Tea Party Debate audience boos al-Qaeda facts

[wyly]

Yeah, I'd guess we have roughly ten percent.......

I was thinking 10% fewer...from my unscientific observations the US is made up of 50% idiots so that would mean 40% in Canada...

[Bob]

Ron Paul was wrong to phrase things as he did. He seems to really believe that somehow the USA should extricate itself from the Middle East and allow the chips to fall where they may. Does he not realize how important that region is with respect to oil? Oil is still the lifeblood of every modern economy, and the Middle East is still, unfortunately, the home of about half (or more?) of the world's crude oil production.

His assertions that somehow these Arabs/Muslims have legitimate grievances with the USA clearly implies blame on American foreign policy for the dysfunction of the Middle East. It's as if it's America's fault that they are so sick, twisted, and barbaric. It is an inferior and savage society/culture on its own, full stop. America didn't make these people the way they are. Arab/Muslim society is broken and very diseased, and these problems are certainly not caused by American foreign policy. He is massively ignorant of that side of the world. Good for the audience for jeering at his idiocy.

I would agree that American foreign policy is highly flawed, but for different reasons. America isn't aggressive enough in its prosecution of war, a sick consequence of leftist politics that value the lives of "civilians" more than they deserve. Moreover, America is engaging in "nation building", literally paying, training, arming, and assisting the enemy. Every time I here about America building roads and schools and giving billions of dollars in "development aid" I want to vomit. Destroy the enemy and get out. Let them clean themselves up, it's their fault anyways.

Basically, America gets bogged down via leftist politics. Again.

Edited September 14, 2011 by Bob

[GostHacked]

I have to apologize to American Woman. I think I am getting a couple threads mixed in with each other. The content of these threads are in the same vein, so I got confused.

[wyly]

You've been listening to the crazy ramblings of Bush for so long that when someone talks common sense you think that it's he thats crazy, that is funny . Ron paul is America's only hope.

his observations on foreign policy was a refreshing shocker, unfortunately it goes right over the heads of the voters in the republican party...it must be depressing being a smart politician in the US, if you want to elected you need to dumb down to the electorates level, Paul should have just answered every question with "They hate us for our freedoms, God Bless America! The greatest Country in the World! USA! USA! USA!" and he'd have them all in his pocket...or at least 50% of them...

[bloodyminded]

Ron Paul was wrong to phrase things as he did. He seems to really believe that somehow the USA should extricate itself from the Middle East and allow the chips to fall where they may. Does he not realize how important that region is with respect to oil? Oil is still the lifeblood of every modern economy, and the Middle East is still, unfortunately, the home of about half (or more?) of the world's crude oil production.

His assertions that somehow these Arabs/Muslims have legitimate grievances with the USA clearly implies blame on American foreign policy for the dysfunction of the Middle East. It's as if it's America's fault that they are so sick, twisted, and barbaric. It is an inferior and savage society/culture on its own, full stop. America didn't make these people the way they are. Arab/Muslim society is broken and very diseased, and these problems are certainly not caused by American foreign policy. He is massively ignorant of that side of the world. Good for the audience for jeering at his idiocy.

I would agree that American foreign policy is highly flawed, but for different reasons. America isn't aggressive enough in its prosecution of war, a sick consequence of leftist politics that value the lives of "civilians" more than they deserve. Moreover, America is engaging in "nation building", literally paying, training, arming, and assisting the enemy. Every time I here about America building roads and schools and giving billions of dollars in "development aid" I want to vomit. Destroy the enemy and get out. Let them clean themselves up, it's their fault anyways.

Basically, America gets bogged down via leftist politics. Again.

This is a fairly dank and depraved post. Your bit about "civilians," complete with scare quotes and some vague determination that they don't deserve much value to their lives is especially grotesque.

And of course several nations, certainly including Western democracies, and obviously including the United States, shares profound and unquestionable culpability for many ills elsewhere. No, certainly, the West, much less America alone, is not solely responsible.

But that doesn't let us off the hook. Not for subverting democracies, for murdering people...and for outright support of terrorism on a grand scale.

It's cowardly to even write what you've written.

