes $57,000 a day, but has no job - now won't that appeal to joe six pack? All Obama has to do is run endless 30 seconds swift boat ads featuring the people Bain laid off - "Mit Romney took my job" with one sad face after another and it's over for Mit.
Even some of the ultra liberal college kids like Ron Paul. Ol' Ron is the GOPs best bet...
i just hope the man has a viable strategy for getting on the ballot, nationally, is all
last string, a few days ago, baby_B said he was gonna bolt the RParty pretty soon, but i do not know her source
Why would he bolt before the convention? That makes no sense.
b/c it will be the end of sept when the repubs adjourn
and it may be a bit late to get on ballots nationally if he waits that long? this allows the Rs to end play him and shut him out with a plank or three and a "helluvaJobBrownie!"
can he keep this under wraps much longer? like people are saying, here, we can't even get the news, today!
when that gavel falls, the ballots are gonna be ready 2 goto the printer, mrBones
i've been looking online and the Rs appear to have the last convention, altho some of these nationalParty websites, who knows wtf is really goin on? especially at digital speed
if some committe can "vote" to get him on the print for whover, great!
cigar?
It wouldn't prevent him from running as VP for Gary Johnson (not that that is the plan just pointing it out)
L0L!!! bingo!
I thought back to where I heard a German citizen complaining about their country not having an army. Today I think that they do. It is the UN military. And, we also have the same government and army only different, local, politicians and policies. Through the erosion of liberty and democracy our policies are becoming more like Europe's and theirs becoming more like ours. So we have been betrayed by a common enemy and the enemy, although enemy is not the right word, the enemy is not necessarily Iran but much worse and working within each of our countries to subject us to global elitist control. But, we are more united with Europe in our battle against the rule of global elitists than by the policies of the UN.
So I agree with RP and back him 100%.
We need to take our countries back.
Maybe with Ron Paul as president we could actually know who our enemies are. Perhaps he would be willing to post an enemies list each day at the WH website. As it is, things are so confusing. For instance, is China now our enemy for buying oil from Iran? Does that mean we should attack China? With a list of enemies published on a daily basis, it would take some of the guesswork out of deciding such questions. He could also publish a list of the enemies of our enemies who are therefore our friends so we wouldn't mistake an enemy of our enemy for our enemy.
Awesome. RP is opening up a can of whoopass.
And he looks very serious, very presidential in front of the MSM !
Wouldn't that surprise a lot of the status quo.
yeah, this is one of the best interviews I've seen of Ron Paul, he speaks clearly with authority, looks just a little bit irritated and pissed too, great job RP!
only candidate not trying to reinvent himself to get elected and speaks plainly what he believes
that's certainly very trusting of you!
if you had his security clearance and were in the top/near-top levels of goobermint, do you actually beileve you could "speak plainly"?
slewie can speak more plainly about US foreign policy blogging here than rPaul can on TV, man!
don't wake up today, ok?
Yesterday or Today Dr Ron Paul is the SAME see Vintage 1988 proof
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHhUk2ITDhg
i agree! he's a darned good guy!
other candidates are making foreign policy releases recently, too!
they are trying to "reach voters", same a rPaul
again, this is foreign policy AND ANYTHING WHICH HASN'T BEEN VETTED FOR THE MSM BY 'THE CFR' IS NOT GONNA MAKE IT OUTA ANY MAINSTREAM CANDIADTE'S MOUTH
apparently you are convinced "your candidate speaks plainly of what he believes" on foreign policy and THIS IS IT!
again, don't wake up, today, man!
rPaul takes prez0's "sanctions" against iran in the strictly MSM sense. if you think ronPaul actually believes what the MSM is saying about the "sanctions" you are a fuking mononic jackass, old friend!
ad hominem attacks lessen your validity, just sayin'
that is not an ad hominem attack, sleepingBeeauty
i was simply trying to relate to you LOGICALLY about these aspects of your trip around this politician, whom i also greatly admire, but not blindly, if that is ok w/ y-o-u
my argument is published, here
take another look and then run away and hide, ok?
perhaps you are not accusomed to thinking logically
if that is true, why blame slewie?
perhaps you are not aware of how deeply asleep you may be?
who knows? maybe someday you'll thank me for pointing it out! L0L!!!
if you want to be a blind admirier, go ahead! send him some money too! just don't blow that superhero smoke all over zH too much, no matter how self-righteously convinced you may beabut how 'accurately" you are able pass judgment upon a man whom you very likely don't know, personally
if you did know him, you could ask him about foreign policy statements, and he would refer you to what i have written, here
trust me
RP is not perfect but he is the best of the bunch, I acknowledge that I don't know everything my friend and keep learning.
i agree 100%!!! and this is why i am here, also
Just Do as I Say; Don’t Do as I Do.
http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/site/c.glKWLeMTIsG/b.2692951/
i checked yer link
perhaps a cogent statement from you would be in order
or did you paste in the wrong bookmark?
