Why I Don’t Trust Trump on Iran: Ron Paul

[Ender]

Why I Don’t Trust Trump on Iran: Ron Paul

Why I Don’t Trust Trump on Iran
written by Ron Paul
Monday January 6, 2020

President Trump and his Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told us the US had to assassinate Maj. Gen. Qassim Soleimani last week because he was planning “Imminent attacks” on US citizens. I don’t believe them.

Why not? Because Trump and the neocons – like Pompeo – have been lying about Iran for the past three years in an effort to whip up enough support for a US attack. From the phony justification to get out of the Iran nuclear deal, to blaming Yemen on Iran, to blaming Iran for an attack on Saudi oil facilities, the US Administration has fed us a steady stream of lies for three years because they are obsessed with Iran.

And before Trump’s obsession with attacking Iran, the past four US Administrations lied ceaselessly to bring about wars on Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Serbia, Somalia, and the list goes on.

At some point, when we’ve been lied to constantly and consistently for decades about a “threat” that we must “take out” with a military attack, there comes a time where we must assume they are lying until they provide rock solid, irrefutable proof. Thus far they have provided nothing. So I don’t believe them.

President Trump has warned that his administration has already targeted 52 sites important to Iran and Iranian culture and the US will attack them if Iran retaliates for the assassination of Gen. Soleimani. Because Iran has no capacity to attack the United States, Iran’s retaliation if it comes will likely come against US troops or US government officials stationed or visiting the Middle East. I have a very easy solution for President Trump that will save the lives of American servicemembers and other US officials: just come home. There is absolutely no reason for US troops to be stationed throughout the Middle East to face increased risk of death for nothing.

In our Ron Paul Liberty Report program last week we observed that the US attack on a senior Iranian military officer on Iraqi soil – over the objection of the Iraq government – would serve to finally unite the Iraqi factions against the United States. And so it has: on Sunday the Iraqi parliament voted to expel US troops from Iraqi soil. It may have been a non-binding resolution, but there is no mistaking the sentiment. US troops are not wanted and they are increasingly in danger. So why not listen to the Iraqi parliament?

Bring our troops home, close the US Embassy in Baghdad – a symbol of our aggression - and let the people of the Middle East solve their own problems. Maintain a strong defense to protect the United States, but end this neocon pipe-dream of ruling the world from the barrel of a gun. It does not work. It makes us poorer and more vulnerable to attack. It makes the elites of Washington rich while leaving working and middle class America with the bill. It engenders hatred and a desire for revenge among those who have fallen victim to US interventionist foreign policy. And it results in millions of innocents being killed overseas.

There is no benefit to the United States to trying to run the world. Such a foreign policy brings only bankruptcy – moral and financial. Tell Congress and the Administration that for America’s sake we demand the return of US troops from the Middle East!
http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archive...0/january/06/why-i-don-t-trust-trump-on-iran/

 

[Anti Federalist]

Bring our troops home, close the US Embassy in Baghdad – a symbol of our aggression - and let the people of the Middle East solve their own problems. Maintain a strong defense to protect the United States, but end this neocon pipe-dream of ruling the world from the barrel of a gun. It does not work. It makes us poorer and more vulnerable to attack. It makes the elites of Washington rich while leaving working and middle class America with the bill. It engenders hatred and a desire for revenge among those who have fallen victim to US interventionist foreign policy. And it results in millions of innocents being killed overseas.

There is no benefit to the United States to trying to run the world. Such a foreign policy brings only bankruptcy – moral and financial. Tell Congress and the Administration that for America’s sake we demand the return of US troops from the Middle East!

Yup, this.

Bring the troops home, protect the United States.

 

[Ender]

Yup, this.

Bring the troops home, protect the United States.

Even as a kid I knew, when this did not happen after 911, that we were not being told the truth.

 

[Warlord]

Ron Paul

 

[enhanced_deficit]

Yup, this.

Bring the troops home, protect the United States.

[h=3]

Trump threatens Iraq with crippling sanctions if US troops are expelled[/h]

 

[ClaytonB]

Ron Paul

+1

 

[KEEF]

Why I Don’t Trust Trump on Iran
written by Ron Paul
Monday January 6, 2020

President Trump and his Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told us the US had to assassinate Maj. Gen. Qassim Soleimani last week because he was planning “Imminent attacks” on US citizens. I don’t believe them.

Why not? Because Trump and the neocons – like Pompeo – have been lying about Iran for the past three years in an effort to whip up enough support for a US attack. From the phony justification to get out of the Iran nuclear deal, to blaming Yemen on Iran, to blaming Iran for an attack on Saudi oil facilities, the US Administration has fed us a steady stream of lies for three years because they are obsessed with Iran.

And before Trump’s obsession with attacking Iran, the past four US Administrations lied ceaselessly to bring about wars on Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Serbia, Somalia, and the list goes on.

At some point, when we’ve been lied to constantly and consistently for decades about a “threat” that we must “take out” with a military attack, there comes a time where we must assume they are lying until they provide rock solid, irrefutable proof. Thus far they have provided nothing. So I don’t believe them.

President Trump has warned that his administration has already targeted 52 sites important to Iran and Iranian culture and the US will attack them if Iran retaliates for the assassination of Gen. Soleimani. Because Iran has no capacity to attack the United States, Iran’s retaliation if it comes will likely come against US troops or US government officials stationed or visiting the Middle East. I have a very easy solution for President Trump that will save the lives of American servicemembers and other US officials: just come home. There is absolutely no reason for US troops to be stationed throughout the Middle East to face increased risk of death for nothing.

