JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Dan on October 22, 2007, 10:22:55 AM
-
I thought the Fred Thompson was awful and sounded like he didn't even have the energy and stamina to finish...
Giuliani sounded good, and gained some ground...
Huckabee also was wonderfully witty and gave great answers.
Romney I think slipped a little, with his socialized healthcare plan and social security reforms
Ron Paul like a typical Nazi and didn't disappoint...
The Best Line of the night belonged to John Mccain! I don't like him but he was very good at one point in the Debate...
-
Ron Paul sounded like his usually whinny self on all the others i agree
-
I saw most of it in bits and pieces.
McCain did get alot of applause for his "I was tied up at the time" line.
And you're right; Thompson looked very bad. He looked exhausted and his speaking style is more potent than Ambien. What a bore.
I got a kick out of the part when Ron Paulistinian couldn't hear the question being asked and had to say he didn't hear too well.
I thought Guiliani did well and I'm still supporting him because I'm convinced he's the best candidate to beat Hillary and will do a good job dealing with the moooozies.
-
Ron Paul is great. The big money boys don't like him, though.
He's right, the United States has no business policing the world. The government is too big, spends too much, etc.
How is Paul a 'nazi'? Because he doesn't want to give support to Israel? Chaim and Rabbi Kahane wanted a hands-off relationship between the US and Israel.
So, what's the problem?
-
Ron Paul is great. The big money boys don't like him, though.
He's right, the United States has no business policing the world. The government is too big, spends too much, etc.
How is Paul a 'nazi'? Because he doesn't want to give support to Israel? Chaim and Rabbi Kahane wanted a hands-off relationship between the US and Israel.
So, what's the problem?
Ron Paul spoke well, why would anyone support Guiliani? Does nobody care about their rights anymore? Nobody cares about the constitution?
-
The problem is Ron Paulistinian is an Israel hating, Jew hating scatbag.
There's not a single problem that he doesn't blame on the USA foreign policy, Israel or the 'neo-cons' (his code word for Jews).
Ron Paul's solution to Islamic terrorism and genocide is to ignore it, negotiate with the mooozies, or blame it on ourselves.
Paul is a Jew hating dhimmi [censored].
That's the problem.
-
Paul is a Jew hating dhimmi [censored].
Where's your proof?
People called Rabbi Kahane a 'fascist'. Did that make him one?
-
The problem is Ron Paulistinian is an Israel hating, Jew hating scatbag.
There's not a single problem that he doesn't blame on the USA foreign policy, Israel or the 'neo-cons' (his code word for Jews).
Ron Paul's solution to Islamic terrorism and genocide is to ignore it, negotiate with the mooozies, or blame it on ourselves.
Paul is a Jew hating dhimmi [censored].
That's the problem.
You sure seem to make use of a lot of satiric misspelling. His interests are America first, he does not wish to intervene with other nations, he implys that 9/11 happened because we were in Saudi Arabia. Do you really think muslims attacked us just because they "hate" freedom? Muslims hate America because we gave them an excuse to by supporting Israel and by getting involved in the middle east. Ron Pauls stance is that he believes we should not intervene as the worlds police men and that we should mind our own business. Why does this make him anti-Jewish? It doesn't, he wants to cut aid to Egypt and Saudi and the rest of the middle east as well. Hopefully what I have just said is not taken out of context.
Are you going to vote for a gun grabber like Guiliani?
-
He is the only Candidate supported by David Duke ,StørmFrønt and Vanguard as well as a host of other anti Jewish websites
-
My proof that Ron Paul is a dhimmi [censored] is his reaction to 9/11.
Does Paul place the blame on the mooozies that did it ?
No. Paul blames the USA's foreign policy.
My proof that Ron Paul is a dhimmi [censored] is his reaction to Iran's quest for nukes.
Paul's has no problem with Iranian nukes. His solution to Iranian nukes and mooozie agression is to negotiate and give them aid through increased trade.
Paul claims the neo-cons control America through the Likud Party in Israel.
He's an Israel hating, Jew hating dhimmi [censored].
He's got the support of the 9/11 truthers that claim 9/11 was either an inside job or done by the Mossad.
