Ron Paul: "They're Terrorists Because We're Occupiers".

[JakeStarkey]

* * * *

doesn't being a partisan hack ever get old?

The hypocrisy and the irony meters not only both just spiked, but they both just fucking exploded!

Liability's snip proves that blu has L-sucks' number.

 

[Igorbot]

So let me see, this thread started because someone thought that Ron Paul stated that they are attacking us because we are attacking them. Then some other dude came along and started calling people names because they don't agree with them, pulled the argument down into the gutter. Cool . Way to go dude. Maybe we can get the discussion back above board perhaps. Just a small history lesson. Our involvement in the ME started with the Carter admin with this latest go round. The single biggest terrorist attack attack to occur to an american base, except for those that occurred during the Clinton and Bush admin was the attack in Lebanon at the marine barracks in the 1980's. The result of this attack, was that Reagan withdrew the troops there. However, Reagan increased funding to the "freedom fighters" in Afghanistan, providing them with stinger missiles which had the ability to take out the "hind" helecopters. After the end of the USSR's occupation ended, the US forgot about Afghanistan. Pakistan did not, with the help of their security police the Taliban was installed as a stablizing government. It was at this time that Bin Laden asked to stay there. The latest round of terrorist attacks took place. The reasons that Bin Laden stated for his attacks were that the USA had occupied their holy land and that we continue to support Israel unconditionally. Now, if you choose to believe they hate us because we are free, cool. However, it would then make sense that they would hate us because of "Die Hard". I maybe could understand that they would hate us because of the "Toxic Avenger". I don't see all Muslims attacking us at all. Oh well.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

In the end Dr. Paul is both right & wrong. He's wrong somewhat in that many of these people would be Terrorists regardless of whether or not we're occupying. These people practice an extremist version of Islam and that is the number one cause of them becoming Terrorists. However Dr. Paul is also right in that bombing & occupying them certainly doesn't help. The big loser is definitely Ben Stein. Did anyone understand what the H*ll he was rambling about? I know i didn't. Did he actually pull out the old "You're a Racist" card? He was losing the argument so he had to resort to calling Dr. Paul Anti-Semitic. What a joke. I can no longer give Ben Stein any credibility. He really did embarrass himself.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Ben Stein has been an embarassment for a long, long time.

 

[Liability]

Ben Stein has been an embarassment for a long, long time.

You are an embarrssment, Jokey. But you are far too dim-witted to perceive it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Ah, the L-dimbulb. Good morning, sunshine.

 

[uscitizen]

Ron Paul blames U.S. for violence

ON CAPITOL HILL
Ron Paul blames U.S. for violence
Congressman: 'They're terrorists because we're occupiers'
Posted: December 30, 2009
11:35 pm Eastern

© 2009 WorldNetDaily
A prominent member of Congress with libertarian ideals is blaming terrorism on the U.S. presence around the globe.

"They're terrorists because we're occupiers," Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, said on the Larry King show:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6Y_58LwYBw&feature=player_embedded

Hooray for Ron Paul! He gets it.
Too bad he is waay too far out on other issues to ever be a serious contender for president.

 

[Liability]

* * * *

doesn't being a partisan hack ever get old?

The hypocrisy and the irony meters not only both just spiked, but they both just fucking exploded!

Liability's snip proves that blu has L-sucks' number.

As everyone can see, Jokey is just obsessing over me because I have consistently shown him up as the total loser he is.

Clearly, noting the undeniable irony of blu commenting about anybody being a 'partisan hack' demonstrates nothing along the dishonest lines claimed by the dishonest Jokey.

 

[uscitizen]

Ben Stein has been an embarassment for a long, long time.

Isn't he a strange guy that had a TV show and is on some commercials?

 

[JakeStarkey]

L-sux continues to be amusing if trivial.

I am minding my own business, he jumps on me, I slap him down, then he says that I am obssessing on me. Seems like L-lostsoul had the same delusions in other forums.

But please continue, Liability.

 

[Liability]

L-sux continues to be amusing if trivial.

I am minding my own business, he jumps on me, I slap him down, then he says that I am obssessing on me. Seems like L-lostsoul had the same delusions in other forums.

But please continue, Liability.

Jokey, you dishonest loser, I was responding to one of your posts, you transparent lying fraud.

And the day you slap anything down is a day where your nightmares turn to pleasant (albeit distinctly unreal) dreams. In real life, you lack any such capacity -- as you prove with each of your posts.

You are funny in a sick, twisted kinda pathetic way.

In any event, you have clearly demonstrated who and what you are.

Muddle on.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Thanks, Liability. You are amusing.

 

[QUENTIN]

Ron Paul is right. Even Rumsfeld was forced to acknowledge the same thing as far back as 2004, when the Independent Task Force on Afghanistan, Iraq, and Islamic Terrorism he commissioned to help understand and combat terrorism concluded that:

Our national intelligence and military analysis apparatuses all come to the same conclusion. The threat against us is a result of our belligerent foreign policy in the Middle East, occupation of sovereign foreign countries, support for the most tyrannical regimes in the region, and unconditional support of Israel even in the face of war crimes and expansion of illegal settlements. To disagree with this conclusion is to disagree with ALL of the experts, ALL of the people most familiar with the subject, privy to the most information, etc. Recognition of the simple facts is also not the same thing as justification for terrorist acts, as some dishonest and disingenuous types claim.

