Gingrich, Paul Spar Over 'Chicken Hawk' Charge...

[paulitician]

Asked during Saturday night’s Republican presidential debate about Ron Paul’s charge that he is a “chicken hawk,” a visibly angry Newt Gingrich fired back by saying the Texas congressman has a history of making inaccurate statements about opponents.

Gingrich pointed out that he comes from a military family, and that his father spent 27 years in the Army as an infantryman. He also noted the decades he has spent working with the military as a civilian.

“I would say, as an Army brat who watched his mother, his sisters, and his father for 27 years, I have a pretty good sense of what military families and veterans’ family need,” Gingrich said.

WMUR Anchor Josh McElveen asked Gingrich the original question. When his fellow moderator Diane Sawyer turned the conversation back to Paul, the congressman implied that Gingrich had sought military deferments to avoid serving in the Vietnam War.

“I think people who don’t serve when they could and they get three or four or even five deferments aren’t — they have no right to send our kids off to war, and not be even against the wars that we have,” Paul, a former Air Force flight surgeon, said. “I’m trying to stop the wars. But at least, you know, I went when they called me up.”



Read more: Newt Gingrich | Ron Paul | Chicken Hawk | The Daily Caller

 

[paulitician]

Mess with the bull,you get the horns.

 

[occupied]

Every single person on that stage would waste our kids lives to protect OUR oil, it is a requirement to be president.

 

[paulitician]

Every single person on that stage would waste our kids lives to protect OUR oil, it is a requirement to be president.

Not every single person on that stage.

 

[occupied]

Every single person on that stage would waste our kids lives to protect OUR oil, it is a requirement to be president.

Not every single person on that stage.

Every new president has a day, soon after he is elected, where he visits the pentagon as president for the first time. he comes away from his first meeting with the joint chiefs a puppet of the MIC, I would love to know what they say to him. Iv'e heard it suggested that they show him a full color film of the Kennedy assassination that looks suspiciously like it was filmed from the grassy knoll, probably not, but they have some kind of lever that gets them all the wars they want.

 

[Paulie]

Every single person on that stage would waste our kids lives to protect OUR oil, it is a requirement to be president.

Protect our soil?

Who's threatening our soil, I'm really curious?

 

[occupied]

Every single person on that stage would waste our kids lives to protect OUR oil, it is a requirement to be president.

Protect our soil?

Who's threatening our soil, I'm really curious?

read it again.

 

[Paulie]

Every single person on that stage would waste our kids lives to protect OUR oil, it is a requirement to be president.

Protect our soil?

Who's threatening our soil, I'm really curious?

read it again.

I did and it's wrong on multiple levels. First of all, dem or repub, any candidate would "waste" lives fighting a war. Obama has as well. Second, Paul clearly stands alone on that stage regarding the use of these lives, so let's add disingenuous to wrong. Third, there hasn't been a war that was for the purpose of actually defending our soil since WWII.

 

[occupied]

Protect our soil?

Who's threatening our soil, I'm really curious?

read it again.

I did and it's wrong on multiple levels. First of all, dem or repub, any candidate would "waste" lives fighting a war. Obama has as well. Second, Paul clearly stands alone on that stage regarding the use of these lives, so let's add disingenuous to wrong. Third, there hasn't been a war that was for the purpose of actually defending our soil since WWII.

I said OIL not SOIL. And Paul would fight a war over it because the MIC demands it.

 

[Paulie]

read it again.

I did and it's wrong on multiple levels. First of all, dem or repub, any candidate would "waste" lives fighting a war. Obama has as well. Second, Paul clearly stands alone on that stage regarding the use of these lives, so let's add disingenuous to wrong. Third, there hasn't been a war that was for the purpose of actually defending our soil since WWII.

I said OIL not SOIL. And Paul would fight a war over it because the MIC demands it.

Ok, my bad, I honestly kept seeing soil for some reason. Had an argument about no nations posing a threat to us here on our soil the other day so maybe that's why.

But you're trying to say that Paul would fight a war over it because his life would be in danger if he didn't. Regardless of whether or not I agreed with that, you do realize that it's a pointless response for the purpose of debate, right?

 

[paulitician]

Every single person on that stage would waste our kids lives to protect OUR oil, it is a requirement to be president.

Not every single person on that stage.

Every new president has a day, soon after he is elected, where he visits the pentagon as president for the first time. he comes away from his first meeting with the joint chiefs a puppet of the MIC, I would love to know what they say to him. Iv'e heard it suggested that they show him a full color film of the Kennedy assassination that looks suspiciously like it was filmed from the grassy knoll, probably not, but they have some kind of lever that gets them all the wars they want.

I'm sure you're being facetious but your point about the MIC is a valid one. They do run the show on those decisions.

 

[occupied]

I did and it's wrong on multiple levels. First of all, dem or repub, any candidate would "waste" lives fighting a war. Obama has as well. Second, Paul clearly stands alone on that stage regarding the use of these lives, so let's add disingenuous to wrong. Third, there hasn't been a war that was for the purpose of actually defending our soil since WWII.

I said OIL not SOIL. And Paul would fight a war over it because the MIC demands it.

Ok, my bad, I honestly kept seeing soil for some reason. Had an argument about no nations posing a threat to us here on our soil the other day so maybe that's why.