He's got the support of the skinheads and nazis.
He's got the support of mooozie groups now.
Does Ron Paul disassociate himself from this support ?
Nope.
Ron Paul is a piece of crap. It's unbelievable that some otherwise intelligent people on this forum can't see this.
Chaim has Ron Paul pegged for the piece of crap Paul is and some of you still don't want to listen.
Unbelievable.
-
He is the only Candidate supported by David Duke ,StørmFrønt and Vanguard as well as a host of other anti Jewish websites
CAIR and muslims support him as well
-
My proof that Ron Paul is a dhimmi [censored] is his reaction to 9/11.
Does Paul place the blame on the mooozies that did it ?
No. Paul blames the USA's foreign policy.
My proof that Ron Paul is a dhimmi [censored] is his reaction to Iran's quest for nukes.
Paul's has no problem with Iranian nukes. His solution to Iranian nukes and mooozie agression is to negotiate and give them aid through increased trade.
Paul claims the neo-cons control America through the Likud Party in Israel.
He's an Israel hating, Jew hating dhimmi [censored].
He's got the support of the 9/11 truthers that claim 9/11 was either an inside job or done by the Mossad.
He's got the support of the skinheads and nazis.
He's got the support of mooozie groups now.
Does Ron Paul disassociate himself from this support ?
Nope.
Ron Paul is a piece of crap. It's unbelievable that some otherwise intelligent people on this forum can't see this.
Chaim has Ron Paul pegged for the piece of crap Paul is and some of you still don't want to listen.
Unbelievable.
You have still yet to answer the question
Are you going to vote for a gun grabber like Guiliani?
-
If Paul is TRULY anti-Israel, I will not support him.
If, however he only wants to end US foreign aid and worldwide police actions, then I do support him.
Was the fact that the US pressured Israel into surrendering the Sinai and Gaza a good thing?
Would it have not been better for Israel if the US had left Israel alone?
-
He is the only Candidate supported by David Duke ,StørmFrønt and Vanguard as well as a host of other anti Jewish websites
CAIR and muslims support him as well
I have no doubt can they all be wr9ong about him
-
"Muslims hate America because we gave them an excuse to by supporting Israel and by getting involved in the middle east. Ron Pauls stance is that he believes we should not intervene as the worlds police men and that we should mind our own business. Why does this make him anti-Jewish? It doesn't, he wants to cut aid to Egypt and Saudi and the rest of the middle east as well. Hopefully what I have just said is not taken out of context.
Are you going to vote for a gun grabber like Guiliani? "
You bet your ass I'll vote for Guiliani before I'd ever vote for a [censored] like Ron Paul.
If you really believe that moooozies hate America because of our support for Israel, then you don't know a thing about Islam.
Even if you buy into the moooozie 'excuse', as you call it, for hating America - being our support for Israel and involvement in the middle east- are you willing to accept having moooozies dictate who we support and terrorism like 9/11 ?
If you are, then you're a dhimmi [censored] like Ron Paul.
Another thing...Guiliani isn't taking your guns away. That's a fear tactic and a bunch of nonsense.
Yeah, I'll be voting for the guy that told the Saudi prince to shove his money up his colon, and the guy that threw Arafart out of lincoln center on his butt.
Ron Paul is a piece of crap.
-
"Muslims hate America because we gave them an excuse to by supporting Israel and by getting involved in the middle east. Ron Pauls stance is that he believes we should not intervene as the worlds police men and that we should mind our own business. Why does this make him anti-Jewish? It doesn't, he wants to cut aid to Egypt and Saudi and the rest of the middle east as well. Hopefully what I have just said is not taken out of context.
Are you going to vote for a gun grabber like Guiliani? "
You bet your donkey I'll vote for Guiliani before I'd ever vote for a [censored] like Ron Paul.
If you really believe that moooozies hate America because of our support for Israel, then you don't know a thing about Islam.
Even if you buy into the moooozie 'excuse', as you call it, for hating America - being our support for Israel and involvement in the middle east- are you willing to accept having moooozies dictate who we support and terrorism like 9/11 ?
