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

[Polk]

If the USA 'collapses'? It will be because of Obama, The Statists in the Congress, and their Funders like Soros, Ted Turner, and others.

no it will be because of george bush's unfunded and illegal wars that have costed us trillions

Just out of curiousity if they were unfunded how did the military get guns, bullets, equipment, food, etc?

Pretty sure he meant unfunded in the sense that they were funded via deficit spending.

 

[Polk]

So he really thinks if we pull out of everywhere, the terrorists are instantly going to love us? If he does, I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona he may be interested in.

I would suggest the number of those who would want to harm the US would drop dramatically, just like I'm sure the number increased when you invaded Afghanistan and Iraq...

Let's see,

After 911 there wasn't another terrorist attack in 7 years, because Pres. Bush took the war on Al Qaida seriously.

Obama, on the other hand, has not taken it seriously and we have had 3 terrorist attacks, within the US, in a year.

There also wasn't an attack on US soil on the seven years before 9/11.
Also, three attacks in the past year? I'd love to see you list them.

 

[CMike]

Bad people will always exsist no matter what we do.

Lets just try to protect oursleves a best as possible and then go about our business.

What Obama is doing is trying to protect us as best as possible and get us going about our business.

Some fools want to harp on screaming "war on Terror" every day and making sure the terrorists feel all powerful in our lives.

Protect us? Protect us? Are you serious? That douche bag has gotten the NWA bomber a flock of lawyers and is treating him like a criminal defendent instead of an unlawful combatant.

He also still insists on sending terrorists back to their home countries, where they will regroup and hit us again.

He is not protecting us, he is making this country, more vulnerable to more terrorist attacks.

And that terrorist groups see that Obama isn't taking terrorism attacks seriously, it will only encourage them to attack american even harder.

 

[Polk]

you guys are forgetting richard ried the shoe bomber .

But then why would I be surprized you are altering the facts to protect the Bush record.

That's true. However, that was only three months after 911, before Pres. Bush could implement anything.

PATRIOT Act was passed a month after 9/11.

 

[CMike]

I would suggest the number of those who would want to harm the US would drop dramatically, just like I'm sure the number increased when you invaded Afghanistan and Iraq...

Let's see,

After 911 there wasn't another terrorist attack in 7 years, because Pres. Bush took the war on Al Qaida seriously.

Obama, on the other hand, has not taken it seriously and we have had 3 terrorist attacks, within the US, in a year.

There also wasn't an attack on US soil on the seven years before 9/11.
Also, three attacks in the past year? I'd love to see you list them.

Well, since you would love to see them. I am happy to provide them.

The attack against the recruiting station.

The Fort Hood attack

The NWA bomb attack

 

[CMike]

you guys are forgetting richard ried the shoe bomber .

But then why would I be surprized you are altering the facts to protect the Bush record.

That's true. However, that was only three months after 911, before Pres. Bush could implement anything.

PATRIOT Act was passed a month after 9/11.

So? It still takes more than two months to implement measures to stop terrorism.

 

[QUENTIN]

He also still insists on sending terrorists back to their home countries, where they will regroup and hit us again.

No he doesn't. No one does. What he insist on doing is releasing the many people we rounded up on faulty suspicion of being terrorists who subsequent investigation found were not in fact terrorists, just falsely accused people. Of the 700+ Guantanamo detainees, more than 2/3rd were found not guilty and released before Obama took office. He wants to put those who have not been cleared or have been found to be terrorists in supermaximum security prison from which no one has ever escaped, as we've always done with terrorists.

Though in fact, he has been completely dragging his feet in releasing even the people we already know to be innocent, who have been completely cleared and had to suffer in an extralegal gulag for years. There are many innocent people left still suffering this fate either because Obama doesn't truly believe in the rule of law or because of the political ramifications that will come from your ilk who believe any Middle Easterner ever accused of a crime must be guilty and must be punished, facts be damned.

The Constitution requires anyone the U.S. holds have access to a trial, to deny them one or hold them even in the event of a judicial ruling that they are not guilty is not only illegal, not only immoral, but further adds to the perception of the U.S. as a hypocritical country that does not honor its values and helps recruit ever more people to join the ranks against us.

