Texas Congressman Ron Paul files for GOP presidential bid

[saturneptune]

I disagree even more. Isn't it absurd to say a military victory isn't attainable? Does he really mean to say that if we threw the full weight and force of the American military at the Iraqi problem, we couldn't win it? If so, this guy is dumber than anyone might have imagined.

A military victory is attainble. We are simply not willing to pay the price for it, as we were not in Vietnam. And my fear is that, like Vietnam, we will leave in defeat because of the lack of political will from people like Ron Paul. And I am not saying we should pay the price for a full military victory. But to say we can't achieve one is patently absurd. No one, not even Achmedinejad (or whatever his name is) believes that.

Think about it. Why, with American troops so close, and Achmedinijad so hateful of the US, has he not done anything? It's because he knows he can't win. If he provokes America, he will be done, just like Saddam. Because he know military victory is attainable. But he also knows that there are many weak-willed and short-sighted people who are not willing to pay the price for a solution.

Again, I hope this is an anomaly. But it seems misguided at best.

This is not an escalation, although that would be the right thing to do. You escalate in order to bring the end sooner. You raise the ante, and make it impossible with the insurgents to keep up.

But 20,000 troops is hardly an escalation.

Having fought in a war, I think your ideals of American foreign policy and what constitutes a threat to the United States are very odd indeed. You keep talking about "not willing to pay the price." The fact is, someone else is paying the price while you and others comfortably go to their families and jobs every day. This is not a video game or entertainment show. This is life and death. The life of an American is very precious, especially when blood is being spilled for a war that was started on a bare face lie, and continuing lies, plus totally incompetent leadership at all levels in this administration.

You really need a new perspective on reality. We spent 3000 American lives and hundreds of billions of dollars to hang Saddam, and the country is in much worse shape. Now, the idiots in charge who have squandered our military capital, face a real threat of Iran, and are hardly in a position to do so.

This candidate goes by the Constitution. Your dislike of him tells me more about how you think than him.

 

[Pastor Larry]

I had a TSA agent check below my belt line for what I don't know. My wife was felt up by a TSA agent as she engaged in the criminal act of having a bra with a wire, both instances were without probable cause or a warrant.

Did you ask? If you have metal, it is probable cause for a search. Besides, there is no constitutional right to fly. Feel free to drive. I would rather be safe in the air.

Last time I flew bottled water was prohibited.

I have flown more than 30,000 miles in the last year. I have been inspected and special inspected. Bottled water is not prohibited. What is prohibited is any unchecked liquids that were purchased outside the security area. Besides, just wait until you get on the plane and ask for some water. They will bring it to you, and then you don't even have to pay extra for it.

These are unreasonable safety precautions and are an infringement on individual liberty.

Really? W/hat part of the constitution gives you the right to fly anyway? You are such a constitutionalist, try that one out. YOu won't find it. You are free to travel. But you are not free to make up your own rules as to how to get there. There are laws about driving just like there are about flying. You gotta follow them.

When you actually looked at it...how did it make sense to you that a 47 story steel framed building, not hit by an airplane, fell at the speed of gravity?

When I looked it, it made sense. You probably have a strange sense of sense, from what I have seen here.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Pastor Larry, as I pointed out in another thread, you CANNOT take bottled water on board (my mother had her unopened bottle taken away (midget sized) as she sat in her wheelchair before she boarded).

Evidently, you have not flown recently and tried to take a beverage on board since the newer rules were put into place.

As I said, I have flown more than 30,000 miles in the past year, I think abot 37,000. And yes, you can take bottled water on board so long as you buy it in the secure area. I have seen people do it and I have done it (with something other than water).

But why would you want to? Just wait until you get on board and that way you dont' have to pay the exorbitant airport price for it.

What you cannot do is carry liquids through the checkpoint.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Having fought in a war, I think your ideals of American foreign policy and what constitutes a threat to the United States are very odd indeed.

I don't think you have any idea what my ideals are. So you are just talking out of your hat. But I sincerely thank you for your service.

You keep talking about "not willing to pay the price." The fact is, someone else is paying the price while you and others comfortably go to their families and jobs every day.

We are all paying a price; and some are over there fighting. I know some who are. Families in my church have lost relatives over there. So I realize very well what is going on.

This is not a video game or entertainment show. This is life and death.

