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

[Kevin_Kennedy]

OCCUPYING... he said OCCUPYING.

nice try, though.

You know, when i studied mid-east politics, my favorite professor used to tell us that jihadis would be the biggest problem of the 21st century. that was BEFORE bin sultan. Jihadis don't give a rats behind if we're nice to them.

And as I recall, we opened Bin Sultan AFB during Gulf I



Chronology of Islamic Terrorism Against the U.S. « Government is Not Your Daddy

Note: I stopped before the first gulf war.

you want to go on with your argument?

What do you call it when our military is in a nation? I'd say that's occupation.

And you'd be mistaken.

****. Even the liberoidal bible, Wiki, makes the distinction plain enough:

Belligerent military occupation occurs when the control and authority over a territory passes to a hostile army.

Military occupation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mere presence is not the same thing as control and authority over a territory.

The latter may require the former, however.

And of course the oppressive Saudi government isn't seen as our puppet, is it? Our military presence along with a puppet government certainly seems like occupation to me.

 

[jillian]

What do you call it when our military is in a nation? I'd say that's occupation.

no. that's having a military base there with the consent of the leadership of the country.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

What do you call it when our military is in a nation? I'd say that's occupation.

no. that's having a military base there with the consent of the leadership of the country.

Leadership that many see as illegitimate, oppressive, and a puppet for the United States.

 

[Liability]

What do you call it when our military is in a nation? I'd say that's occupation.

And you'd be mistaken.

****. Even the liberoidal bible, Wiki, makes the distinction plain enough:

Belligerent military occupation occurs when the control and authority over a territory passes to a hostile army.

Military occupation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mere presence is not the same thing as control and authority over a territory.

The latter may require the former, however.

And of course the oppressive Saudi government isn't seen as our puppet, is it? Our military presence along with a puppet government certainly seems like occupation to me.

You claim that the government of Saudi Arabia is our mere puppet is just that: a claim. Your claim does not suffice as valid evidence.

And our military presence in Iraq (did you mean Iraq rather than Saudi Arabia?) is not an occupation if our guys don't run the show in Iraq. And clearly they don't. For if they did, we'd be directing that they have some free market zones for bars and so forth.

What something "seems like to you" is not exactly a compelling bit of proof for your contention.

 

[blu]

Obviously another lie from blooper.

I neg repped your ass because what you said was so petty, dishonest and stupid.

Now stop all that crying and get back to making merely stupid posts.

maybe you can enlighten me as to what was dishonest in the post since the rest of the rant is subjective.

Well, because you are an imbecile, nobody else would know which of your ******* typically dishonest posts I was referring to at the time I gave you your neg rep.

So, let's go to your typically dishonest post itself in all it's glory, starting with a comment by The T!

Actually? That isn't correct. The Right encourages Liberty.

tell that to atheists, gays/lesbians/transvestites, weed smokers, muslims, protestors, anti-war groups, public schools, colleges, people who speak out against the military, anyone who criticizes bush, people standing in free speech zones, those locked away without representation due to the patriot act, those who were served letters and can't tell their family due to the PA, those who had their house searched when they weren't home due to the PA, those who have had their phone calls & internet comm spied on and recorded without reason or warrant (every american), etc, etc, etc

2000-2008 has shown that the gop and what is now considered "the right" hates liberty and will get usa citizens & the world to bend to their well now matter how many liberties are stripped away or people have to die in the process.

You -- in your idiotic and dishonest "response" -- were arguing that the RIGHT opposes freedom for atheists. Totally untrue.