But you're trying to say that Paul would fight a war over it because his life would be in danger if he didn't. Regardless of whether or not I agreed with that, you do realize that it's a pointless response for the purpose of debate, right?

This idea that Ron Paul would be any different as a military leader is ludicrous, even he should know that he cannot stand against the MIC in their area of dominance. They will have their profiteering oil wars in spite of any mere civilian that holds the office of president, even Paul.

 

[Paulie]

I said OIL not SOIL. And Paul would fight a war over it because the MIC demands it.

Ok, my bad, I honestly kept seeing soil for some reason. Had an argument about no nations posing a threat to us here on our soil the other day so maybe that's why.

But you're trying to say that Paul would fight a war over it because his life would be in danger if he didn't. Regardless of whether or not I agreed with that, you do realize that it's a pointless response for the purpose of debate, right?

This idea that Ron Paul would be any different as a military leader is ludicrous, even he should know that he cannot stand against the MIC in their area of dominance. They will have their profiteering oil wars in spite of any mere civilian that holds the office of president, even Paul.

You're going to have to elaborate more on this, because the way it works in the US is the president controls the use of troops in conflicts and gets final decision on whether or not they will be used.

Paul's entire life's work of advocating for the end to the military empire would have its judgement day once he entered the oval office. There's not a god damn reason in the world to assume he'd do anything other than that, because all anyone knows about him is he does what he says.

So what are you actually saying? That he'll cave in and do the bidding of the MIC because they threaten him?

Help me out here.

 

[paulitician]

At least Ron Paul did serve bravely in our Military. And that's much more than ole Newt did. Gingrich is a Chicken Hawk.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Every new president has a day, soon after he is elected, where he visits the pentagon as president for the first time. he comes away from his first meeting with the joint chiefs a puppet of the MIC, I would love to know what they say to him. Iv'e heard it suggested that they show him a full color film of the Kennedy assassination that looks suspiciously like it was filmed from the grassy knoll, probably not, but they have some kind of lever that gets them all the wars they want.

Yes, valid point – however it’s done, I’m sure it’s made crystal clear to a new president how things really work in the American Empire – and that would include a ‘president Paul’ who would immediately give up his naïve notion of recalling American forces from the ramparts of that Empire.

This idea that Ron Paul would be any different as a military leader is ludicrous, even he should know that he cannot stand against the MIC in their area of dominance. They will have their profiteering oil wars in spite of any mere civilian that holds the office of president, even Paul.

Correct. And if not an ‘oil war’ then the myth of a ‘war on terror’ will suffice.

 

[occupied]

Ok, my bad, I honestly kept seeing soil for some reason. Had an argument about no nations posing a threat to us here on our soil the other day so maybe that's why.

But you're trying to say that Paul would fight a war over it because his life would be in danger if he didn't. Regardless of whether or not I agreed with that, you do realize that it's a pointless response for the purpose of debate, right?

This idea that Ron Paul would be any different as a military leader is ludicrous, even he should know that he cannot stand against the MIC in their area of dominance. They will have their profiteering oil wars in spite of any mere civilian that holds the office of president, even Paul.

You're going to have to elaborate more on this, because the way it works in the US is the president controls the use of troops in conflicts and gets final decision on whether or not they will be used.

Paul's entire life's work of advocating for the end to the military empire would have its judgement day once he entered the oval office. There's not a god damn reason in the world to assume he'd do anything other than that, because all anyone knows about him is he does what he says.

So what are you actually saying? That he'll cave in and do the bidding of the MIC because they threaten him?

Help me out here.

I am saying exactly that. I do not feel Paul is the freedom loving patriot he is made out to be. His cult of personality is one thing but the reality of his presidency would probably be pretty horrific, especially if he tried to directly engage the defense establishment. He is but a man and all men are corruptible, they would find his levers, they always do.

 

[georgephillip]

Ok, my bad, I honestly kept seeing soil for some reason. Had an argument about no nations posing a threat to us here on our soil the other day so maybe that's why.

But you're trying to say that Paul would fight a war over it because his life would be in danger if he didn't. Regardless of whether or not I agreed with that, you do realize that it's a pointless response for the purpose of debate, right?

This idea that Ron Paul would be any different as a military leader is ludicrous, even he should know that he cannot stand against the MIC in their area of dominance. They will have their profiteering oil wars in spite of any mere civilian that holds the office of president, even Paul.

You're going to have to elaborate more on this, because the way it works in the US is the president controls the use of troops in conflicts and gets final decision on whether or not they will be used.

Paul's entire life's work of advocating for the end to the military empire would have its judgement day once he entered the oval office. There's not a god damn reason in the world to assume he'd do anything other than that, because all anyone knows about him is he does what he says.

So what are you actually saying? That he'll cave in and do the bidding of the MIC because they threaten him?

Help me out here.

Martin Luther King never had a ghost of chance of moving into the White House; however, he saw very clearly how the profit motive produced war and poverty. He also had a national audience to rival any of today's Republican contenders. If the MIC perceives the slightest threat to their cash cow, they will kill it unless there's a way for someone like President Paul to ensure his life with a cyber-insurance policy similar to the one Julian Assange is alleged to possess.

There's no shortage of skeletons in Pentagon closets.
Dr. Paul probably already knows where to find some.
For example:

http://www.gtr5.com/