sumbody's irked at RP ;)

[heavenlyboy34]

Ron Paul Lashes Out at Israel, Predicts "Consequences" to U.S. Support By Philip Klein on 1.6.09 @ 4:41PM
Via Alarming News and Hot Air, I see this video of Ron Paul condemning Israel's defensive action in Gaza. At no point in the near 7-minute video can he muster any criticism of Hamas terrorists, scoffing that "they have a few small missiles." He blames the crisis solely on Israel and the United States for supporting Israel. Our support, Paul argues, has "antagonized the Muslim/Arab world more than ever before and unfortunately we'll suffer the consequences from this." I wonder what "consequences" he has in mind. Remember that this comes from the man who argued that U.S. bombing of Iraq during the 1990s was the cause of 9/11.

 

[pacelli]

And there goes any hope for a 2012 run for Ron Paul. Hopefully another Paul supporter will be up to the task.

 

[Jeremy]

And there goes any hope for a 2012 run for Ron Paul. Hopefully another Paul supporter will be up to the task.

What?

 

[Fox McCloud]

how is it so illogical to make that argument that Paul is making? It's also not just the bombing of Iraq, but the occupation of other various "holy" lands...not to mention sanctions as well.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldgbOxDX6DE&fmt=18

if you can have blowback after 26 years, then you can have most definitely have blowback after only 11.

 

[Lord Xar]

The guys name is "Klein" <-- that should tell you all you need to know.

 

[transistor]

Philip Klein sounds like a grade-A douche bag

 

[pacelli]

What?

Regardless of the fact that I know exactly what Dr. Paul is talking about, and agree with his statements, his comments are being interpreted across the internet as anti-israeli. This is not the first forum I've seen the analysis. I emphasize the word interpreted. This video will be dug up & played in a few years if Paul decided to run for the presidency again. Some MSM spin & it will have the exact same effect as the newsletters.

 

[Zolah]

Our support, Paul argues, has "antagonized the Muslim/Arab world more than ever before and unfortunately we'll suffer the consequences from this." I wonder what "consequences" he has in mind. Remember that this comes from the man who argued that U.S. bombing of Iraq during the 1990s was the cause of 9/11.

Is this supposed to make Ron Paul look crazy? Is Klein's counter-argument that Muslims hate us for our freedoms? I don't think even FOX news believes that anymore...no logical person can possibly believe that anymore.

 

[pacelli]

Is this supposed to make Ron Paul look crazy? Is Klein's counter-argument that Muslims hate us for our freedoms? I don't think even FOX news believes that anymore...no logical person can possibly believe that anymore.

I think it is more geared toward reinforcing the MSM talking point that Ron is part of the "blame america first" crowd. In other words, an emotion-based argument that has no logical foundation, but is believed by many.

 

[Kludge]

The guys name is "Klein" <-- that should tell you all you need to know.

Don't they make designer womens' jeans or something?

 

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

It has nothing to do with blaming America first, and that's a position Ron Paul ought to be able to defend. If anything, the neo-cons and warmonger are hellbent on putting Israel first. What happened to America First--period?

For supposedly being our vassal or "ally" in the Middle East, Israel sure has a lot of influence over the Kingdom, so to speak. Even the people who despise the Arab countries should be bothered by this. Any country with as much unseemly lobbying might and who meddles as much in our foreign policy as Israel should be viewed with high distrust by any true Patriot.

 

[JK/SEA]

I don't think this will harm Ron Paul. We may end up being able to say WE TOLD YOU SO by 2012...eh, sort of what we're doing now in regards to Ron's economy position.....

Ron Paul..right again.

 

[Original_Intent]

Ron Paul Lashes Out at Israel, Predicts "Consequences" to U.S. Support By Philip Klein on 1.6.09 @ 4:41PM
Via Alarming News and Hot Air, I see this video of Ron Paul condemning Israel's defensive action in Gaza. At no point in the near 7-minute video can he muster any criticism of Hamas terrorists, scoffing that "they have a few small missiles." He blames the crisis solely on Israel and the United States for supporting Israel. Our support, Paul argues, has "antagonized the Muslim/Arab world more than ever before and unfortunately we'll suffer the consequences from this." I wonder what "consequences" he has in mind. Remember that this comes from the man who argued that U.S. bombing of Iraq during the 1990s was the cause of 9/11.