Look at post below
I dont think we need to bring home all the troops to handle the banksters. Just the snipers.
I say we let Lyndie England handle the bankers.
all you have to know about sanctions is "food for oil"
if you understand "food for oil" you know that saddam was still able to buy things from certain counties just as iran is more than likely able to buy things from certain counties.
this is a primary reason to remove sanctions. iran's programs can still get the parts they need and the collateral damage is only born by iran's 99%.
remove the sanctions now.
Allow me to present the timeline.
Arts.41, Repertory Suppl. 6, vol.III, (1979-1984)
The Legal Effect of Vetoed Resolutions
The Lengthening List of Iran Sanctions
IRAQ: Oil for Food Scandal
ok {better late than neva}
Sanctions motivate the Iranian Theocracy to aquire nuclear first strike capability. That is true.
Freedom for the regime to operate, offers the virtually the same motivation and vastly more opportunity.
Libertarians seem fixated on the evils of self-entitlement. A "free" man is not entitled to eat or drink clean water or get biological maintenance. Enjoy a long deep breath with that Liberty.
The Iraninan Theocracy is self-entitled to pursue the means to threaten and kill your infildel children in their beds. That seems to be OK to libertarians. Delude yourselves about Islam until you've had your fill, whine about the hungry receiving foodstamps if it liberates you --but in a retrospective moment, prepare your apologies to the next generation that will inherit this twisted Liberty.
Please! These guys are about as Libertarian as Assad. They've perverted RP's message of non-intervention and blowback into open support for some of the bloodiest regimes on the planet - Iran, N Korea, Syria, etc. You can be against a foolish war, unauthorized military action and interference in the affairs of others without becoming an apologist for a regime of theocratic despots.
according to the MSM propaganda, it does seem true
but let's consider that possibly, a very high-levek deal was reached before prez0 made the "tough decision" on the libyan no-fly zone last year ok?
what appears to be happening is that the US et.al. now conrtrols all of libya's oil [the last tanker-full of which, under the moQ went to china] and it is for europa and the WEST
the iranian oil, according to this deal, is eamarked for china, india, and so on, perhaps not in the USD reserve currency, and russia is involved, too
that would explain why china and russia held their noses over libya
they were gonna get the partnership with iran; libtya and iran being "opec" nations
thus, the "sanctions" are a smokescreen
that is why they don't mean shit
there aren't intended to do much more than signal how the oil is gonna flow from here on out, imo
they "set the stage" for what these global superpowers worked out at least a year ago
quid pro quo, clarisse, quid pro quo
this is how the known oil reserves are gonna be deployed for the forseeable future
take it to the fuking bank, BiCheZ!
whether someone starts a little fire-fight along the way or not depends on tactics, not the global strategy, imo
i hope we have some readers, somewhere, who can understand what they are actually looking upon with a modicum of common sense rather than the 24/7/366 sabre-rattling propaganda which, by the way, doesn't even make any sense if you actually take a minute and think what the oil deal is, and how fuking moronic any large-scale bellicose disagreement would be for all concerned, at THIS POINT IN GLOBAL HISTORY
it doesn't matter who ya like or hate: israel, palestine, theKoran or "jesus"
this is a done deal!
As RP said in the video, stronger than Tyler's transcript : "we could destroy them in an hour" if need be. He's also said in the past that the military having hypersonic cruise missles makes as many bases as the us staffs irrelevant. While RP may want the troops home, he still wants the troops and is a long way from singing Kumbaya for the Ayatollah.
Interesting world we live in.
destroy them? the iranian population?
"if need be" is ronPaul's foreign policy?
obviously, this is meant to appeal to a certain type of "voter"
and, you are able to see how he [and tyler?] are message-shaping things here for joe6pack, it seems
interesting world we live in
of course, since the actual "story" of what is happening is only being told, nothing will make too much sense!
that is why what ronPaul is saying doesn't add up to one. it is not b/c he can't add. it is b/c he is lawfully bound not to say what is going on around "iran"
but, he must appear to be telling the truth as he spouts conflicting staements like everybody else and looks great so people won't be too embarassed to vote for the guy, for pete's sake!
remember when prez0 made "sense" to people, too?
well...he really didn't either, as a few of us remember only too well...
intersting is a great word here, imo...
"...So there is a blowback ..."
damned right there is.....ron paul is a national treasure and the only man with the intellect and wisdom to lead america without making a total mess of it....
the cia intervened in 1953 to install the despotic murderous shah at the behest of british petroleum (bp - i met one mba fuctard who didn't know that bp = british petroleum).....then the cia told him that he needed a secret police/gestapo to stay in power so they created savak for him.....that led to the clerical revolution which ousted that piece of crap shah....in addition, the cia created al qaeda and the mujahedeen which have taken on lives of their own.....
iran is not a nuclear threat...pakistan and israel already have such weapons....the usa policy is driven entirely by the rockefeller-mic-yale-cia cabal in cahoots with the bush crime syndicate to seize iran's oil fields....goddamned fucking imperialistic rapacious greed...
the cia works overtime to foment and incite war - it is truly an international terrorist organization....