It is abandoning our core principles out of an overwhelming, trembling fear of terrorism that not only destroys America internally, but ever increases the external threat.

 

[QUENTIN]

Those who believe all those, or even a majority of those, currently willingly to practice violence against the U.S. do so merely because of their radical religion and would do so regardless of intrusive, offensive, invasive foreign policies in the Middle East literally have no backing to support their claims and are forced to ignore or simply refuse to accept the findings of every military and intelligence expert of the U.S. who has ever been tasked with understanding the causes of terrorism. There is a veritable mountain of evidence disproving your claims and absolutely nothing to prove them. Put simply, you are wrong and living in a fantasy of your own creation.

 

[Polk]

Let's see,

After 911 there wasn't another terrorist attack in 7 years, because Pres. Bush took the war on Al Qaida seriously.

Obama, on the other hand, has not taken it seriously and we have had 3 terrorist attacks, within the US, in a year.

There also wasn't an attack on US soil on the seven years before 9/11.
Also, three attacks in the past year? I'd love to see you list them.

Well, since you would love to see them. I am happy to provide them.

The attack against the recruiting station.

The Fort Hood attack

The NWA bomb attack

One of those wasn't successful (if we're counting unsuccessful attacks, there were plenty of those during the Bush years). Of the two attacks you've listed, only one of them has proven ties to Al-Queda.

If you want to go to any attack committed by Muslims though, lets go. Using things as small as the recruiting station shooting (which killed one person) as major terrorist incidents, then there were tons of them during the Bush years. The anthrax letters from late 2001 killed five people. A gunman shot up an El Al ticket counter at LAX in 2002 killing four people. The Beltway snipers. The guy who tried to run people down with his car at UNC. The guy who did the same thing in San Francisco.

 

[CMike]

He also still insists on sending terrorists back to their home countries, where they will regroup and hit us again.

No he doesn't. No one does. What he insist on doing is releasing the many people we rounded up on faulty suspicion of being terrorists who subsequent investigation found were not in fact terrorists, just falsely accused people. Of the 700+ Guantanamo detainees, more than 2/3rd were found not guilty and released before Obama took office. He wants to put those who have not been cleared or have been found to be terrorists in supermaximum security prison from which no one has ever escaped, as we've always done with terrorists.

Though in fact, he has been completely dragging his feet in releasing even the people we already know to be innocent, who have been completely cleared and had to suffer in an extralegal gulag for years. There are many innocent people left still suffering this fate either because Obama doesn't truly believe in the rule of law or because of the political ramifications that will come from your ilk who believe any Middle Easterner ever accused of a crime must be guilty and must be punished, facts be damned.

The Constitution requires anyone the U.S. holds have access to a trial, to deny them one or hold them even in the event of a judicial ruling that they are not guilty is not only illegal, not only immoral, but further adds to the perception of the U.S. as a hypocritical country that does not honor its values and helps recruit ever more people to join the ranks against us.

It is abandoning our core principles out of an overwhelming, trembling fear of terrorism that not only destroys America internally, but ever increases the external threat.

Your proof that they were falsely accused?

 

[Polk]

That's true. However, that was only three months after 911, before Pres. Bush could implement anything.

PATRIOT Act was passed a month after 9/11.

So? It still takes more than two months to implement measures to stop terrorism.

My point is if Bush isn't responsible for things a year into his tenure in office, then neither is Obama. You don't have any real standard, you just attempt to place the blame on whoever you don't like.

 

[CMike]

How is this guy a republican? Violence is due to the choices of the violent person.

You are a disengenuos asshole. How would you feel if the country you have your only true allegience to, Israel, was occupied for whatever reason?...and I can think of several...

What would you do? Just bend over and take it? The problem with subversive traitors such as yourself is that you have no respect for anyone that does not share YOUR fantasy beliefs.

If I had my "violent choice" all of the mid east countries would have the same access to nukes and all you morons could let the nuclear snow fall where it may.

Yes we make enemies by occupying others lands. You make no headway protecting Israel denying that fact. You just expose your willfull traitorous deception.

I don't care what the cause, targeting civilians is never acceptable nor should it be tolerated.

 

[CMike]

PATRIOT Act was passed a month after 9/11.