Edited September 15, 2011 by bloodyminded

[CitizenX]

his observations on foreign policy was a refreshing shocker, unfortunately it goes right over the heads of the voters in the republican party...it must be depressing being a smart politician in the US, if you want to elected you need to dumb down to the electorates level, Paul should have just answered every question with "They hate us for our freedoms, God Bless America! The greatest Country in the World! USA! USA! USA!" and he'd have them all in his pocket...or at least 50% of them...

He might be what I never thought I would witness in my life time. An honest politician. It's like witnessing a unicorn, I'm still rubbing my eyes.

Edited September 14, 2011 by CitizenX

[wyly]

He might be what I never thought I would witness in my life time. An honest politician. It's like witnessing a unicorn, I'm still rubbing my eyes.

I couldn't believe my ears, my first thought was "holy f**K a republican is saying this!" there is hope for the US after all, I'd even vote for him if he ran for the conservatives here, he'd own Harper's ass...I've no idea if his economic policy is any good but ending foreign occupations and conflicts is a good place to start for economic recovery as well...

[CitizenX]

I couldn't believe my ears, my first thought was "holy f**K a republican is saying this!" there is hope for the US after all, I'd even vote for him if he ran for the conservatives here, he'd own Harper's ass...I've no idea if his economic policy is any good but ending foreign occupations and conflicts is a good place to start for economic recovery as well...

He's no republican, he's a libertarian running within the republic party.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8S3yws_88I

Edited September 14, 2011 by CitizenX

[Sir Bandelot]

He might be what I never thought I would witness in my life time. An honest politician. It's like witnessing a unicorn, I'm still rubbing my eyes.

I wouldn't be too enthused. Ron Paul talks a good talk, but remember, it's easier to criticize and speak truth to power than it is when you actually are IN power. I think Obama found that one out pretty quick. Judging by the way the grey hair's coming in, the role of commander in chief removes all of ones illusions and takes its toll.

But still, we need people to criticize. Only saying, that's their role. If by some freak of nature Paul acquired supreme executive power, times would be interesting yes, but only for a short while.

[wyly]

I wouldn't be too enthused. Ron Paul talks a good talk, but remember, it's easier to criticize and speak truth to power than it is when you actually are IN power. I think Obama found that one out pretty quick. Judging by the way the grey hair's coming in, the role of commander in chief removes all of ones illusions and takes its toll.

But still, we need people to criticize. Only saying, that's their role. If by some freak of nature Paul acquired supreme executive power, times would be interesting yes, but only for a short while.

true enough...but if no one pushes the envelope then there is no progress, someone needs to have the balls to say what needs to be said otherwise there's stagnation...people should not be afraid to speak or think what they feel without the fear of being shouted down by the uneducated rabble...no doubt there many others in the republican party who agree with him but are afraid to speak up...just by speaking up creates controversy, people start asking questioning of the unchallenged belief, dialogue ensues and progress results....on second thought this the USA we're talking about nothing will come of telling the truth...

[CitizenX]

I wouldn't be too enthused. Ron Paul talks a good talk, but remember, it's easier to criticize and speak truth to power than it is when you actually are IN power. I think Obama found that one out pretty quick. Judging by the way the grey hair's coming in, the role of commander in chief removes all of ones illusions and takes its toll.

But still, we need people to criticize. Only saying, that's their role. If by some freak of nature Paul acquired supreme executive power, times would be interesting yes, but only for a short while.

The American government is set up so that one man can only have so much power, and rightly too. So your right that he talks a good talk but how much he can actually do once in power is another thing. If he won he would be going up against multi-national corporations that use the military as their thugs, and up against the Military–industrial complex itself.

I'm still pulling for him.

[Bob]

This is a fairly dank and depraved post. Your bit about "civilians," complete with scare quotes and some vague determination that they don't deserve much value to their lives is especially grotesque.

And of course several nations, certainly including Western democracies, and obviously including the United States, shares profound and unquestionable culpability for many ills elsewhere. No, certainly, the West, much less America alone, is solely responsible.

But that doesn't let us off the hook. Not for subverting democracies, for murdering people...and for outright support of terrorism on a grand scale.

It's cowardly to even write what you've written.