In our Ron Paul Liberty Report program last week we observed that the US attack on a senior Iranian military officer on Iraqi soil – over the objection of the Iraq government – would serve to finally unite the Iraqi factions against the United States. And so it has: on Sunday the Iraqi parliament voted to expel US troops from Iraqi soil. It may have been a non-binding resolution, but there is no mistaking the sentiment. US troops are not wanted and they are increasingly in danger. So why not listen to the Iraqi parliament?

Bring our troops home, close the US Embassy in Baghdad – a symbol of our aggression - and let the people of the Middle East solve their own problems. Maintain a strong defense to protect the United States, but end this neocon pipe-dream of ruling the world from the barrel of a gun. It does not work. It makes us poorer and more vulnerable to attack. It makes the elites of Washington rich while leaving working and middle class America with the bill. It engenders hatred and a desire for revenge among those who have fallen victim to US interventionist foreign policy. And it results in millions of innocents being killed overseas.

There is no benefit to the United States to trying to run the world. Such a foreign policy brings only bankruptcy – moral and financial. Tell Congress and the Administration that for America’s sake we demand the return of US troops from the Middle East!
http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archive...0/january/06/why-i-don-t-trust-trump-on-iran/

Ahh, a breath of common sense. Something that this forum has been digressing away from.

 

[Slave Mentality]

Ron Paul

+1

+2

 

[dannno]

Even as a kid I knew, when this did not happen after 911, that we were not being told the truth.

Uh, ya, but you should then be smart enough to know we aren't being told the truth now.

 

[dannno]

Yup, this.

Bring the troops home, protect the United States.

Ya, but I also don't mind if somebody assassinates CIA assets who are secretly working in foreign governments and working with the neocons to start a war with Iran.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

At some point, when we’ve been lied to constantly and consistently for decades about a “threat” that we must “take out” with a military attack, there comes a time where we must assume they are lying until they provide rock solid, irrefutable proof. Thus far they have provided nothing. So I don’t believe them.

I won’t believe it until Adam Schiff and John Brennan agree (and when monkeys fly out of Nancy Pelosi’s butt).

 

[Ender]

Uh, ya, but you should then be smart enough to know we aren't being told the truth now.

I am- and so should you.

 

[dannno]

I won’t believe it until Adam Schiff and John Brennan agree (and when monkeys fly out of Nancy Pelosi’s butt).

It's already known, Ron Paul actually mentioned on his show today that Suleimani has already murdered a lot of people.

The question was whether he was about to do it again. Does that matter?

I believe that he was a CIA stooge who infiltrated the Iranian regime and was trying to foment war between the US and Iran.

My sources tell me he had a bioweapon that he was bringing to Iraq to use against innocent people and US military.

Ron Paul is working off of information from the mainstream media. He has done it before, and had to correct himself, before.

 

[dannno]

I am- and so should you.

Nope, you are buying it hook, line and stinker.

 

[Ender]

Nope, you are buying it hook, line and stinker.

I'll take Ron's word for it before anyone here or on the MSM- which I never read, BTW

 

[dannno]

I'll take Ron's word for it before anyone here or on the MSM- which I never read, BTW

Ron sometimes speculates on information from the MSM, which is often false. He later will backtrack it. This will be one of those cases.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

It's already known, Ron Paul actually mentioned on his show today that Suleimani has already murdered a lot of people.

The question was whether he was about to do it again. Does that matter?
...

If it’s called “pre-emptive” for an “imminent threat” then it matters.

As to what he has done in the past, who knows? I doubt he was out shooting people himself, or personally planting IEDs. He was most likely supplying many different militias and groups. If supplying weapons is equal to personally murdering people, the list of guilty people on this planet is extremely long. Every weapon manufacturer would be considered guilty.

 

[Ender]

If it’s called “pre-emptive” for an “imminent threat” then it matters.

As to what he has done in the past, who knows? I doubt he was out shooting people himself, or personally planting IEDs. He was most likely supplying many different militias and groups. If supplying weapons is equal to personally murdering people, the list of guilty people on this planet is extremely long. Every weapon manufacturer would be considered guilty.

Wish I could +rep you again!

 

[dannno]

If it’s called “pre-emptive” for an “imminent threat” then it matters.

As to what he has done in the past, who knows? I doubt he was out shooting people himself, or personally planting IEDs. He was most likely supplying many different militias and groups. If supplying weapons is equal to personally murdering people, the list of guilty people on this planet is extremely long. Every weapon manufacturer would be considered guilty.

No, he did more than that and Ron Paul said on his show that he was responsible. He is a terrorist, and a CIA stooge trying to foment war, playing into the neocons hands. I would recommend watching the PJW video. He is personally responsible for hundreds of murders - if you take your logic about supplying and coordinating, it would be much higher than that, probably tens of thousands or more.

The point is if you have somebody who has already murdered hundreds of people, and you take them out pre-emptively based on intelligence of another attack that is yet to come, that is ENTIRELY different than taking out an innocent person who has never committed such an act for a pre-crime.

Also, I don't cry when CIA stooges are killed.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

...
The point is if you have somebody who has already murdered hundreds of people, and you take them out pre-emptively based on intelligence of another attack that is yet to come, that is ENTIRELY different than taking out an innocent person who has never committed such an act for a pre-crime.
...

Yes, there is difference between pre-emptive action against someone who hasn’t done anything (pre-crime), and prosecuting, convicting and punishing someone who has already committed a crime.