You also stupidly, ignorantly and dishonestly claimed that the RIGHT opposes freedom for:
gays/lesbians/transvestites, = untrue.

weed smokers, = untrue.

muslims, = untrue.

protestors, = untrue.

anti-war groups, = untrue.

public schools, = untrue (and rather mindless at that).

colleges, = untrue.

people who speak out against the military,= untrue.

anyone who criticizes bush, = untrue.

people standing in free speech zones, = untrue.

those locke d away without representation due to the patriot act, = untrue in SOME respects, but actually right in some respects, although your knee-jerk Pavlovian reaction to PATRIOT Act is causing you to misuse it in this context.

those who were served letters and can't tell their family due to the PA, = not just simply untrue but totally untrue. There is NOBODY that applies to. The secrecy provision of the law doesn't even apply to those to whom the letters are directed, you idiot.

those who had their house searched when they weren't home due to the PA,= untrue and utterly nonsensical.

those who have had their phone calls & internet comm spied on and recorded without reason or warrant (every american), = untrue. And p[aranoid stupid-ass delusion at that.

etc, etc, etc = untrue. One cannot have the "et" in et cetera if there is no real first instance. And there isn't in that faux litany of yours.

Thus, as I CORRECTLY noted, you lied.

was your whole response seriously putting "= untrue" after each thing I mentioned?

 

[Political Junky]

One picture is worth a thousand words.

I can hardly imagine the number of words a video must be worth.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XrJFsM0JQw"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XrJFsM0JQw[/ame]

Very telling video.

 

[GHook93]

Ron Paul might have some pretty good economic ideas, but come do you really thing if we implemented his foreign policy approach we would be safe? I mean the guy has stated that he wants to get rid of the CIA, DEA, FBI, DHLS, ICE etc. I won't be surprised if he wanted to completely privatize the armed and police forces. Sorry but that sounds like a receipt for disaster to me.

Everyone always talks about blowback, but European countries, particularly France, have been hit by more numerous terrorist attack (America was just hit with the largest) and the French are not in the Middle East and were the biggest dissenters of the Iraq War. China is an opponent of the West and arguably on the Jihadist side. Yet Al Qaeda has declared war on them and they have been plagued by Islamic separatist and terror.

Al-Qaeda Vows Holy War on China Over Uighurs’ Plight (Update2) - Bloomberg.com

Ron Paul supporters call his policies non-intervention! Really that is a PC mask of his real policy of isolationism. So battles need to be fought, Ron needs to STFU and realize that.

 

[Liability]

One picture is worth a thousand words.

I can hardly imagine the number of words a video must be worth.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XrJFsM0JQw"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XrJFsM0JQw[/ame]

Very telling video.

It is telling

ABOUT the propagandists who did the interview, the production and the editting job.

Great title to that video, too, eh? That's the hallmark of objectivity, is it?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Ron Paul might have some pretty good economic ideas, but come do you really thing if we implemented his foreign policy approach we would be safe? I mean the guy has stated that he wants to get rid of the CIA, DEA, FBI, DHLS, ICE etc. I won't be surprised if he wanted to completely privatize the armed and police forces. Sorry but that sounds like a receipt for disaster to me.

Everyone always talks about blowback, but European countries, particularly France, have been hit by more numerous terrorist attack (America was just hit with the largest) and the French are not in the Middle East and were the biggest dissenters of the Iraq War. China is an opponent of the West and arguably on the Jihadist side. Yet Al Qaeda has declared war on them and they have been plagued by Islamic separatist and terror.

Al-Qaeda Vows Holy War on China Over Uighurs’ Plight (Update2) - Bloomberg.com

Ron Paul supporters call his policies non-intervention! Really that is a PC mask of his real policy of isolationism. So battles need to be fought, Ron needs to STFU and realize that.

The link you provided tells you why al-Qaeda opposes China right in its title, oppression of Muslims.

 

[Liability]

maybe you can enlighten me as to what was dishonest in the post since the rest of the rant is subjective.

Well, because you are an imbecile, nobody else would know which of your ******* typically dishonest posts I was referring to at the time I gave you your neg rep.