If you are, then you're a dhimmi [censored] like Ron Paul.
Another thing...Guiliani isn't taking your guns away. That's a fear tactic and a bunch of nonsense.
Yeah, I'll be voting for the guy that told the Saudi prince to shove his money up his colon, and the guy that threw Arafart out of lincoln center on his butt.
Ron Paul is a piece of crap.
Then you haven't learned a damn thing about Bushes mistakes.
As for Guiliani being a gun grabber, why don't you listen to the facts straight from the horses mouth then?
http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php?topic=8515.0
Watch the videos, he even admits his stance on guns.
Any candidate that attempts to INFRINGE on my rights, especially gun rights is a enemy to the state IMO.
If the United States had never sent foreign aid to Israel, they would be in a much better position right now. Israel would have kept the Galil in service, they would have a booming military industry as well as the LAVI project instead of the F-16. They would have Sinai, gaza, and the west bank and probably would have taken back Jordan by now. They would have been able to have succeeded in many things. US with control of Israel has done nothing but screw them over, both sides. You can thank the Neocons in control which aren't even real Conservatives, they are a bunch of liberals who claim to be Conservatives. Left wing at that.
-
Giuliani only objects to grabbing guns from crowded areas where shootouts might take place on crowded streets
-
Giuliani only objects to grabbing guns from crowded areas where shootouts might take place on crowded streets
That is STILL an INFRINGEMENT to peoples rights. People living in the city need guns the most, whats the next step, there aren't many shootings in rural areas so confiscate the guns?
"Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither" - Benjamin Franklin
-
Sounds good next we will give up listening in on terrorist plots
-
Republicans are the worst.They now hate Amerika more than democrats! >:(
-
Sounds good next we will give up listening in on terrorist plots
Yeah ok, you enjoy living in a so called "safe society", give me a call when you lose all your rights and we can know we're talking safely while the government wiretaps us. Enjoy your sporting firearms that you have to rent from a gun range and keep stored because all the guns have been banned due to Sarah Brady crying that terrorists are going to use a .50 cal sniper rifle to shoot down a airliner, enjoy when you can't even critsize muslims because the governments too busy labeling non muslims as terrorists like the JDL and Kahanist groups. If you support that kind of government, enjoy. Enjoy going to the airport where you are being scanned with the new xray systems to see through your clothes with a 3d model of your naked body, afterall it's for the security of the nation to target non muslims. I really do feel sorry for you. You don't seem to understand the government you are supporting on this "war on terror" is not targeting muslims, they are targeting EVERYONE as a potential terrorist, even right wing Jewish groups.
Maybe you didn't hear Romney at the last debate when he said we need wiretaps and need to sacrifice some freedom to be safe to listen in on mosques and churches. Yes we all know churches have terrorists right?
-
I always carry in n.y.
-
I always carry in n.y.
What happened in New York was unconstitutional, how many peoples rights were violated for Guiliani to supposedly clean up NYC? NY has the worst gun restriction on the book. I wouldn't move there if you paid me. I'm sure the liberals would welcome me when I'm toting around my scary black rifles with 100 round beta drum magazines.
-
Since when do we have some many Ron Paul sympathisers.... ???
If he is Anti-Israel and Anti-American then he is a Neo-Democrat-Socialist-Pig!
-
If , if, if.
Do you live in the real world ?
Sure it would be great if Israel had built the Lavi.
But what was going to power the Lavi ?
Do you think Israel builds it's own jet engines?
The truth is Israel builds alot of it's own armaments but is still reliant on the USA to supply components and parts even for the stuff it builds on it's own.
In a perfect world the mooozies wouldn't be getting armed by the Soviets and the USA...and it would just be Israel versus the Arabs with no foreign intervention...let the best man win.
Israel would clean their clocks.
But this isn't a perfect world.
And Ron Paul isn't going to make it perfect or stop the arabs from getting arms. Nope. He doesn't have a problem with Iran getting nukes. He's oblivious not only to the danger to Israel but to the USA.
He's a dhimmi fool that doesn't have a clue what his isolationist position means in a modern era threatened by global islamic jihad.