That is my point. It is life and death. And not just now but for the future. That is why we must have the will to win.

The life of an American is very precious,

Here is where we differ. I think all life is precious. The Iraqis are in the image of God as well. I am a consistent prolife advocate.

especially when blood is being spilled for a war that was started on a bare face lie, and continuing lies, plus totally incompetent leadership at all levels in this administration.

Talk about barefaced lies, the war wasn't started on a barefaced lie. It was started based on intelligence that the world agreed on, and later found out to be wrong. Yes, there were dissenting views. But there was also a consensus shared by this adminstration and the last one. Incompetent leadership? Hard to say exactly where that is. It is easy to blame it on Bush but is he actually the one making day to day decision? I doubt it.

Even the generals on the ground have some dissenting views about which way to go. In the end, someone has to be in charge.

You really need a new perspective on reality. We spent 3000 American lives and hundreds of billions of dollars to hang Saddam, and the country is in much worse shape. Now, the idiots in charge who have squandered our military capital, face a real threat of Iran, and are hardly in a position to do so.

How is Iran a real threat? They are no more fierce that Iraq. And teh country is in worse shape now, just as Germany and Japan were after the war. But wars are not judged in the short term (in reality). They are judged in teh long term.

This candidate goes by the Constitution. Your dislike of him tells me more about how you think than him.

I have already said I know very little about him, so that should tell you that I am honest, and don't draw conclusions on matters about which I am uninformed. Unfortunately, I think you conclude something else. You are incorrect.

What is your objection to someone wanting to find out the truth before drawing a conclusion?

 

[Rufus_1611]

When I looked it, it made sense. You probably have a strange sense of sense, from what I have seen here.

Without anything better to refute it, I guess I'll just have to stick to the laws of physics and maintain my strange sense of sense.

 

[saturneptune]

Talk about barefaced lies, the war wasn't started on a barefaced lie. It was started based on intelligence that the world agreed on, and later found out to be wrong. Yes, there were dissenting views. But there was also a consensus shared by this adminstration and the last one. Incompetent leadership? Hard to say exactly where that is. It is easy to blame it on Bush but is he actually the one making day to day decision? I doubt it.

First of all, Bush is in charge, he is responsible. He promised to listen to and take the advice of the generals, then when they say what he did not like, he changes them to find ones that will parrot his own ideas, since he has so much military experience.

Next, there is no barefaced lie except that you seem to find reasons to give what Bush has done credibility. There were no weapons of mass destruction. Iraq did not strike our country. They were not involved in 9/11. In fact, we were buddy buddy with them during the Iran Iraq war, and no doubt some of the weapons we sold Iraq now kill our own men. So you can spin that into truth and honesty if that is your desire, but for me, no thanks. I have never been so sorry I voted for this clown not once but twice.

Mr Bush has created such a mess, there is no winning as you put it. Mark my words, this 20000 increase will increase the problem.

 

[hillclimber1]

He will make for some interesting political debate and it will, I believe , be good for the Republicans to have his voice heard.

Chances ? 1 in a 1000.

Nope too high :laugh:

 

[Pastor Larry]

First of all, Bush is in charge, he is responsible. He promised to listen to and take the advice of the generals, then when they say what he did not like, he changes them to find ones that will parrot his own ideas, since he has so much military experience.

No, that's not really true.

Next, there is no barefaced lie except that you seem to find reasons to give what Bush has done credibility.

No, I think he has no credibility in a lot of ways. Please be sure of what I believe before making it up.

There were no weapons of mass destruction.

As we found out after we were there. There was evidence that pointed to their existence, and the whole world, including Democrats, agreed.

Iraq did not strike our country. They were not involved in 9/11.

This is true.

In fact, we were buddy buddy with them during the Iran Iraq war, and no doubt some of the weapons we sold Iraq now kill our own men.

We were buddy buddy with Russia during WWII. And made the drastic mistake of letting them enter Berlin first. Sometimes, in war, you choose the lesser of two evils.

So you can spin that into truth and honesty if that is your desire, but for me, no thanks.

Nothing to spin. The truth is the truth. I have no desire to spin it.

...this clown ...

How does this square with the biblical injunction to respect and honor those in authority? Certainly you can disagree with his policies without such disrespectful and unbiblical attacks, cant' you?

Mr Bush has created such a mess, there is no winning as you put it. Mark my words, this 20000 increase will increase the problem.