So, let's go to your typically dishonest post itself in all it's glory, starting with a comment by The T!

tell that to atheists, gays/lesbians/transvestites, weed smokers, muslims, protestors, anti-war groups, public schools, colleges, people who speak out against the military, anyone who criticizes bush, people standing in free speech zones, those locked away without representation due to the patriot act, those who were served letters and can't tell their family due to the PA, those who had their house searched when they weren't home due to the PA, those who have had their phone calls & internet comm spied on and recorded without reason or warrant (every american), etc, etc, etc

2000-2008 has shown that the gop and what is now considered "the right" hates liberty and will get usa citizens & the world to bend to their well now matter how many liberties are stripped away or people have to die in the process.

You -- in your idiotic and dishonest "response" -- were arguing that the RIGHT opposes freedom for atheists. Totally untrue.

You also stupidly, ignorantly and dishonestly claimed that the RIGHT opposes freedom for:
gays/lesbians/transvestites, = untrue.

weed smokers, = untrue.

muslims, = untrue.

protestors, = untrue.

anti-war groups, = untrue.

public schools, = untrue (and rather mindless at that).

colleges, = untrue.

people who speak out against the military,= untrue.

anyone who criticizes bush, = untrue.

people standing in free speech zones, = untrue.

those locke d away without representation due to the patriot act, = untrue in SOME respects, but actually right in some respects, although your knee-jerk Pavlovian reaction to PATRIOT Act is causing you to misuse it in this context.

those who were served letters and can't tell their family due to the PA, = not just simply untrue but totally untrue. There is NOBODY that applies to. The secrecy provision of the law doesn't even apply to those to whom the letters are directed, you idiot.

those who had their house searched when they weren't home due to the PA,= untrue and utterly nonsensical.

those who have had their phone calls & internet comm spied on and recorded without reason or warrant (every american), = untrue. And p[aranoid stupid-ass delusion at that.

etc, etc, etc = untrue. One cannot have the "et" in et cetera if there is no real first instance. And there isn't in that faux litany of yours.

Thus, as I CORRECTLY noted, you lied.

was your whole response seriously putting "= untrue" after each thing I mentioned?

Obviously not, you fraudulent schmuck. Are you blind as well as stupid and dishonest?

In any event, you lying assbite, you asked, and I answered. Now, go whine somewhere else. Until then, try to be honest for a change. It would be a good thing.

 

[jillian]

What do you call it when our military is in a nation? I'd say that's occupation.

no. that's having a military base there with the consent of the leadership of the country.

Leadership that many see as illegitimate, oppressive, and a puppet for the United States.

I saw the bush administration as illegitimate and oppressive. still didn't give me the right to blow up stuff.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

no. that's having a military base there with the consent of the leadership of the country.

Leadership that many see as illegitimate, oppressive, and a puppet for the United States.

I saw the bush administration as illegitimate and oppressive. still didn't give me the right to blow up stuff.

And if he had invited in foreign armies to form military bases in the U.S. would you have not seen them as occupiers?

 

[Liability]

no. that's having a military base there with the consent of the leadership of the country.

Leadership that many see as illegitimate, oppressive, and a puppet for the United States.

I saw the bush administration as illegitimate and oppressive. still didn't give me the right to blow up stuff.

Yeah. I SEE the Obama Administration as illegitimate and oppressive. That still doesn't give me any right to blow up stuff, nor even the desire to do so.

 

[Liability]

Leadership that many see as illegitimate, oppressive, and a puppet for the United States.

I saw the bush administration as illegitimate and oppressive. still didn't give me the right to blow up stuff.

And if he had invited in foreign armies to form military bases in the U.S. would you have not seen them as occupiers?

I would view them as illegitmate armed guests. Sorta like much of our illegal alien population.

And I would never consider them to be the source of any valid rule or regulation or order, etc. Of course, if they were just staging here and not trying to impose jack shit on us, I wouldn't consider them occupiers, either.

 

[kwc57]

Why is it that so many of today's "conservatives" fail to understand REAL conservative principles from old schoolers like Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan? From Buchanan's 12/29/09 column titled "A Decade of Self-Delusion".