But you go ahead and keep accepting Paul's asinine assertion that mooozies hate us only because of our foreign policy.
Doesn't really matter, because thankfully Ron Paul doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning the Republican nomination or gaining the Presidency.
But if it makes you feel better to be in bed with the candidate that the nazis and moooozies are supporting because Guiliani is a 'gun grabber', then go right ahead and lie down with them.
Just don't complain about the fleas when you wake up.
-
I always carry in n.y.
I dont yet, just waiting for my permit to come through
Muslim groups seem to support ron paul in large numbers, what is his policy on islamic terrorism, will he advocate profiling muslims, not arabs.....MUSLIMS of any shade or race. I havent paid much attention to him, he doesnt seem to have that good of a chance of getting the nomination.
-
Since when do we have some many Ron Paul sympathisers.... ???
If he is Anti-Israel and Anti-American then he is a Neo-Democrat-Socialist-Pig!
I've heard people call Paul anti-Israel, but anti-U.S.?
Give me evidence that he is anti-Israel and I will stop supporting him.
It sounds to me like Paul is against big government. What is Socialist about that?
-
I always carry in n.y.
What happened in New York was unconstitutional, how many peoples rights were violated for Guiliani to supposedly clean up NYC? NY has the worst gun restriction on the book. I wouldn't move there if you paid me. I'm sure the liberals would welcome me when I'm toting around my scary black rifles with 100 round beta drum magazines.
I carry everywhere i go in N.Y. no problem i'm serious
-
Paul is Anti-War and puts down our effort in Iraq every chance he gets...
I'm not pro war but since we're there the military should be supported and not bashed at every corner... it causes more hatered of America around the world.
-
I carry everywhere i go in N.Y. no problem i'm serious
As long as you don't get caught, you can carry anywhere!
-
C'mon Scriabin.
Paul repeatedly asserts that 9/11 and mooozie terrorism around the globe is a result of America's foreign policy. By that he means support for and friendship with Israel. Get it ?
He's also written stuff claiming the neo-cons (his code word for Jews) control America through the Likud Party in Israel.
He's as anti-Israel as they come.
And if he's anti-Israel, in my book, he's also anti-America.
What about your book ?
-
Paul is Anti-War and puts down our effort in Iraq every chance he gets...
Is Paul anti-war or anti-Iraq War?
Chaim is against the Iraq War too.
-
Oh and for Ron Pauls comments Al Qaida hates us because our support of Israel read this review of Raymond Ibraihams book, he works in the U.S. archives and is an Arab .He is the only person in the U.S. govt who bothered to read osamas letters to the moslems.Yes osama hates us because who we are.
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/the-al-qaeda-reader-martyrdom-or-mortardom.html
-
Paul is Anti-War and puts down our effort in Iraq every chance he gets...
Is Paul anti-war or anti-Iraq War?
Chaim is against the Iraq War too.
He called it a criminal act he said you don'nt attack a country rfor what criminals in that country did
-
C'mon Scriabin.
Paul repeatedly asserts that 9/11 and mooozie terrorism around the globe is a result of America's foreign policy. By that he means support for and friendship with Israel. Get it ?
He's also written stuff claiming the neo-cons (his code word for Jews) control America through the Likud Party in Israel.
He's as anti-Israel as they come.
If Paul is anti-Israel then I'm anti-Paul.
I simply haven't seen any PROOF that he's anti-Israel.
I understand hating those who are invading your country.
Mexico is invading the United States and NOTHING is being done to stop it. At the same time, we're spend hundreds of billions of dollars fighting in Iraq? Why? To bring democracy to the Middle East?
INSANE.
-
Paul is Anti-War and puts down our effort in Iraq every chance he gets...
Is Paul anti-war or anti-Iraq War?
Chaim is against the Iraq War too.
He called it a criminal act he said you don'nt attack a country rfor what criminals in that country did
Normally thats true, however we are fighing islamic terrorists who come from all over, the only thing they all have in common is islam and the "grand dream" of the islamic ummah.
-
True i agree
-
If , if, if.
Do you live in the real world ?