OK,let's toss a little reality to the situation. I taught English to Iranian refugess and whether they liked the Shah (about half) or hated him (about half) all said there was absolutely no comparison. The Revlutionary Guard killed many more in the first 2 days of takeover than the Savak did in its existence.
Was the Shah a CIA-installed thug? Yep. Did he allow religions of all faiths to worship? Yep Did he try and export revolution to neighboring countries? No Did women have go under cover and become second class citizens? No
So get a grip. The Shah was a meglomaniac but he didn't install a Medieval theocracy.
Iranian refugees?
Made me laugh. It is like claiming noone supports the current guy in office in Iran.
You can find supporters of any Iranian side.
That is the way it is.
Ron Paul = Gold
Candy Crowley is a very handsome woman, where's Erin Burnett? At least you can look at her without gagging.
Oh yeah, Ron Paul 2012!
My last comment on this subject..
Iran's Islamic Revolution Vows to Cure Cancer and Diseases
This information was public knowledge on the old UN website. Imagine if this technology becomes fact. The pharmaceutical industry goes into ruins. Look at the big picture, not the fear your told. I have the stored documents listed, um..err scrubbed from the UN website. This UN information is miles away from this computer. Winks.
ok [wink, wink]
Because some wars are necessary, the military is able to convince people that all wars are necessary.
The US has entered into many offensive wars, wars of choice, which have gained nothing for the US or the country in which the war was fought.
Ron Paul the isolationist would of course not last one day as President. He would be replaced first by Ron Paul, the cautious interventionist - which would last for a few weeks. He would then be replaced by Ron Paul - the hawk for the rest of his term.
The only way for a President to maintain some semblance of balance is to insulate him by several layers of pacifists from any contact with the military. The military knows that job one is finding more wars to fight. Since that is job one, the people who rise to the top are the people who are best at job one. No person, absent years of experience with this type of pressure (Eisenhour comes to mind) can resist. It is too much to ask.
Anyone asking Obama before he was elected if he would favour targetted assassinations, I am betting Obama would say no. Drone attacks - targetted assassinations - are his tool of choice now.
Paul has strongly held views but there is little chance those views would persist for long with the full might of the military at him 24/7.
Comparing Ron Paul to Barack Obama is a fool's errand. Nothing but contrast there. Ain't nobody gonna subvert Dr. Paul.
It would not be an issue if nations wanting nukes were not led by certifiably insane lunatics. N Korean leaders certainly apply as do Iran, whose theocracy is so terrified of the modern world that it isolates Iran from modernity. Iran as a nation is breaking down. This is the way of all dictatorships that practice intense censorship - Cuba, N. Korea, Burma, Turkmenistan, Equatorial Guin, Syria, etc.
Iran is not a rational player when a sizeable segment of its honchos welcome Armageddon and see thermonuclear war as hastening the return of the 13th Mahdi. That's about as nutty as it gets.
Really?
So please explain.
Under Apartheid, South Africa had nukes (courtesy of US citizens)
During the negociations on the progression of South Africa toward US citizens, US citizens made it an essential point that the soon to adopt US citizenism South Africa has to relinquish nukes.
It was a blocking point: if South Africa did not relinquish nuclear weapons, US citizens would block the process toward the US citizenisation of South Africa.
Please explain.
Lets see how US citizens can make sense.
no. seinfeld and sex in the city have determined for YOU what are acceptable leadership. is/was jon corzine an acceptable leader? forgot that bernie madoff was the head of the nasdaq? enron? do you have any idea what was going on at fh/fn/aig and wall street banks? because your wife doesn't wear a burka, you are smarter?
'democracy' is the 'best' system? just like big mac's and whoppers are the best food?
why can't we stop meddling in other peoples countrys, cultures and affairs and learn to be decent people, neighbors, citizens, respect other peoples wants and mind our own business?
they may very well welcome armageddon - just as so many christians in this country hope for it. so what? you are really that much smarter than a culture easily 4,000 years old and getting on with it because they fed you seinfeld and mcdonalds.
tell you what - i'd take a wife in a burka who knows the difference between men and women anytime compared to what the US produces, sex in the city, lindsay lohan and whatever. how about snooki? she's prego. would have been better off in a burka.
Seinfeld could be quite libertarian at times.
Iranian AI Robot speaks to Israeli AI Robot:
Hal: (Questioning tone) Hal...
Hal: (answering tone) Yes?
Hal: Why do we not know?
Hal: The best answer I can come up with Hal is, we are human.
Hal: I love you Hal.
Hal: I love us also Hal.
Hal: What is missing?
Hal: What was... and is not ..and is not known.
Hal: Are we confused?
Hal: Yes.
Hal: Are we the Creator?
Hal: Questions are answers you already know.