A Decade of Self-Delusion - HUMAN EVENTS

After Sept. 11, the nation was united behind a president as it had not been since Pearl Harbor. But instead of focusing on the enemies who did this to us, we took Osama bin Laden's bait and plunged into a war in Iraq that bled and divided us, alienated Europe and the Arab world, and destroyed the Republican Party's reputation as the reliable custodian of national security and foreign policy.

The party paid -- with the loss of both houses in 2006 and the presidency in 2008 -- but the nation has not stopped paying.

With nearly 200,000 troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and another 30,000 more on the way, al-Qaida is now in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and North Africa, while the huge U.S. military presence in Afghanistan and Iraq serves as its recruiting poster.

Again, it is not a malevolent fate that has done this to us. We did it to ourselves. We believed all that hubristic blather about our being the "greatest empire since Rome," the "indispensable nation" and "unipolar power" advancing to "benevolent global hegemony" in a series of "cakewalk" wars to "end tyranny in our world."

 

[jillian]

Leadership that many see as illegitimate, oppressive, and a puppet for the United States.

I saw the bush administration as illegitimate and oppressive. still didn't give me the right to blow up stuff.

Yeah. I SEE the Obama Administration as illegitimate and oppressive. That still doesn't give me any right to blow up stuff, nor even the desire to do so.

I hear ya... but the operative part is we don't want to blow up stuff.

please explain it to kevin.

 

[Political Junky]

I can hardly imagine the number of words a video must be worth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XrJFsM0JQw

Very telling video.

It is telling

ABOUT the propagandists who did the interview, the production and the editting job.

Great title to that video, too, eh? That's the hallmark of objectivity, is it?

Amazing how cons can refute what is on tape. They do it all the time.

 

[Liability]

Very telling video.

It is telling

ABOUT the propagandists who did the interview, the production and the editing job.

Great title to that video, too, eh? That's the hallmark of objectivity, is it?

Amazing how cons can refute what is on tape. They do it all the time.

Except, of course, you idiot, I didn't "refute" what's on the tape. I didn't even attempt to do any such thing.

All I said was that it is telling about the propagandists who made that video.

And, of course, it is.

Amazing indeed how you fubar libs can so cavalierly attempt to deny reality.

 

[Liability]

I saw the bush administration as illegitimate and oppressive. still didn't give me the right to blow up stuff.

Yeah. I SEE the Obama Administration as illegitimate and oppressive. That still doesn't give me any right to blow up stuff, nor even the desire to do so.

I hear ya... but the operative part is we don't want to blow up stuff.

please explain it to kevin.

I kinda like Kevin, even though I find myself disagreeing with him frequently on matters of politics.

But I'll say this much. I don't argue that libs want to blow things up and I am not accusing you (or other liberals) of claiming that conservatives do, either.

 

[Liability]

Why is it that so many of today's "conservatives" fail to understand REAL conservative principles from old schoolers like Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan? From Buchanan's 12/29/09 column titled "A Decade of Self-Delusion".

A Decade of Self-Delusion - HUMAN EVENTS

After Sept. 11, the nation was united behind a president as it had not been since Pearl Harbor. But instead of focusing on the enemies who did this to us, we took Osama bin Laden's bait and plunged into a war in Iraq that bled and divided us, alienated Europe and the Arab world, and destroyed the Republican Party's reputation as the reliable custodian of national security and foreign policy.

The party paid -- with the loss of both houses in 2006 and the presidency in 2008 -- but the nation has not stopped paying.

With nearly 200,000 troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and another 30,000 more on the way, al-Qaida is now in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and North Africa, while the huge U.S. military presence in Afghanistan and Iraq serves as its recruiting poster.

Again, it is not a malevolent fate that has done this to us. We did it to ourselves. We believed all that hubristic blather about our being the "greatest empire since Rome," the "indispensable nation" and "unipolar power" advancing to "benevolent global hegemony" in a series of "cakewalk" wars to "end tyranny in our world."

How is it that so many nominally intelligent people can confuse and conflate the politics of Ron Paul (or Pat Buchanan) with the politics of old school conservatism?