Sure it would be great if Israel had built the Lavi.
But what was going to power the Lavi ?
Do you think Israel builds it's own jet engines?
The truth is Israel builds alot of it's own armaments but is still reliant on the USA to supply components and parts even for the stuff it builds on it's own.
In a perfect world the mooozies wouldn't be getting armed by the Soviets and the USA...and it would just be Israel versus the Arabs with no foreign intervention...let the best man win.
Israel would clean their clocks.
But this isn't a perfect world.
And Ron Paul isn't going to make it perfect or stop the arabs from getting arms. Nope. He doesn't have a problem with Iran getting nukes. He's oblivious not only to the danger to Israel but to the USA.
He's a dhimmi fool that doesn't have a clue what his isolationist position means in a modern era threatened by global islamic jihad.
But you go ahead and keep accepting Paul's asinine assertion that mooozies hate us only because of our foreign policy.
Doesn't really matter, because thankfully Ron Paul doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning the Republican nomination or gaining the Presidency.
But if it makes you feel better to be in bed with the candidate that the nazis and moooozies are supporting because Guiliani is a 'gun grabber', then go right ahead and lie down with them.
Just don't complain about the fleas when you wake up.
That's funny, many of the people complaining about Bush today are the ones who voted for him. I'll be laughing while everyones complaining about Guiliani if he happens to get elected.
You have no consideration about our constitution or our rights. Your primary focus is that America has an obligation to fight terrorism and aid Israel. You don't seem to understand that the fact remains, America is using Israel for it's own agenda. The people in power today are the same people that have been in power for quite some time now. The same ones that used other countries and set up their own governments and dictators in the name of "Democracy". The fact is, we are not a democracy, democracy is a illusion. We are a republic.
How many dictators did we put in power? How about Saddam who we sold weapons to? Aren't we selling to the Egyptians now as well? Whenever there is a dictator we don't like, we go in and overthrow the government and set up a new one. Do you not think that the United States would do the exact same to Israel if a right wing government came to power through elections similar to Meir Kahane? What do you think would happen if Meir Kahane was elected prime minister of Israel at that time? The United States knew he was a threat to their plan of a "American" Middle East. We cannot go around the world drawing lines in the sand, the British did this and look what happened to them? All empires fall, the Soviets fell, the Nazis fell, the British empire fell, the Romans fell. Do you really think America is exempt from this or are you too blind to see this for yourself?
Israel was of use to America at one point, they were of use during the cold war which the Soviets armed the communists in South America, the Middle East, Eastern Europe, chunks of Asia and Africa. We aided countries as well. The Israelis were not only fighting against muslims but also against leftist secular Arabs, many of the worst terrorists in history were leftists or had communist aid. This is why America saw a use in Israel. We did the same thing with Korea and Germany. The soviets took East Berlin and East Germany, we took the west. They took North Korea, we took South Korea. It was all about getting as many allies as we could during that period.
Now the cold war is over officially. Israel is now being used for something else, they are being used as a bargaining chip by the United States to stabilize the middle east. Do you not think every inch of land that is given to the PLO/Hamas Arab Muslim Nazis by order of King George is part of this so called peace process? It buys the United States time everytime Israel is forced to give up land. It's nothing more than to satisfy the muslims. The only thing foreign aid has done is make Israel dependent on America for weapons, guess what happened to all the other nations who were dependent on other countries for their survival?
Cuba? We placed an embargo on them, that's ok, the Soviet Union funded them and then when the Soviet Union collapsed, their country turned to excrement. You go there, there are all kinds of American cars there from the 50's because of the embargo. They are screwed. All those weapons they have now, at one time they were top of the line technology. What are they now? Pieces of excrement rust buckets that barely work and spare parts are running out.
North Korea? Wow, they were pretty stupid scary at one point. Now look at them, again all that technology has gone to waste.
South Africa? They had embargos placed on them, some say they didn't have television until 30 years after the world did. They got military aid from Israel, R4's (Galils), vehicles, helmets, nuclear weapon program. They couldn't survive with the apartheid system and whites being a minority and after Israel ditched them, the country started producing stuff domestically but it was too late. Israel is headed into a similar direction, Jews will soon become a minority because of this whole illusion of a democratic country in which Arabs will become the majority.