So? It still takes more than two months to implement measures to stop terrorism.

My point is if Bush isn't responsible for things a year into his tenure in office, then neither is Obama. You don't have any real standard, you just attempt to place the blame on whoever you don't like.

Ahhhhh but there is a big difference. Obama already had the measures in places implemented by Pres. Bush.

Obama has been dismantelling them, and THAT is the problem.

 

[Polk]

So? It still takes more than two months to implement measures to stop terrorism.

My point is if Bush isn't responsible for things a year into his tenure in office, then neither is Obama. You don't have any real standard, you just attempt to place the blame on whoever you don't like.

Ahhhhh but there is a big difference. Obama already had the measures in places implemented by Pres. Bush.

Obama has been dismantelling them, and THAT is the problem.

And Bush had in place measures implemented by Clinton. We could go like this all day. The key is you don't have a consistent standard.

 

[rdean]

Ron Paul. The guy believes in "magical creation", so who knows where he gets his "facts".

They are terrorists because they are terrorists. They made that choice, NOT US.

Bin Laden attacked the WTC because his feelings were hurt. When Iraq invaded Kuwait, the rest of the Middle East asked the US to help, much to the chagrin of Bin Laden. No one wanted Bin Laden because there was the possibility he would "get" a country with wealth.

Bin Laden was angry that "infidels" were killing Muslims in Middle Eastern holy lands and his offer of help had been dismissed.

The US did the right thing driving Iraq out of Kuwait. However, Bin Laden was the cause behind 9/11, NOT the US being a good Samaritan.

Because someone takes a good thing and makes something evil out of it doesn't mean that evil is the "fault" of good.

Interesting concept...

Concept? If that's not history, I would be interested in knowing why. What did I get wrong?

 

[Liability]

My point is if Bush isn't responsible for things a year into his tenure in office, then neither is Obama. You don't have any real standard, you just attempt to place the blame on whoever you don't like.

Ahhhhh but there is a big difference. Obama already had the measures in places implemented by Pres. Bush.

Obama has been dismantelling them, and THAT is the problem.

And Bush had in place measures implemented by Clinton. We could go like this all day. The key is you don't have a consistent standard.

Not if you cared to be honest about it.

The measures put into place by Bubba included the very ******* "wall" that impeded fighting against that kind of enemy.

The measures put into place by the Bush Administration removed that idiotic obstacle and were designed to obtain the kind of intel that would impede the enemy's plans, instead!

To the extent that President Obama is dismantling the efforts of his immediate prececessor, he is underming his own Administration's ability to effectively fight the enemy.

The consistent standard is clearly in place. Your efforts at evasion fail.

 

[The T]

Ron Paul. The guy believes in "magical creation", so who knows where he gets his "facts".

They are terrorists because they are terrorists. They made that choice, NOT US.

Bin Laden attacked the WTC because his feelings were hurt. When Iraq invaded Kuwait, the rest of the Middle East asked the US to help, much to the chagrin of Bin Laden. No one wanted Bin Laden because there was the possibility he would "get" a country with wealth.

Bin Laden was angry that "infidels" were killing Muslims in Middle Eastern holy lands and his offer of help had been dismissed.

The US did the right thing driving Iraq out of Kuwait. However, Bin Laden was the cause behind 9/11, NOT the US being a good Samaritan.

Because someone takes a good thing and makes something evil out of it doesn't mean that evil is the "fault" of good.

Interesting concept...

Concept? If that's not history, I would be interested in knowing why. What did I get wrong?

Nothing as far as I can tell. I was in effect complimenting you.

 

[Misty]

This is why Ron Paul is an idiot.

Terrorists hate us because of our culture, music, clothing, loose morals, and religion, and our support of Israel

 

[Liability]

This is why Ron Paul is an idiot.

Terrorists hate us because of our culture, music, clothing, loose morals, and religion, and our support of Israel

It is even simpler, I believe.

They hate us because our infidel feet are (in one way or another) on their ******* precious land.

And they hate us because we have not chosen Islam nor are we likely to be subjagated to that filthy crap religion.

 

[Kalam]

Terrorists hate us because of our culture, music, clothing, loose morals, and religion, and our support of Israel

One of those things is correct.