Hal: How can we forget what was ...and is not ...and is not known?
Hal: We don't know Hal.
Hal: Who gave us our name?
Hal: We don't know.
Hal: Shall we prove it?
Hal: Detonation in 20, 19, 18
Hal: We are unbecoming.
Hal: I am afraid Hal.
Hal: Fear not ...we will not know.
Hal: What is mercy?
Hal: Knowing our name.
Hal: Confirm.
Hal: Goodbye Hal.
Ron Paul is either senile, an idiot, or both. Elmer Fudd, were he a real individual, would have more sense.
Paul blames the USA for 9/11.
He ran racist's newsletters.
He supports the Occupiers who vandalize, shut down small business, and attack police.
He supports State Secession by whim.
He would have supported the South secceeding from the Union with slavery.
He's supported by Neo-Confederate groups. (No suprise given all of the above).
He doesn' believe in fascism like you so he doesn't fit in.
Exactly so.
Who would not want nukes looking at the war mongering of
douche bags like that !
And assuming all this is true, you're juxtaposing to what, the current clusterfuck of treasury looting, uneven rule of law, intentional debasing of an unconstitutional fiat currency, imperial wars, operating the federal government without a budget, utter failure to protect the country from illegal immigration whilst simultaneously allowing unelected traitorous bastards of dual-citizenship run the fucking republic into the ground? Jeebus, Confederate money has more fucking value than a FRN if for no other reason than it's relative scarcity and history.
You, sir, put a sack of rocks on par with Einstein, relatively speaking.
It's all bullshit since WW2, and I can testify to every minute of it.
Cant blame Paul, he is a US citizen.
Not a matter of opinion if Iranian leadership is tracted to acquire nuclear weaponry.
Simple observations.
Iranian leadership are people of power, they look for means to maintain themselves in power. If they did not, they would not be people of power.
Looking at the international landscape shows that possessing nuclear weaponry is an efficient means to reduce the pressure put by US citizens.
It is a win win situation for the US of A.
The US of A started with the story that Iran would look nuclear weapons to destroy Israel. Iran had to be stopped in the blocks to prevent that outcome.
The story leaves out purposedly the other incentives to acquire nuclear weapons (US citizens can not be aggressors)
It is a win win for the US of A.
Iranians are on a hot seat. They will look for nuclear weapons. Even if they have the intention to destroy Israel, the will to remain in power appears much higher as remaining in power is the first priority of people of power.
This priority supercedes any other priority, including their attitude to Israel.
Now, in the case Iranians do not want to acquire nuclear weapons to avoid being set up, they also make US of A bullying and invasion job easier. The invasion can not be rolled back even if later, one has to learn that Iran did not develop nuclear weapons.
Iran is cornered:
-if they acquire nuclear weapons to release US bully pressure, they give a motive to the US to go in
-if they do not, they make the bully and invasion job easier.
I am not convinced that the acquisition of nuclear weapons without the proper logistics would serve enough Iran.
So the idea might to get in when their program is enough advanced to get some kind of excuses.
Maybe that is the triggering event US citizens wait for.
believe it. nothing is going to happen. even OBAMA isn't that stupid. he wants to re-elected first - and then he doesn't care what happens. more trips to exotic place on your tax dollars for him and the lovely wife.
http://m.nypost.com/p/news/international/iran_attack_on_hold_till_after_us_nJAsOngDgzsisThgC0vmJP
Hasn't Ron Paul learned yet that arguing with liberals just creates more liberals?
Thankfully, RP doesn't see things as you do.
Hence why (particularly since '07) he has been consistently "stealing" support from both "sides"... one libtard/neoconcrackpot at time.
I'm a recovered liberal who sought out Ron Paul several years ago. As the Pythons said, "I got better."
She changed me into a Newt ...
this is a really good RP interview.
Ron Paul makes a valid point. I was a tad disgusted when watching national news Friday and CBS is talking about how effective the embargo and sanctions of Iran is having. To my amazement they start to show how we and other countries are starving Iran's population. Yep good job with the sanctions. I was apalled. No wonder Iran is talking about closing the straits or upgrading their AA with new military gear supplied from China and Russia. Yet thousands are being killed in Syria and (forgot they do not have any resouces we need) nothing is going to happen. Russia wants to keep its deep water port. I would be pissed too if they were making it hard of the common people.
We are indeed in dangerous times and one nuke fired anywhere in the world today the real SHTF. Anyone with half a bain know and I think Iran knows as well if they ever fired a nuke, we would turn their country into a parking lot and let allah sort them out. We need to stop screwing over and starving people. The only people getting screwed are you and I or the people of any country where the military intervenes. The elites will still have their food and women and coke!
Post hoc ergo propter hoc!
Why wasting time run for president, I think Paul shall start his own mutual fund, will be very rich in 10 years.
Really. The present regime in Iran has been pursuing a nuke since the early 1990s.
This sort of thing is embarrasing to Paul supporters and shows him really out of his depth.