Venezuela? Same things happening now. US won't send them the parts they need for F-16's, they are now getting armed from the Russians.
Unlike these countries, I doubt the Russians are going to help the Israelis, the Chinese may sell them weapons but do you really want to go that route?
You really think it's wise for Israel to be under American aid? If it becomes dependent on America and one day America decides to ditch them, all those pretty F-16's and F-15's, and small arms will be useless rust buckets come 20-30 years from now. That is why it is crucial for Israel to start producing all of it's military gear domestically and get rid of the foreign aid. Instead, get contracts from major American defense companys like Boeing and Lockheed like they have been doing. They don't need this 6 billion dollar aid a year or whatever it is now. Israel was smart to produce their own tanks (Merkava series), they should have stuck with the space program but they retired the shavit launcher and are now using India to launch their satellites, that was stupid. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the LAVI project, yet America told them to cut the funding and send them F-16's instead?
Israel could have also been a major oil producer, who told them to give up the Sinai? There was plenty of oil there.
The United States in specific is not to blame, it's the people in power, the Neocons. These are not real Conservatives, they are nothing more than people who use others for their own gains and benefits. We have gone completely astray from our founding fathers wishes. Yet the situation we're in now, is all because we elected these people to power. We will continue to elect these people into power because they say they support Israel and will fight the war on terror. These people are deceptive and twist their words to get the support they need. They don't give a damn about Israel and they certainly don't give a damn about America. They just want to mold America into their own vision which is closer to a mix of Fascism and Communism.
Ron Paul doesn't hate Israel, he doesn't exactly care for them either. He doesn't hate the muslims but he doesn't really care about them either. Ron Paul is neutral, he doesn't pick sides, and he has stated that. He feels we have no need to get involved with the world yet he is endorsed by Nazis because of the fact he does not specifically support Israel financially. You see this as a threat because he does not want to get involved with Iran, it is not Americas priority to get involved with Iran. The reason most people do not support a war with Iran is they feel it has absolutely nothing to do with America, but to do with Israel. We are Jews, we live by the laws of the land, we do not change countries into our own vision. As we are in exile, we must abide by the laws of the land as long as they don't conflict with our own. Israel HAS the capability to take out Iran therefore it is Israels responsibility to defend themselves, not Americas. Likewise, why didn't you see Israelis in Vietnam? or how about Iraq? I'll answer that, because it wasn't Israels war. Iran is Israels war and this is their obligation to destroy Iran or to take out the nukes. This doesn't make Ron Paul and Anti-Semite as again you are taking out of context what he says. He has never specifically called Israel an enemy, he has never called muslims are friends. He has no stance on the middle east period.
-
Paul is anti-war.
Who isn't ?
Anyone in his right mind is anti-war.
But the reality is sometimes war is unavoidable and necessary.
You think Chaim has a problem waging war on Iraq ?
I don't.
I think he has a problem with how the war is being waged and it's goals.
Does anyone here have a problem with taking out Saddam Insane ?
I doubt it.
All of us should have a problem with trying to establish an 'Islamic democratic' government there though. That's a waste of American lives and sheer fantasy.
We should have a problem with having the goal of getting rid of moooozie WMD in Iraq when Iran is and was the far greater threat.
But Ron Paul isn't the answer to these problems.
Paul would sit idly by while Iran goes nuclear.
And G-d forbid when NYC or Tel Aviv gets nuked, he'll blame US foreign policy and Israel.
I can't believe there's people here that support Ron Paulistinian.
-
Paul is anti-war.
Who isn't ?
Anyone in his right mind is anti-war.
But the reality is sometimes war is unavoidable and necessary.
You think Chaim has a problem waging war on Iraq ?
I don't.
I think he has a problem with how the war is being waged and it's goals.
Does anyone here have a problem with taking out Saddam Insane ?
I doubt it.
All of us should have a problem with trying to establish an 'Islamic democratic' government there though. That's a waste of American lives and sheer fantasy.