Had we not meddled in the Middle East, we would not have a terrorist threat of remotely this proportion against us. As the Defense Department suggests, less than 10% of the people we're fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan (and there are less than 100 Al Qaeda affiliated fighters in all of Afghanistan) are radical, religious extremism-driven people. Instead they, like the vast majority of the people we classify as terrorists, insurgents, and enemies are fed up with the occupation of their land and the horrific result for the civilian population, where hundreds of thousands are killed due to our presence. Invasive American intervention in the Middle East far predates 9/11 (which was a reaction to the placement of American troops in the holiest land in Saudi Arabia, ignoring our agreement with Afghanistan to supply them with substantial humanitarian aid after they successfully fought our proxy war for us, and supplying arms to the Israelis they used to kill Palestinian women and children) and there is a direct link between each country where majorities oppose us and our own actions there. None of the many other non-Muslim, "heathen" nations of the world experience the kind of threat we do from terrorism because it's not actually about religion, it's about foreign policy. The other nations that have been attacked (like Spain and England) were also attacked not for their cultural values but for their occupation of Muslim countries. Most of the rest of the non-Muslim world is safe. They only target those who have interfered in their nations. Terrorism is the result of anger about civilian deaths in the Middle East, tyrannical and oppressive regimes in the Middle East, and desecration of holy lands in the Middle East caused by foreigners (chiefly Americans). Religious extremism is merely the tool by which that anger is turned to action. The way normal people, infuriated by American actions that kill thousands of civilians, are turned into people who will do harm to Americans and American interests. But it is not the religion that radicalizes them, that's just the means to an end. And even then, according to our own military interrogators, greater than 90% of people captured committing violence or attempting to commit violence against Americans are not religiously driven and not radical religious extremists, but politically driven people intending to defend their countries. Radical Islamic beliefs are merely an ideological tool to get people already angry and willing to do violence against Americans to see their actions in a grander and justifiable light, no different than jingoism or exceptionalism, a means to separate a horrendous action from other horrendous actions for arbitrary reasons, a way to say "We're not like them even when we do the same thing." It is not the source of the violence.

There's nothing unAmerican or leftist or sympathetic about the recognition that some American foreign policies are not beneficial, but in fact considerably detrimental to our national interests. Principle among these is dropping bombs on Muslim countries, invading and occupying Muslim countries, supporting Muslim countries with weapons and money, and supporting Israel no matter what they do to Palestinians. The DOD, American military analysts, CIA, NSA, have all identified the source of Islamic terrorism as these American foreign policies in the Middle East. To deny that is to simply bury your head in the sand and concoct an inhumane, unrealistic caricature of hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions of people as totally irrational lunatics motivated only by an absurd "hatred of our freedom." The facts are the facts, and Ron Paul is right here. People aren't born terrorists, they become radicalized to the point of willing to do violence by witnessing violence perpetrated against them. Our foreign policy isn't "pissing off terrorists," it's pissing off normal people, business owners, farmers, teachers, so much that they become willing to perform terrorism. It created them and increases their ranks every day. We cannot defeat the existential, ideological threat of terrorism until we cut off the source, which is our own actions in the region.

 

[blu]

Ron Paul is right. Even Rumsfeld was forced to acknowledge the same thing as far back as 2004, when the Independent Task Force on Afghanistan, Iraq, and Islamic Terrorism he commissioned to help understand and combat terrorism concluded that:

Our national intelligence and military analysis apparatuses all come to the same conclusion. The threat against us is a result of our belligerent foreign policy in the Middle East, occupation of sovereign foreign countries, support for the most tyrannical regimes in the region, and unconditional support of Israel even in the face of war crimes and expansion of illegal settlements. To disagree with this conclusion is to disagree with ALL of the experts, ALL of the people most familiar with the subject, privy to the most information, etc. Recognition of the simple facts is also not the same thing as justification for terrorist acts, as some dishonest and disingenuous types claim.