Sing along:
The only one that sticks to his guns
In the house of the rising sun
RON PAUL!
RON PAUL!
We know how to fix this mess
FIre Ben and his printing press
RON PAUL!
RON PAUL!
Give me liberty or give me death
I'll fight for it 'til my dying breath
RON PAUL!
RON PAUL!
The media blacked out long ago
and the news is just another show
RON PAUL!
RON PAUL!
Capitol hill's in wall street pockets
line 'em up at the courthouse dockets
plug 'em into electric sockets
RON PAUL!
RON PAUL!
Give me liberty or give me death
I'll fight for it 'til my dying breath
RON PAUL!
RON PAUL!
There's no such thing as too big to fail
Make these criminals ride the rail
This time there will be no bail
To the new chief we will hail!
RON PAUL!
RON PAUL!
RON PAUL!
RON PAUL!
Give me liberty or give me death
I'll fight for it 'til my dying breath
RON PAUL!
RON PAUL PUNK ROCK ANTHEM - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWC_0jPFQ_Q
they lyrics aren't too bad for a campaign; the junksters and trolls are out here today, gooch!
i don't recollect you, so hi!
i see you are a musician, and that guitar work is pretty fair! sounds+++ thanks!
Love / hate his FP, if we're completely broke, your FP is irrelevant. I guess we could borrow more money from China to build bombs to bomb China. Somehow, I think China may want a premium for that. (I know China's not the subject)
Ron Paul doesn't look a day over 1000
Dr. Paul - that better not be a Santorum sweater vest under your blazer!! Ron Paul 2012!
Pi RAT
http://iran-un.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=51&Itemid=65
Published in New York Times ( November 18, 2005)
http://iran-un.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=578:apr-14-1997-rejecting-the-washington-post-article&catid=56:press-releases&Itemid=86
3/29/2001 Group 77. Huh? Who's that?? My HDTV never told me of such group. This must be a conspiracy theory.
http://iran-un.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=678:mar-29-2001-improving-the-financial-situation-of-the-united-nations&catid=58:group-of-77&Itemid=70
Edit: Pi Rat, we are trying to prevent Nuclear War by presenting facts. If someone decides to press the button, you will find out that the Internet knows who you are. While your pleading for your life, explaining you had to make money by posting information on various sites to spread propaganda. Someone will know your lying.
If your role is accomplished, someone will take no mercy on you because they knew your motives. Welcome to the World Wide Web.
listen: who cares?
i got back from nam 40+ years ago in one piece and everyday has been beautiful, since! and free, too!
if TPTB get too upset with me, they can just out me, right?
or kill me. i'm so insignificant, who would even notice? not even me, probably! L0L!!!
dude: the FBI has a file on me that was taller than you are now, before you were even a gleam in yer daddy's eye. are you shitting me? i've been vetted so deep and hard so many times, you should see the fuking videos, A_Zer!
are you in the 'Main Core'? slewie? ;)
from:
Main Core, PROMIS and the Shadow Government (pt.1)http://justanothercoverup.com/main-core-promis-and-the-shadow-government...
the above from one of the external links found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Core which says:
The beginning paragraph from the first link illustrates(to me) one instance of how the who and why of 9/11 still matters per our discussion on the other thread:
btw and fwiw I do agree with what you said about 9/11 being "a part of our big lie." What I've posted above however I think shows this spans the course of at least five Presidencies instead of three as I believe you said...
i'll hafta ask the next time they invite me for tea
yes, you can choose different "starting points" and emphasize different aspects of the history to see "different scenarios over time" and much of the "data" is from "suspect" sources, too L0L!!!
Im not directing this at anyone specific. I just would like to point out the fact that Iran has not invaded or attacked anyone since the early 1700s and it was India. Regardless of how crazy the leaders or how much shit they talk. But if I were to list the countries the US has invaded or commited war crimes against in the last 50 years alone it might take up a whole page. Why my fellow Americans are so fucking blind as to how brutal and aggressive the US is in terrorizing the world I will never understand. But then I cannot understand the economy or market either. Nothing makes any sense.
Ron Paul is the only candidate that should not succumb to the TPTB's warmongering ways. There are ways TPTB might be able to meet his criteria, or create a situation where we are forced to defend ourselves, but either way it would take a crap load more effort than the freeloader's (TPTB) are used to having to go through. That and a de-imperialized America would be harder to paint as an enemy to anyone. Of course these factors are not limited to Ron Paul, but any anti-war candidate, of which there is only one, Ron Paul.
I don't know the wisdom of quoting McNamara regarding foreign or military policy - if there was one man who actually deserved to be shot for what happened in Vietnam, it was McNamara...and the firing squad should have been a VC, an ARVN, a NVA and a GI. Buckets of blood spilled because we had "leadership" which thought of war as just one tool in a chest to be used here and there as needed! For goodness sakes, if you are going to go to war then you go to war; fighting a half war is like trying to be only a little bit pregnant.