We should have a problem with having the goal of getting rid of moooozie WMD in Iraq when Iran is and was the far greater threat.
But Ron Paul isn't the answer to these problems.
Paul would sit idly by while Iran goes nuclear.
And G-d forbid when NYC or Tel Aviv gets nuked, he'll blame US foreign policy and Israel.
I can't believe there's people here that support Ron Paulistinian.
The United States needs to take care of her OWN interests and Israel needs to take care of hers.
The answer is NOT disarming Iran.
Let them have nukes, but make them TERRIFIED to use them!
We need to change OURSELVES...NOT the world around us!
-
How do you terrify a homicide bomber not to blow himself up.
-
How do you terrify a homicide bomber not to blow himself up.
You terrify the entire society that the bomber comes from.
A bully picks on the weak because he is WEAK himself.
-
You really think it's wise for Israel to be under American aid? If it becomes dependent on America and one day America decides to ditch them, all those pretty F-16's and F-15's, and small arms will be useless rust buckets come 20-30 years from now. That is why it is crucial for Israel to start producing all of it's military gear domestically and get rid of the foreign aid. Instead, get contracts from major American defense companys like Boeing and Lockheed like they have been doing. They don't need this 6 billion dollar aid a year or whatever it is now. Israel was smart to produce their own tanks (Merkava series), they should have stuck with the space program but they retired the shavit launcher and are now using India to launch their satellites, that was stupid. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the LAVI project, yet America told them to cut the funding and send them F-16's instead?
This part i agree with btw the last sattelite Israel launched on their rocket in Israel
-
Paul is anti-war.
Who isn't ?
Anyone in his right mind is anti-war.
But the reality is sometimes war is unavoidable and necessary.
You think Chaim has a problem waging war on Iraq ?
I don't.
I think he has a problem with how the war is being waged and it's goals.
Does anyone here have a problem with taking out Saddam Insane ?
I doubt it.
All of us should have a problem with trying to establish an 'Islamic democratic' government there though. That's a waste of American lives and sheer fantasy.
We should have a problem with having the goal of getting rid of moooozie WMD in Iraq when Iran is and was the far greater threat.
But Ron Paul isn't the answer to these problems.
Paul would sit idly by while Iran goes nuclear.
And G-d forbid when NYC or Tel Aviv gets nuked, he'll blame US foreign policy and Israel.
I can't believe there's people here that support Ron Paulistinian.
What you are doing is counter productive, it's the same rap sheet. You figure "Hey the nazis are voting for this guy, i'm not going to vote for him, i'm going to vote for the guy completely opposite of him"
You are willing to sacrifice our rights and freedoms because your ego says "this guy is supported by nazis". Why don't you vote for the best candidate for this country period?
During the Nazi era, if you had a choice, would you have supported Stalin or Hitler? I wouldn't have supported either. Your basically supporting the lesser of two evils. The enemy of our enemy is not our friend. Basically in a scenario
yes the soviets [censored] up the Germans, yes the Germans hated Jews but that did not make the soviets our friends. The soviets did some [censored] up stuff to our people.
The same applys here, there are many nazis who hate whats going on in this country like we do, many hates muslims like we do, does that make them our friend? Absolutely not.
The same applys with presidential candidates, these Neocons are NOT friends of Israel. They are deceptive manipulative liars. They aren't doing Israel favors by sending aid, that money has strings attached to it (of course), it's nothing more than bribing money, it's like a pedofile giving a kid a 50 dollar bill or some candy so he'll perform for him. Do you really think the situations any different with Israel? The United States having complete control over Israel saying "heres some money, now give up a chunk of the west bank so we can negotiate with the muslims". That is completely insane, I seriously wonder what caused people to be so backwards to begin with. Maybe it's all those growth hormones that are being injected into our meat supply?
Ron Paul is for America first. You are failing to understand why the nazis support him. There are a lot of things nazis support, does that mean we don't support it as well? Nazis love guns, do we stop buying guns? Nazis love europe and white culture, do we stop supporting white culture and promote black culture? How about white inventions? Nazis love to brag about white inventions, do we stop using everything invented by the whites because Nazis brag about it? Many Nazis hate democrats, liberals, and communists. Should we support communism because Nazis hate it?
