Ron Paul

[mord]

You can  post  write ins

[newman]

A deluded twit who thinks 'Jooos control everything'.

[jsullivan]

Chaim said he looks and speaks like Mr. Magoo.

[Ehud]

He looks like the type of person that I would want to pummel mercilessly.

[Daniel]

I know Chaim and you guys say he's a Nazi. But what has he ever done or said to suggest this?

[Ehud]

How about saying that he would refuse to strike Iran to prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons even if it constitutes a grave and existential threat to Israel?

[Daniel]

How about saying that he would refuse to strike Iran to prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons even if it constitutes a grave and existential threat to Israel?

He would probably say the same if Iran presented a threat to his own mother. That's how libertarians think.

[mord]

LIE bertarians they lie

[Trumpeldor]

Chaim said he looks and speaks like Mr. Magoo.

At least Mr. Magoo isn't a Nazi.

[Daniel]

How about saying that he would refuse to strike Iran to prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons even if it constitutes a grave and existential threat to Israel?

I can understand how this type of passive-aggressive (or just plain passive) stance can be construed as antisemetic. But did Ron Paul ever say anything specifically derogatory of Jews, Zionism, or Israel? Did he ever say anything about Jews owning the banks and the media or that Zionism is racism? Anything like that? Not trying to play devil's advocate, just searching for the evidence and the sources.

[Ehud]

How about saying that he would refuse to strike Iran to prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons even if it constitutes a grave and existential threat to Israel?

I can understand how this type of passive-aggressive (or just plain passive) stance can be construed as antisemetic. But did Ron Paul ever say anything specifically derogatory of Jews, Zionism, or Israel? Did he ever say anything about Jews owning the banks and the media or that Zionism is racism? Anything like that? Not trying to play devil's advocate, just searching for the evidence and the sources.

I'm not sure about that, but Nazis and anti-Semites love Ron Paul.  That's gotta count for something.

[EagleEye]

He looks like the type of person that I would want to pummel mercilessly.

lol

He would be a disaster for Israel, though I don't know if "nazi" is entirely appropriate.

[Daniel]

How about saying that he would refuse to strike Iran to prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons even if it constitutes a grave and existential threat to Israel?

I can understand how this type of passive-aggressive (or just plain passive) stance can be construed as antisemetic. But did Ron Paul ever say anything specifically derogatory of Jews, Zionism, or Israel? Did he ever say anything about Jews owning the banks and the media or that Zionism is racism? Anything like that? Not trying to play devil's advocate, just searching for the evidence and the sources.

I'm not sure about that, but Nazis and anti-Semites love Ron Paul.  That's gotta count for something.

Why do Nazis and anti-Semites love him?

[OdKahaneChai]

I think he's a Nazi who likes little children a little too much...

[Ehud]

Well, I think Nazis and anti-Semites tend to lean towards libertarians because they see the government as an oppressive Zionist-controlled institution that takes their freedom away from them by not allowing them to do Nazi things.  They like lower taxes and don't want to spend their money on social programs that mostly helps minorities.  They are non-interventionists because they are unaware of world politics and the danger of Islam because they spend all their time worrying about how the Jews are controlling them and how they want to take over the U.S. and destroy them.  Nazis are the type of people who want to be left alone, and a libertarian government would probably be the ideal form of government to facilitate that.  They also hate Israel and want to see a policy of the government of neutrality with Israel.

In truth I really don't know I'm just throwing these ideas out there.  It would be an interesting question to ask a Nazi if you come across one.

[Dan]

Who said he looks like a 'Great Man'?

[EagleEye]

Its probably more, for them, about the Israel issue than anything else.

[shimon]

ron paul stated that it was israels fault for the bombing of the marines. and he supported hezbollah in last summers war

[MassuhDGoodName]

shimon:  "...ron paul stated that it was israels fault for the bombing of the marines. and he supported hezbollah in last summers war..."

If you could please put links to his direct quotes stating this I would greatly appreciate it.

[MassuhDGoodName]

Ze'ev:  "...[regarding Ron Paul] How about saying that he would refuse to strike Iran to prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons even if it constitutes a grave and existential threat to Israel?..."

I must ask everyone on the forum this question, and I hope you all think deeply about your own answers to it ...

With all of the billions in dollars in aid provided to Israel by the United States, not the least of which being the finest state-of-the-art military war machines, and with Israel's military reputation, and with Rabbi Meir Kahane's admonition (which, by the way, is the same as the original Zionist pioneers' admonition that JEWS ONLY would defend Eretz Yisrael; NEVER relying on or asking others to defend Israel or fight for Jews anywhere in the world....

Then why in the world are there now Jews who think it proper and good that the U.S.A., or UK, or the UN peace-keeping forces should be expected to do what Israel herself should have done long ago, completely alone, and without asking permission from any other leaders or nations?

[ItalianZionist]

The only good thing about Ron Paul is that he says the the US should not bother with the Arabs..foriegn aid, military bases, etc. He is more of an isolationist. That can be bad if he doesn't realize a potential threat from one of those creatures. But I think not bothering with the Arabs is a good idea for the U.S.

[EagleEye]

Some dumb people can't see that Islam is the reason those countries act the way they do, and believe they are "resisting Israeli Oppression" instead.  First of all, such oppression doesn't exist, because Palis are NOT a legitimate people.

Did the Beslan massacre by Chechens, the attacks on Indians by Muslims, the riots in France, 9/11, the support of terrorist regimes all happen because of Israel?  Give me a break.   Muslims are violent, because there is something wrong with them, not for environmental reasons.  It is weakness, not strength, which encourages terrorism.  Muslims are the way they are because of their religion, not the political environment.

[Ehud]

Ze'ev:  "...[regarding Ron Paul] How about saying that he would refuse to strike Iran to prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons even if it constitutes a grave and existential threat to Israel?..."

I must ask everyone on the forum this question, and I hope you all think deeply about your own answers to it ...

With all of the billions in dollars in aid provided to Israel by the United States, not the least of which being the finest state-of-the-art military war machines, and with Israel's military reputation, and with Rabbi Meir Kahane's admonition (which, by the way, is the same as the original Zionist pioneers' admonition that JEWS ONLY would defend Eretz Yisrael; NEVER relying on or asking others to defend Israel or fight for Jews anywhere in the world....

Then why in the world are there now Jews who think it proper and good that the U.S.A., or UK, or the UN peace-keeping forces should be expected to do what Israel herself should have done long ago, completely alone, and without asking permission from any other leaders or nations?

Well Massuh, I don't believe that Iran presents a threat just to Israel.  A nuclear armed Iran is a threat to the entire world including the United States.  Knocking out the Iranian nuclear reactor isn't just defending Israel, it's defending the whole world.  Since no one else is willing to take on this world threat, I believe the U.S. should.  The U.S. has a greater infrastructural ability to wipe out the entire Iranian military, so I would trust the U.S. more than Israel to get the job done.  I do think that taking out Iran's entire military would be a good idea and I think the U.S. is best equipped to handle it.  If Israel and the U.S. want to team up on the objective together, I would support that.  I just think that Israel going it alone is dangerous militarily and politically.   

[EagleEye]

A nuclear armed Iran is a threat to the entire world including the United States.

Agreed.  There are no divergent interests between American and Israel on this issue.

I just think that Israel going it alone is dangerous militarily and politically.   

Yes, because it will fuel antisemitic conspiracy theories.

[RationalThought110]

Ron Paul is crazy and has a delusional obsession with "neocons."  He thinks any discussion of the threats posed by the Iranian regime are just "neocon" conspiracies.

He claims, "They unconditionally support Israel and have a close alliance with the Likud Party."