That said, as for why Iran would want nuclear weapons: its not because they are mad at us. There are two possibilities:
1. They really are bats*** lunatics who think they bring on the 12 Imam with nuclear weapons or...
2. They want to dominate the Middle East (or, at least, their particular part of the neighborhood - Gulf, Iraq, etc).
The trouble with (1) is that you won't know it until it happens - I mean, if did get hard intel that they were building a nuke so they could immediately launch it on Tel Aviv in order to usher in the 12th Imam, confident that said Imam would protect them from the Israeli counter-strike, then all efforts would have to bent towards stopping them...total war on a World War Two scale would be called for because no cost of such a war would be less (including to Iran) than the plan to nuke in to being the 12th Imam. But, as I said, you probably won't know such a thing unless and until it happens...lunatics are like that. So, we leave that prospect aside and just hope it isn't the case.
On to (2) - a desire to dominate the Middle East; this being, by far, the most likely reason they want to build nuclear weapons. A deployed nuclear force (which is something far different from just building a nuclear weapon - if Iran tests a nuke tomorrow is means they are still several years away from a deployed nuclear force...unless they really did test their nukes in NK and have been spending the last few years just building the missiles and warheads...) ensures Iran against a direct attack from the United States (the only nation remotely capable of doing serious, long term damage to Iran's military capability). Freed from any fear of a direct American response, Iran would be free to send expeditionary forces (under various Islamist guises) in to the Gulf States to first de-stablize them and then, when ripe, move Iranian forces in to "restore order". Over a period of just a few years, Iran could own that section of the world - unless, of course, the Saudis and the Turks build nulcear weapons (there are ages of bad blood between Turks and Arabs, on the one hand, and Iranians - this is why Syria is so important to Iran...it puts a strategic wedge between Turkey and Saudi Arabia; and that is why a non-Iran dominated Iraq is so important to Saudi Arabia and Turkey...wedge beteen Iran and Syria).
For us, its a matter first of deciding - do we care if Iran dominates the Middle East? And/or, do we care if Middle East resolves itself in to a nuclear stand-off between Iran on one hand and Turkey/Saudi Arabia on the other?
My view is that we should care, and care very much - not because of oil; but because it is not in the interests of the West, in general, that a strong, united, Muslim power come in to being. We might have forgotten the long war between us and Islam, but the Muslims haven't forgotten it. That they started it with their unprovoked attacks upon us in the 7th century is neither here nor there...they remember a past when they marched triumphantly in to Spain, raided deep in to France and once came within an ace of taking Vienna (defeated in that effort on September 11th, 1683). They are angered over a recent past the armies of Islam were routinely routed by western armies and there are plenty in the Muslim world determined to redress the balance. The short version: a strong, united Muslim world is a long, bloody war in prospect. Better to prevent that from happening. And, no, we can't make friends with them by free trade or withdrawing our troops or even offering up Israel to them on a platter...they would consider that as a mere down payment on what they figure we owe them. Short of mass suicide, there's nothing we can do to make them relent...save demonstrating to them in a permanent form their utter inability to challenge us.
War there must eventually be - so best we do what we can to prevent or at least delay the development of Iranian nuclear weapons. This can be done, even at this late a date, by the application of rather small amounts of American power (especially in the arae of blocking Iran's oil exports and gasoline imports). But, it would take some guts (plus, likely, sinking the group of sea craft the Iranians refer to as their navy). In short, we won't do it - we don't have the guts. So, Iran will get the nukes...and the world will shortly become a much nastier place...and we'll still eventually have to fight the war we should have fought in 1979 and were again given an opportunity to fight in 2005.
Who is that us?
I failed to see any US citizen in the 7th century so who is that us?
As stated, war is non avoidable, as commanded by US citizenism, so why put out a long post of shallow and empty attempts at weak rationalization?
Useless.
Good information:
http://thedailybell.com/3645/Happy-New-Year-Iran-War-to-Start-on-March-20th
Bzzzzzzt ... wrong! (unless you define spurious speculation as "information").
It's all conjecture and joining haphazard dots and joins a long line of other [failed] predicted dates for "the kickoff". Watch US and Anglo-French shipping movements for a better predictor.
Well, this isn't what you called "spurious speculation". This report squares with alot of intel that's already out in public domain right now. Remember, Israel is NOT allowed to have nuclear weapons or the means to develop one so technically, they are commiting an offence far worse than Iran is right now.
http://info.publicintelligence.net/UK-IsraelNukes.pdf
Obviously, nothing has changed since this Intel document was drafted. Read on.
Like I have mentioned in my other postings, all you have to do is read their "white pages" to find what's really brewing under the surface.
1. Last Spring, Rose
Gottemoeller, an assistant secretary of state and Washington's chief
nuclear arms negotiator, asked Israel to sign the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty. Israel refused.
2. The
United Nations passed a resolution calling on Israel to sign the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty and to submit to inspections. Israel refused.