We will see. I would guess that it will improve the problem. Of course, I have just as much expertise and knowledge as you do, so both of us are blindly guessing.
So we will see who is right. It can be won; it simply remains to be see who has the will to win ... the good guys or the bad guys.

 

[KenH]

So you support him

Actually, I am supporting Mitt Romney as you can tell by my signature. But I won't be saying anything bad about Ron Paul as I agree with him across the board on domestic issues and disagree somewhat on foreign policy as I am in favor of a more robust effort in that area than he is. But I think he will be the Alan Keyes in 2008 - pretty much right on the issues but unable to play with the big boys - unless the Internet does come into play like never before. I think that if only folks who are active in political discussions in the GOP on the Internet could vote on the nominee that Ron Paul would run away with the nomination.

If somehow, some way, Ron Paul won the GOP nomination I would support him as much as I could.

 

[DQuixote]

It will take a while, but I suggest reading Ron Paul's voting record. It makes him a viable candidate, IMHO.

 

[saturneptune]

.

How does this square with the biblical injunction to respect and honor those in authority? Certainly you can disagree with his policies without such disrespectful and unbiblical attacks, cant' you?

We will see. I would guess that it will improve the problem. Of course, I have just as much expertise and knowledge as you do, so both of us are blindly guessing.
So we will see who is right. It can be won; it simply remains to be see who has the will to win ... the good guys or the bad guys.

Well, it squares about as much as I am sure you have felt about some past democratic presidents in the past. I voted for the guy on the premise that he had leadership in time of war. Obviously, that was wrong.

While I am not going to get into a debate with you about who knows more or less about military or foreign affairs, ask yourself, how much good has Mr Bush done in the past four years by sending more troops?

 

[Pastor Larry]

Well, it squares about as much as I am sure you have felt about some past democratic presidents in the past.

Really? And how are you sure about that? Why do you think this is a democrat/republican thing?

I voted for the guy on the premise that he had leadership in time of war.

I didn't. I voted for him because he was better than the alternative.

Obviously, that was wrong.

ask yourself, how much good has Mr Bush done in the past four years by sending more troops?

I think a lot of good has been done. Iraq is free from a brutal murderous dictator. They have had legitimate elections. They have a constitution. They have a chance for freedom. How is that not good?

Sure, there are bad things going on. There are everywhere. But hopefully, Iraq will be strong enough to weather the storm and the weakwilled Americans won't win out here.

 

[KenH]

For anyone who is interested here is any early website by a supporter:

http://electronpaul.com/

 

[LadyEagle]

Thanks, Ken, for the additional info on Ron Paul.

Lol at myself, I thought it said Electron Paul. Hmmm, I thought, that's quite catchy for a slogan. :laugh: :laugh:

 

[KenH]

I did the same thing, LE. :laugh:

 

[KenH]

Also, if anyone is interested a Yahoo!Group has already started:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RonPaulforPresident/

 

[KenH]

A couple of very interesting articles:

www.newswithviews.com/Yates/steven24.htm

www.lewrockwell.com/ostrowski/ostrowski80.html

 

[JGrubbs]

Paul's for legalizing all drugs and for open borders.

Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness!!

I know for a fact that Ron Paul is one of the only members of Congress working to fight the Bush administrations plans to open our borders! Can you show any links that state what your claiming about Ron Paul, or are you just spreading lies and gossip?

Ron Paul is one of the only Constitutionalists in Washington!

 

[KenH]

Ron Paul is one of the only Constitutionalists in Washington!

Amen.

By the way, for anyone who is interested, online contributions can now be made at the exploratory committee website in addition to being able to mail one in:

www.ronpaulexplore.com


For those interested in restoring limited, constitutional government to these United States it will be the best political contribution you have ever made.

 

[Dragoon68]

I really like Congressman Paul's "Freedom Principles":

The Ron Paul FREEDOM PRINCIPLES

* Rights belong to individuals, not groups.
* Property should be owned by people, not government.
* All voluntary associations should be permissible -- economic and social.
* The government's monetary role is to maintain the integrity of the monetary unit, not participate in fraud.
* Government exists to protect liberty, not to redistribute wealth or to grant special privileges.
* The lives and actions of people are their own responsibility, not the government's.

He's very consistent in his talk and his votes in this respect.

But, I don't like his position on the war in Iraq!