Townhall: But Who Was Right -- Rudy or Ron? by Pat Buchanan

[Harald]

Great article on Townhall:

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/PatrickJBuchanan/2007/05/18/but_who_was_right_--_rudy_or_ron?page=full&comments=true#postComments

by Pat Buchanan

...
What does Rudy Giuliani think the political motive was for 9-11?

Was it because we are good and they are evil? Is it because they hate our freedom? Is it that simple?

Ron Paul says Osama bin Laden is delighted we invaded Iraq.

Does the man not have a point? The United States is now tied down in a bloody guerrilla war in the Middle East and increasingly hated in Arab and Islamic countries where we were once hugely admired as the first and greatest of the anti-colonial nations. Does anyone think that Osama is unhappy with what is happening to us in Iraq?
...

[Michael Wilson]

That is a great article. Anytime I see Pat on t.v. he always slips in a word about Ron Paul. I think Pat Buchanan is a Ron Paul guy.

[MsDoodahs]

I love that comment where the person uses all those Hannity QUOTES!

[jimmyjamsslo]

As a liberal (libertarian?) I've read Buchanan's column for years, which is usually linked to from a lot of Left-wing websites I visit. He's been against the prosecution of this war from the beginning, and has used his erudite knowledge of history to illuminate the reasons why this war is a failure. His twenty-point platform of what conservative values is pretty right-on, as well.

Jimmy

[cujothekitten]

I love that comment where the person uses all those Hannity QUOTES!

Someone needs to make a video of that ASAP!

[Anne]

I always thought Pat Buchanan was a crazy neocon. After reading this he seems incredibly wise and intelligent!

[tekkierich]

People often get it wrong about Pat. He is simply a liberal hating social and fiscal conservative. He is anything but a neo-con.

Politics is not a bi-poler game. Ron Paul can wake people up to that.

[Defeat_the_Neocons]

I always thought Pat Buchanan was a crazy neocon. After reading this he seems incredibly wise and intelligent!

Pat is one of the, if not the number 1 , enemies of the dirty neocons. Check out www.amconmag.com



He was against the Iraq war since the beginning. However, unfortunately it seems lately he is starting to agree with Bush on not pulling out of Iraq. Pat has been saying recently that if we pull out it will be a major calamity. So I am not sure where he stands in regards to the Iraq war atm.

[billv]

Just read about 10 of the comments after that column and they're all pretty pro-Paul. This is coming from readers at Townhall.com. I'm seeing good things there.

[vertesc]

Hell, there's a reasonable argument that pulling out all at once right now would be a bad idea. Starting an immediate and gradual withdrawal might be better. Paul hasn't set any concrete dates, except that he would START bringing the troops home right away.

But staying indefinitely? I don't think even Pat is for that.

[Exponent]

I found this article through Google News on WorldNetDaily (http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55763). From what I gather, that's a pretty important religious-right website, which would be a great subset of Republicans to reach.

[mrapathy]

WorldNetDaily has articles by Jerome R Corsi who does some investigative journalism work. appears on Coasttocoastam.com radio program and has been on alex jones radio program as well.

Chuck Norris also writes articles for WorldNetDaily.

[Gabecpa]

Pat Buchanan has liked Paul from the beginning.

They are both true conservatives who want to make this country better. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised at a Paul-Buchanan ticket if it came down to it. Buchanan is more socially conservative, but they are both Goldwater Republicans.

[mdh]

These Hannity quotes are TOO funny... (reposted here, from someone on townhall.com):

"Why should one U.S. airman give up his life when our national security is not in imminent danger?"
- Hannity, March 24, 1999

"Congressman Moran, a couple of things that are in my mind. Number one is the president has really failed to lay out before the American people the reasons why we need to be involved militarily. That's number one.

And then we go back to Henry Kissinger's test, which is number one, is there a vital U.S. national interest? And do we have a plan to disengage? What's the exit strategy? I don't see that we've met that test either. And why does it have to happen this second, this hour? Why don't we have a national debate first?"
- Hannity, March 24, 1999

"But you know what? There's a lot of massacres going on in the world. As you know, 37,000 Kurds in Turkey, over a million people in Sudan. We have hundreds of thousands in Rwanda and Burundi. I mean, where do we stop?"
- Hannity, March 24, 1999

"My question to you is from all reports that I have been able to dig up, 2,000 killed in Kosovo in the last year. We keep hearing the president refer genocide, ethnic cleansing, comparisons to Adolf Hitler. Is the president purposefully using propaganda and hyperbole to garner the American public for support?"
- Hannity, March 26, 1999

"HANNITY: All right, Lucian Truscott, aren't you being disingenuous? Every day now with the president and vice president this Hitler analogy. You know what? That's all propaganda. That's misinformation.

Now, I'm not minimizing the fact that 2,000 lives have been lost in the last year. But you can't make the comparison in terms of the raw numbers and the brutality of Hitler to Milosevic. Is that not correct, Lucian?"
- Hannity, April 5, 1999

"Colonel, I guess this is why it's so ill-conceived from the very beginning. You know, they didn't anticipate that his popularity would rise. They didn't anticipate that he would beef up his reign of terror, if you will, against the ethnic Albanians. They didn't anticipate the refugee problem, and they didn't anticipate that they would also run out of bombs.