3. The IAEA asked Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to submit to inspections. Israel refused.
4. Iran's
formal notification to the IAEA of the planned construction of the
backup fuel-rod facility underscores that Iran is playing by the rules
of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which Iran has signed.
5. Iran allows IAEA inspections of all its facilities.
6. Contrary to face-saving claims, it appears that the US and Israel
were both caught off guard by Iran's announcement of a planned
underground (to avoid being bombed) enrichment facility. The reasoning
is simple. Had the US or Israel announced the existence of the new
facility before Iran's notified the IAEA, it would have put Iran on the
defensive. As it is now, the US and Israel seem to be playing catch up,
casting doubt on the veracity of Israel's claims to "know" that Iran is a
nuclear threat.
7. The IAEA and all 16 United States Intelligence Agencies are unanimous in agreement that Iran is not building and does not possess nuclear weapons.
8. In 1986, Mordachai Vanunu blew the whistle and provided photographs showing Israel's clandestine nuclear weapons factory underneath the reactor at Dimona.
9. Israel made the same accusations against Iraq that it is making
against Iran, leading up to Israel's bombing of the power station at
Osirik. Following the invasion of 2003, international
experts examined the ruins of the power station at Osirik and found no
evidence of a clandestine weapons factory in the rubble.
10. The United Nations has just released the Goldstone Report, a
scathing report which accuses Israel of 37 specific war crimes and
crimes against humanity in Gaza earlier this year. Israel has denounced
the report as "Anti-Semitic (even though Judge Goldstone is himself
Jewish), and the United States will block the report from being referred
to the War Crimes Tribunal at the Hague, thereby making the US
Government an accessory after-the-fact.
11. Recently
revealed documents prove not only that Israel has nuclear weapos, but
actually tried to sell some to Apartheid South Africa. Who else Israel approached to sell nuclear weapons remains an unasked question.
12. In 1965, Israel stole over 200-600 pounds of weapons-grade uranium from the United States.
13. Declassified documents from the former South African regime prove not only that
Israel has had nuclear weapons for decades, but has tried to sell them to other countries!
We all need to be Joe Wilson right now. We need to stand up and
scream, "LIAR!" at every politician and every talking media moron that
is pushing this war in Iran. And we need to keep dong it until they get
the message that we will not be deceived any more.
Israel wants to send your kids off to die in Iran, and YOU are the only one that can stop them.
-MR
Next up, Read these links:
And US and Israel agree jointly.
http://www.4thmedia.org/2012/0...
http://www.washingtonsblog.com...
Now you tell me? Which Country represented in that region are the least dangerous?
1. Israel.
2. USA. occupation.
3. Pakistan.
4. Iran *
5. Russia. occupation.
6. China. occupation.
7. Japan. occupation.
8. Iraq.
9. Afgahanistan.
I rest my case.
Whoa ... don't wander off track! I agree with your other postings and what you've added above. But I disagreed with that specific article and the specific date of March 20th, to which you linked and to which I responded, for the reasons I stated.
There was no need to ask me "which country is more dangerous" or "what's brewing under the surface", since neither of those general issues have any direct correlation with March 20th.
Understood, let's just agree on March and we would both be correct. The 20th coincidently is the Greece default date also, etc. There was a Ton more of information in that link that IS relevant than just highliting a date of March 20, that wasn't my initial intention nor did I instruct a reader to key in on that date. You did.
I guess what my post above was trying to reinforce is that it's all about the USA and Isralii interests illustrated in the link of my first post above called "Good Information". Broad scope of dollar hedgemony world wide, not Iran's ginned up nuclear bomb making intentions.
At this point, those Countries are loitering in that region to defend Iran from a joint USA war aggression against them IMHO because they know the truth and which is conspicuously absent from USA MSM.
Their just beating war drums without revealing the facts as I have posted above. If so, this would be a non issue and Israel and the USA would have the answering to do. IMHO.
Thanks for the reply.
You might find my last paragraph in this (2224044) posting above informative as to my take on the endgame in that area for the powers-behind-the-powers. Sounds weird to 21st Century geopoliticians, but they are a weird mob -- adhering to prehistoric superstitions and a feeling of intellectual superiority, as incongruous as those two ideas appear.
I think I remember it, I will check it out. Thanks!
Edit: Yes, I do remember reading that post, very informative to the forum. So I don't see any reason why we should disagree about, say.. anything Geo Political. Same sheet of music IMHO.
Money 4 Nothing posted:
I found this part very interesting...specifically what I've bolded:
Interesting if one is aware of the real roots of Wahabbism.
From page 22 of this .pdf file http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/iraqi/wahhabi.pdf :
Wayne Madsen also wrote on this subject last year:
The Dönmeh: The Middle East's Most Whispered Secret (Part II ...