How can Ron Paul have claimed that when he disagreed that Iraq was behind 9/11 in the first place? I would challenge this douche where Ron Paul EVER argued that 9/11 was caused by U.S bombing of Iraq.

 

[devil21]

How can Ron Paul have claimed that when he disagreed that Iraq was behind 9/11 in the first place? I would challenge this douche where Ron Paul EVER argued that 9/11 was caused by U.S bombing of Iraq.

Eh, well he did bring it up during the infamous "Rudy's Reading List" debate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQrwKr_b4Lg

 

[Zolah]

How can Ron Paul have claimed that when he disagreed that Iraq was behind 9/11 in the first place? I would challenge this douche where Ron Paul EVER argued that 9/11 was caused by U.S bombing of Iraq.

Ron Paul didn't single out Clinton's bombing of Iraq as the sole reason, he listed other well-known things like (I think) USA military bases in Saudi Arabia, which is considered holy land, etc. And Rudy Giuliani said it was absurd and that he had never heard anything like that...Even though Osama bin Laden talked about these things in his videos after Sept11th.

But Ron Paul never claimed a connection between Iraq and 911, no. Again, only the clinically logic-less believe that.

 

[Grandson of Liberty]

As much as I love RP, I disagree with him on this one.

I'd like to think that if Mexico was firing "a few small missiles" into "white" areas in the southwest U.S. (I mean, hey, they were there first, right?), he'd back a declaration of war and a serious beatdown of Mexico.

Just saying.

ETA: I'm not saying it's our job to get ourselves bogged down in it, but that we ought to let Israel do whatever they see is appropriate to defend their country.

 

[Jeremy]

As much as I love RP, I disagree with him on this one.

I'd like to think that if Mexico was firing "a few small missiles" into "white" areas in the southwest U.S. (I mean, hey, they were there first, right?), he'd back a declaration of war and a serious beatdown of Mexico.

Just saying.

But it has been reported by CNN that Israel was the first to break the cease fire.

 

[Zolah]

As much as I love RP, I disagree with him on this one.

I'd like to think that if Mexico was firing "a few small missiles" into "white" areas in the southwest U.S. (I mean, hey, they were there first, right?), he'd back a declaration of war and a serious beatdown of Mexico.

Just saying.

ETA: I'm not saying it's our job to get ourselves bogged down in it, but that we ought to let Israel do whatever they see is appropriate to defend their country.

I'm sure that if Ron Paul was in power, Mexico wouldn't be under siege from the USA, and I'm sure the USA wouldn't be making military incursions into Mexico resulting in civilian deaths.

No one is saying Israel shouldn't defend itself, but logic dictates that what they are doing is going to lead to more radicalisation and incitement to hatred, especially in Palestine, which ultimately does not make things better for Israel.

 

[BlackTerrel]

What are these consequences they speak of? Surely not Muslim terrorist attacks? After all the posters on these boards convinced me that all "Muslim terrorists" are really Mossad and CIA in disguise.

 

[Grandson of Liberty]

No one is saying Israel shouldn't defend itself, but logic dictates that what they are doing is going to lead to more radicalisation and incitement to hatred, especially in Palestine, which ultimately does not make things better for Israel.

If that's true, then what SHOULD they do? I'm not asking that to be a jerk- I'm really interested in what some solutions might be.

I think as long as there are Arabs and Jews, there is going to be hatred and radicalization. Nothing is going to change that. As long as Hamas is content to hide behind women and children as shields so they can later use their bodies as a PR move, then Israel will always be the "bad guys" I guess.

We (the U.S.) killed A LOT of innocent people in WW2 to win a war. But I think you'd be hard pressed to find many Japanese that are radicalized to hate America. It's not the violence, it's not the death, it's the cultures that have been at war for centuries. And they are just going to hate each other. But the Israelis don't strap bombs on their children to go blow up innocent people. I think Golda Meir said it best: “We will have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us.”