I don't really care one bit about the civilians of most other countries, especially countries and societies and cultures that are largely our enemies. They should only be protected insofar as it doesn't significantly hinder military objectives. When soldiers start coming back in body bags en masse because of leftist politics that place the lives of these "civilians" on pedestals of infinite value, I want to throw up. To me, the life of one Canadian soldier is worth more than the lives of everyone in Afghanistan. Now you know my point of departure when engaging in this subject matter. They don't give a damn about me or mine, so you think I'm going to waste one iota of concern on some Muhammad or Fatima in Kabul? Please.

On a somewhat related note, read this - Edward Luttwak - Give War a Chance.

[wyly]

I would agree that American foreign policy is highly flawed, but for different reasons. America isn't aggressive enough in its prosecution of war, a sick consequence of leftist politics that value the lives of "civilians" more than they deserve.

replace "america" with "Deutschland" and that statement could be believably attributed to Adolf Hitler...

[dre]

Ron Paul was wrong to phrase things as he did. He seems to really believe that somehow the USA should extricate itself from the Middle East and allow the chips to fall where they may. Does he not realize how important that region is with respect to oil? Oil is still the lifeblood of every modern economy, and the Middle East is still, unfortunately, the home of about half (or more?) of the world's crude oil production.

Thats a poor reason to support ME policy. The reality is that oil rich countries there would sell the US oil with or without the US borrowing trillions from China to spend on elective military adventures in the region. This activity actually drives prices UP, and causes PROBLEMS in the supply.

The west could completely withdraw and we would still be able to buy all the oil we like... likely at lower and more stable price points.

[wyly]

bob's post so sounded nazi like I just had to go and search and see if their was something that reflected his post, the sentiment is the same IMO...it only confirms what many of us already suspected about bob...

I would agree that American foreign policy is highly flawed, but for different reasons. America isn't aggressive enough in its prosecution of war, a sick consequence of leftist politics that value the lives of "civilians" more than they deserve

- bob

“Those who want to live, let them fight, and those who do not want to fight in this world of eternal struggle do not deserve to live.”

― Adolf Hitler

[maple_leafs182]

I don't really care one bit about the civilians of most other countries, especially countries and societies and cultures that are largely our enemies.

Not our enemies, maybe your enemies, not mine.

[Guest American Woman]

I don't really care one bit about the civilians of most other countries, especially countries and societies and cultures that are largely our enemies. They should only be protected insofar as it doesn't significantly hinder military objectives. When soldiers start coming back in body bags en masse because of leftist politics that place the lives of these "civilians" on pedestals of infinite value, I want to throw up. To me, the life of one Canadian soldier is worth more than the lives of everyone in Afghanistan.

That's how little value the terrorists placed on the lives they took/continue to take. :angry: The loss of innocent lives in Afghanistan is every bit as great a tragedy as the loss of lives in our countries.

[Moonlight Graham]

I've read up and bit and watched some more videos on Ron Paul. The left/Democrats are very naive (as was I beforehand) to think that Paul's anti-interventionist foreign policy views are mainly due to humanitarian sentiments. The man is a libertarian. He believes in the US being non-interventionist & returning to more of an isolationist stance because of his libertarian beliefs. He doesn't like taxes, big government or tons of fed departments, and he doesn't like governments telling anyone what to do. Therefore much less US intervention & global military presence would mean a HUGE cut in US taxes and gov defense spending, a reduction in government departments/bureaucracy, and it goes with his libertarian beliefs that the US nor any foreign government should tell what people or governments in any other country can or can't do.

Ron Paul is not a bastion of humanitarianism, he is a bastion of individual liberty and small government. I, and many people, happen to agree with his foreign policy views, but for much different reasons.

Edited September 14, 2011 by Moonlight Graham

[Moonlight Graham]

I don't really care one bit about the civilians of most other countries, especially countries and societies and cultures that are largely our enemies. They should only be protected insofar as it doesn't significantly hinder military objectives. When soldiers start coming back in body bags en masse because of leftist politics that place the lives of these "civilians" on pedestals of infinite value, I want to throw up. To me, the life of one Canadian soldier is worth more than the lives of everyone in Afghanistan.

This makes you the most giant hypocrite of all-times. You're a zionist jew right? Well, above is exactly how Hitler and Nazi/fascist Germans thought, the only real difference is that Hitler gave no value to humans of non-German/Aryan blood rather than those of non-German citizenship.