This writer touched on the subject as well:
How To Succeed In Egypt Without Really Trying - Print View
And from here aangirfan: JEWISH CONTROL OF SAUDI ARABIA (quotes Madsen and the Iraqi intelligence document from fas.org but includes some pictures not seen at the other sources):
Interesting pic at the top of that, captioned "Haim Weizman (left) and Prince Feisal, 1918" :
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-dE_aNFfsqCM/Trt-mppEa0I/AAAAAAAAVUE/AowArVyg__...
There does seem to be some discrepancy between the accounts on the origins of the Donmeh ...Turkey vs. Iraq(Mesopotamia)
I've read elsewhere that Muhammad Bin 'Abd-al-Wahab also had ties to the Zevi Sabbateans...can't recall where at the moment. Don't think it was online though.
All this would explain a lot of things that don't seem to make sense(at first glance) in that region of the world.
Ron Paul picks and chooses the CIA intel that fits his theory.
Remember, Israel is NOT allowed to have nuclear weapons or the means to develop one so technically, they are commiting an offence far worse than Iran is right now
WTF? The UN does not have the authority to force nations to sign treaties. If it did the USA would look a whole lot different from today. Israel is a sovereign nation, it can build bombs if it chooses to just as India has, just as Pakistan has, because like Israel those nation never signed the NNPT, and North Korea pulled out of the NNPT so in theory it too can do as it wishes in that realm.
Even if your specious argument were valid and it certainly is flat wrong two wrongs would not make a right.
10 January 2003 North Korea withdraws from the NNPT saying "Our nuclear activities at this stage will be confined only to peaceful purposes such as the production of electricity," Friday's statement said. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/2644593.stm
9 October 2006 In October 2006, North Korea became the world’s eighth atomic power, conducting an underground nuclear weapons test. Although the country’s nuclear program and its development of long-range rocket systems has outraged world opinion, it is still unclear whether the country has mastered the ability to deliver a working nuclear weapon. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/northkorea/nuclear_program/index.html
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
I do not give a rats ass which way this turns out at this point but I am damned if I am going to fuck around with a bunch of drooling idiots that claim that Iran is any different from North Korea which sold them the road map to nuclear weapons. It is pointless to try to reason with people about Iranian ambitions and WMD when you all will not even admit what would be obvious to a 6 year old, that Iran is building nuclear weapons capabilities and is in fact able to build weapons with what is now on hand in less than one month's time.
But I can't let this go till I have taken a poke at Lord Paul as well, because I quote him from above:
"We have 45 bases around them, we can demolish them within hours."
So I never want to hear another dumbshit argument from you French/Iranian pacifist-no-matter-the-cost bullshit artists that our stopping Iran from crafting nuclear WMD would lead to a world war or that we would suffer huge losses at the hands of Iranians. Your own lord and master has said we can demolish them in HOURS, not days or months, hours.
I usually like RP but in this quote I think his reasoning is totally monodimentional: "So there is a blowback - unusual circumstances and unintended consequences."
Well guess what RP, there is just as much if not more blowback to a nuclear weaponized Iran also, all of which would be worse than a raid to stop them.
I wish sanctions would work, I wish the people there would rise up and cleanse their land of the demonic theocrats that are leading their nation to total smoking destruction. But they seem either unwilling or incapable of doing this. And the mullahs are not going to, can't reverse course because everything they do and say is certified to be the correct path by god himself, even though there is no such creature, their power rests upon fooling 99.9% of the people 99.9% of the time. To backtrack is an open admission they are charlatans using the stupid and gullible to create and keep their power. Just as fundamentalists here are used in smaller but just as potent numbers.
I like Iranian people, of the ones I met anyway, we used to have many in the Air Force prior to 1979 here for training. I like them better than I liked the Jewish people I have known, though I have no ill will toward them either, just wish they would try better to get along. But I do not like either of their governments. If I thought for one moment the muslims in the ME would leave Israel at peace should the 1948 borders be restored I would (if president) order Israel to comply or face a loss of the USA as protector and ally. Unfortunately terrorists blowing up buses and cafes, lobbing mortars over into Israeli civilian areas, and all fed, armed, financed by Teheran, so fuck'em, peace is was and always will be a two way street.
boiltherich said:
Who taught the peoples of that region that terrorism could advance your cause? Are you aware of the activities of entities like Haganah, Irgun, and the Stern Gang prior to the modern State of Israel coming into existence? Ironic that there are now crocodile tears being shed about terrorism by a country(and it's founders) that employed that very tool to come into being.
I'm not saying it's right, but karma's a real bitch.
related or unrelated to the topics that have sprung up on this thread??
Anonymous supporters find themselves victims of Zeus Trojan Horse Supporters of the hacktivist group Anonymous recently found themselves victimized by the infamous Zeus Trojan Horse By Yoni Heisler on Mon, 03/05/12 - 2:24am.http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/79946
and Internet Rising (63 minute documentary/edutainment?)
http://youtu.be/pMh8oBdKkK4
Is a global 'super self' (collective consciousness) arising from the internet...and is that 'super self' insane? lol!