So it seems that we're talking about a very ill-conceived military action here. And now the question is, do you go in further and deeper, or do you pull back and rethink what the strategy's going to be here, because there has really been no stated goal, mission or objective."
- Hannity, March 31, 1999

[mdh]

"My question to you is from all reports that I have been able to dig up, 2,000 killed in Kosovo in the last year. We keep hearing the president refer genocide, ethnic cleansing, comparisons to Adolf Hitler. Is the president purposefully using propaganda and hyperbole to garner the American public for support?"
- Hannity, March 26, 1999


This one is especially funny, since I've time and again pointed out to liberals that there were no anti-war rallies when it was Clinton, a Democrat, sending out troops to their demise overseas. Here's proof that the opposite was true all along, too!

[angelatc]

I love that comment where the person uses all those Hannity QUOTES!

I loved that!!! Hannity is a Rudy guy through and through.

[angelatc]

Pat is one of the, if not the number 1 , enemies of the dirty neocons. Check out www.amconmag.com



He was against the Iraq war since the beginning. However, unfortunately it seems lately he is starting to agree with Bush on not pulling out of Iraq. Pat has been saying recently that if we pull out it will be a major calamity. So I am not sure where he stands in regards to the Iraq war atm.


It will be a major calamity. Look what happened in Vietnam when we pulled out of there. From WIkipedia: Hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese officials, particularly ARVN officers, were imprisoned in reeducation camps after the Communist takeover. Tens of thousands died and many fled the country after being released. Up to two million civilians left the country, and as many as half of these boat people perished at sea.

I don't want to leave the people, at least - who are supporting our efforts, behind to be slaughtered.

I don't know what the answer is.

[Gabecpa]

It will be a major calamity. Look what happened in Vietnam when we pulled out of there. From WIkipedia: Hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese officials, particularly ARVN officers, were imprisoned in reeducation camps after the Communist takeover. Tens of thousands died and many fled the country after being released. Up to two million civilians left the country, and as many as half of these boat people perished at sea.

I don't want to leave the people, at least - who are supporting our efforts, behind to be slaughtered.

I don't know what the answer is.

I don't agree with an Iraq pullout, but Dr. Paul shares the same views as me on every other issue it seems.

The aftermath of our withdrawal from Vietnam isn't often talked about, but it caused possibly hundreds of thousands of additional deaths. America was done with it, but South Vietnam and Cambodia paid dearly.

[Defeat_the_Neocons]

It will be a major calamity. Look what happened in Vietnam when we pulled out of there. From WIkipedia: Hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese officials, particularly ARVN officers, were imprisoned in reeducation camps after the Communist takeover. Tens of thousands died and many fled the country after being released. Up to two million civilians left the country, and as many as half of these boat people perished at sea.

I don't want to leave the people, at least - who are supporting our efforts, behind to be slaughtered.

I don't know what the answer is.


Yes it will most likely be a major calamity but we cannot stay forever. If Iraqis want peace they will have it. If they want civil war they will have it. Nothing really we can do about it.

We will eventuality leave when we forget our pride and understand these people do not want western democracy(who are we to decide what is best for a people?). It may take 5 years and 5000 more deaths.

But I think the only answer is to build a time machine and go back to stop this disaster.

[JoshLowry]

It may take 5 years and 5000 more deaths.

But I think the only answer is to build a time machine and go back to stop this disaster.

Or we could elect Ron Paul?

[Bryan]

Here is one of Pats books exposing the neocons:
http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/I/51NGRHBMSTL._AA240_.jpg
Where the Right Went Wrong: How Neoconservatives Subverted the Reagan Revolution and Hijacked the Bush Presidency
http://www.amazon.com/Where-Right-Went-Wrong-Neoconservatives/dp/0312341164/

Although the George W. Bush administration is famous for being "on message," delivering a consistent and polished political perspective no matter what, such consistency apparently does not extend to every member of the conservative universe. In Where the Right Went Wrong, veteran pundit and occasional presidential candidate Patrick Buchanan offers up scathing criticisms of Bush's policies, the arrogance and boorishness of which, he warns, could ultimately dramatically destabilize the United States' superpower status. The problem, in Buchanan's eyes, is the rejection of traditional Reagan-era conservatism by an administration under the sway of the so-called "neoconservatives," who favor a pre-emptive military strategy and big government and don't mind running up dangerously huge budget deficits to support it. The war in Iraq, fought without direct demonstrable threat, alienates America in the eyes of the rest of the world, says Buchanan, squandering the global goodwill earned after the 9/11 attacks and creating exponentially larger numbers of terrorists who will threaten the U.S. for generations to come. The zeal over free trade among elected officials, a feeling notably not shared by Buchanan, Ross Perot, and Ralph Nader, is costing America jobs, Buchanan theorizes, and leading to a de-industrialized service-sector-only economy, an end to American self-sufficiency in favor of a reliance on global corporations, and a looming economic crisis. Refreshingly, and unlike pundits of his day, Buchanan crafts his arguments by examining world history, offering detailed analogies to the Roman Empire, the Civil War, and pre-Soviet Russia among others. Conservatives alienated by the Bush administration will find an eloquent champion in Buchanan and even liberals, who may not have known there was a conservative argument against war in Iraq, stand to learn something from a right side of the aisle perspective so different from that found in the Bush White House. --John Moe