Had we not meddled in the Middle East, we would not have a terrorist threat of remotely this proportion against us. As the Defense Department suggests, less than 10% of the people we're fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan (and there are less than 100 Al Qaeda affiliated fighters in all of Afghanistan) are radical, religious extremism-driven people. Instead they, like the vast majority of the people we classify as terrorists, insurgents, and enemies are fed up with the occupation of their land and the horrific result for the civilian population, where hundreds of thousands are killed due to our presence. Invasive American intervention in the Middle East far predates 9/11 (which was a reaction to the placement of American troops in the holiest land in Saudi Arabia, ignoring our agreement with Afghanistan to supply them with substantial humanitarian aid after they successfully fought our proxy war for us, and supplying arms to the Israelis they used to kill Palestinian women and children) and there is a direct link between each country where majorities oppose us and our own actions there. None of the many other non-Muslim, "heathen" nations of the world experience the kind of threat we do from terrorism because it's not actually about religion, it's about foreign policy. The other nations that have been attacked (like Spain and England) were also attacked not for their cultural values but for their occupation of Muslim countries. Most of the rest of the non-Muslim world is safe. They only target those who have interfered in their nations. Terrorism is the result of anger about civilian deaths in the Middle East, tyrannical and oppressive regimes in the Middle East, and desecration of holy lands in the Middle East caused by foreigners (chiefly Americans). Religious extremism is merely the tool by which that anger is turned to action. The way normal people, infuriated by American actions that kill thousands of civilians, are turned into people who will do harm to Americans and American interests. But it is not the religion that radicalizes them, that's just the means to an end. And even then, according to our own military interrogators, greater than 90% of people captured committing violence or attempting to commit violence against Americans are not religiously driven and not radical religious extremists, but politically driven people intending to defend their countries. Radical Islamic beliefs are merely an ideological tool to get people already angry and willing to do violence against Americans to see their actions in a grander and justifiable light, no different than jingoism or exceptionalism, a means to separate a horrendous action from other horrendous actions for arbitrary reasons, a way to say "We're not like them even when we do the same thing." It is not the source of the violence.

There's nothing unAmerican or leftist or sympathetic about the recognition that some American foreign policies are not beneficial, but in fact considerably detrimental to our national interests. Principle among these is dropping bombs on Muslim countries, invading and occupying Muslim countries, supporting Muslim countries with weapons and money, and supporting Israel no matter what they do to Palestinians. The DOD, American military analysts, CIA, NSA, have all identified the source of Islamic terrorism as these American foreign policies in the Middle East. To deny that is to simply bury your head in the sand and concoct an inhumane, unrealistic caricature of hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions of people as totally irrational lunatics motivated only by an absurd "hatred of our freedom." The facts are the facts, and Ron Paul is right here. People aren't born terrorists, they become radicalized to the point of willing to do violence by witnessing violence perpetrated against them. Our foreign policy isn't "pissing off terrorists," it's pissing off normal people, business owners, farmers, teachers, so much that they become willing to perform terrorism. It created them and increases their ranks every day. We cannot defeat the existential, ideological threat of terrorism until we cut off the source, which is our own actions in the region.

quoted for truth and lieability

 

[nodoginnafight]

Another example of Ron Paul's lunacy.

We are occupying BECAUSE they are terrorists. (well not Iraq - that was Bush's IDIOCY!) Tell me where we were ocuppying on 9/11?
Pure bullshit to blame Americans for terrorism and I don't like to use language like that. But this guy is so unabashedly stupid and anti-American that I can't help it.

His ignorance of foreign policy is only challenged by his idiotic economic ideas.

The fact that 3 or 4% of Americans support this fool, speaks very poorly of our educational system.

 

[nodoginnafight]

The big loser is definitely Ben Stein. Did anyone understand what the H*ll he was rambling about? I know i didn't.

You were not able to understand an intelligent person discussing an issue?

Is this where I'm supposed to act like that surprises me?

 

[LibocalypseNow]

The only part of Stein's rant i understood was the part where he accused Dr. Paul of being Anti-Semitic. Now that was pretty shameful and pathetic on his part. He was losing the argument so he had to pull the old race card. Isn't that what all Liberals do when they're losing arguments? How can he call himself a Conservative? After that embarrassment i can no longer give Stein any credibility. Pull his "Conservative" card for sure.

 

[johnrocks]

Ron Paul was a Republican when a lot of you were Carter/McGovern/LBJ Democrats, he reminds people of what a Republican and a Conservative actually were before the neo/social element came over from the Democratic Party and took over.

 

[QUENTIN]

We are occupying BECAUSE they are terrorists. (well not Iraq - that was Bush's IDIOCY!) Tell me where we were ocuppying on 9/11?

Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, and Kosovo.

And the recognition of the facts does not blame Americans for terrorism. It acknowledges that the source of terrorism that fuels violence against Americans is specific foreign policies of the government that are detrimental to foreign nations and foreign people, as well as America and American people.

 

[blu]

Another example of Ron Paul's lunacy.

We are occupying BECAUSE they are terrorists. (well not Iraq - that was Bush's IDIOCY!) Tell me where we were ocuppying on 9/11?
Pure bullshit to blame Americans for terrorism and I don't like to use language like that. But this guy is so unabashedly stupid and anti-American that I can't help it.

His ignorance of foreign policy is only challenged by his idiotic economic ideas.

The fact that 3 or 4% of Americans support this fool, speaks very poorly of our educational system.

exactly. if the country was more educated, 100% of people would support him. before 9/11 we had forces in saudi arabi (which is one the biggest things cited by AQ type folks, because our troops were holding their holy land), iraq, afghanistan, were threatening iran much like we are today, etc. if you think our actions in the middle started because of 9/11 you are completely fucking stupid.