Let me now replace what you said with words Hitler/Nazis would say:

I don't really care one bit about the non-Aryans of most other countries, especially countries and societies and cultures and races that are largely our enemies. They should only be protected insofar as it doesn't significantly hinder military objectives. When soldiers start coming back in body bags en masse because of leftist politics that place the lives of these non-Aryan "civilians" on pedestals of infinite value, I want to throw up. To me, the life of one German soldier is worth more than the lives of every Jew and non-Aryan in Poland.

Congrats, you are a jewish zionist fascist, I wouldn't believe such a thing if i didn't read it myself! The irony blows my mind!

Edited September 14, 2011 by Moonlight Graham

[BubberMiley]

The irony blows my mind!

The Nazi Jews are indeed a scourge on Israel. I think they do much more harm to the state than the Arabs.

Edited September 14, 2011 by BubberMiley

[CitizenX]

Bob states that he is a Far-Right-Wing Ultra-Nationalist Extemist. So he is not to be taken seriously, he is a walking talking joke.

[Bob]

That's how little value the terrorists placed on the lives they took/continue to take. :angry: The loss of innocent lives in Afghanistan is every bit as great a tragedy as the loss of lives in our countries.

Excuse me madame, but there is a WORLD of difference between not giving a damn about Afghanistan and its people (and I certainly don't give a damn about them), and wishing harm upon them. The terrorists went to, and continue to go to, great lengths to murder as many people as possible. I do not wish any harm on the people of Afghanistan, so why are you comparing my sentiment to those of the terrorist filth?

What I wish is for the West to secure its military objectives and stop obsessing over the "civilians" of another nation while increasing the risk to our soldiers an the completion of the mission. All America and her allies need to do is destroy the enemy's ability to wage war. If the people get out of line in the future, then go back and "mow the lawn", so to speak. Stop trying to change these animals by building them schools and sending in "consultants" to teach them how to be democratic and pluralistic. If they wish to be barbarians, let them be barbarians. And if their barbarism again spills out of their neighbourhood and threatens us - go in again and trim the hedges.

I understand the desire to fight by "the rules", but it is clear to me that America is going way too far in order to build up Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as giving billions of dollars to hostile governments that rule of hostile populations (cases in point - Pakistan and Egypt, primarily). I stand by my original assertion - America and the West seem to have lost the ability to actually be aggressive enough and win.

[bush_cheney2004]

Bob states that he is a Far-Right-Wing Ultra-Nationalist Extemist. So he is not to be taken seriously, he is a walking talking joke.

No more a "joke" than the walking talking commies hoping that American Ron Paul can save them.

[Topaz]

In my view, IF citizens of a country believe that their country can do NO wrong, meaning the government, and every thing they say is the truth, then those people of those countries are fools. All the wars in the Middle-East are about the oil and the control over the region. I don't blame the people of the Middle-East for fighting and because its another world over in the region, the West should try harder to make peace instead of regime changes. War is big business for the companies that produce the war toys and the military of countries are there to protect their country and I think some countries abuse their military by trying to control other countries when there aren't any threats to them.

[Bob]

This makes you the most giant hypocrite of all-times. You're a zionist jew right? Well, above is exactly how Hitler and Nazi/fascist Germans thought, the only real difference is that Hitler gave no value to humans of non-German/Aryan blood rather than those of non-German citizenship.

Let me now replace what you said with words Hitler/Nazis would say:

Congrats, you are a jewish zionist fascist, I wouldn't believe such a thing if i didn't read it myself! The irony blows my mind!

Hitler sure did give a damn about us, he went to great lengths to murder all of us. Me not giving a damn about the people of Afghanistan is totally different, despite your feigned outrage and imaginary moral superiority. I would wager that you've done as much as I have to help the people of Afghanistan. In other words, you've done nothing (aside from pretending to care about them in an online discussion forum).

I wish no harm upon them, but I absolutely oppose any assistance being given to them whatsoever. They are responsible for themselves, and if they can't manage their own country well enough to prevent our enemies from waging war against us from their land, then we reserve the right to "mow the lawn", as it were. Hitler tried to exterminate the Jewish people, and I am simply stating that I don't give a damn about the people of Afghanistan (just as they, at best, don't give a damn about us), which is hardly the same as actively hating them or wishing for their destruction.