You really aren't making any sense, you are saying "Because some nazis endorsed ron paul, lets call him a nazi and not support him". Didn't the nazis support Regan? Haven't the Nazis supported other republican candidates in the past that we supported?
-
You really think it's wise for Israel to be under American aid? If it becomes dependent on America and one day America decides to ditch them, all those pretty F-16's and F-15's, and small arms will be useless rust buckets come 20-30 years from now. That is why it is crucial for Israel to start producing all of it's military gear domestically and get rid of the foreign aid. Instead, get contracts from major American defense companys like Boeing and Lockheed like they have been doing. They don't need this 6 billion dollar aid a year or whatever it is now. Israel was smart to produce their own tanks (Merkava series), they should have stuck with the space program but they retired the shavit launcher and are now using India to launch their satellites, that was stupid. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the LAVI project, yet America told them to cut the funding and send them F-16's instead?
This part i agree with btw the last sattelite Israel launched on their rocket in Israel
The Shavit has been launched seven times:
* 1988 - Ofeq 1 - Success - experimental payload.
* 1991 - Ofeq 2 - Success - experimental payload.
* 1995 - Ofeq 3 - Success - first operational satellite in orbit.
* 1998 - Ofeq 4 - Failure.
* 2002 - Ofeq 5 - Success - second operational satellite in orbit.
* 2004 - Ofeq 6 - Failure.
* 2007 - Ofeq 7 - Success - third operational satellite in orbit.
On the fourth and sixth flights, the vehicle failed before reaching space. The September 2004 failure of the Shavit resulted in the destruction of the $100 million Ofeq 6 spy satellite. Israel has announced that it will use the Indian Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle for future Ofeq launches. There was widespread criticism about that decision as some quarters wanted to use only Shavit for launch for reasons of national pride. Israel will use India's PSLV to launch its Techsar SAR satellite in 2007.
Ofek-7, also known as Ofeq 7, is part of the Ofeq family of earth observation satellites designed and built by Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) for the Israel Ministry of Defense.
The first Ofek 7 was launched by a Shavit space launch vehicle on June 11, 2007. Equipped with advanced technology and a series of new enhancements to provide improved imagery, it is placed into a elliptical orbit of 300x600 kilometers. Three days after its launch, IAI/MBT Space Division received the first images taken by the satellite. The Ofek 7 is a follow-on spacecraft to Ofek 5 that was placed into orbit in 2002.
The latest Ofek 7 was lauched on September 17, 2007 from Palmahim Air Force Base atop a Shavit missile. It's elliptical orbit reportedly takes it over Iran, Iraq, and Syria every 90 minutes.
India space launcher.
Planned launches
C10 December 2007 Sriharikota Polaris (Israel) and/or Cartosat-2A Planned
Israel now plans to use India to launch it's satellites. This is another form of outsourcing and becoming less dependent.
-
Quotes from Cohen the Ron Paul supporter:
Ron Paul doesn't hate Israel, he doesn't exactly care for them either. He doesn't hate the muslims but he doesn't really care about them either. Ron Paul is neutral, he doesn't pick sides, and he has stated that.
Iran is Israels war and this is their obligation to destroy Iran or to take out the nukes. This doesn't make Ron Paul and Anti-Semite as again you are taking out of context what he says. He has never specifically called Israel an enemy, he has never called muslims are friends. He has no stance on the middle east period.
Here's the problem with this rational as an endorsement of Ron Paul.
I don't know about you, but I don't want a President that's neutral.
I want a President that's pro-Israel and hates moooozies.
Apparently, you don't.
Your convoluted thinking is that a neutral President that isn't pro-Israel and anti-moooozie will help Israel by forcing Israel to be entirely self-reliant.
Yes, Israel should strive to be self-reliant and independent of foreign influences. That's essential and a given. But in the real world that's not going to happen overnight and Israel's enemies have worldwide support.
You state that Iran is Israel's war. This is true, and Israel should take out Iran's nuke potential.
But here's something you and the rest of the Paul supporters conveniently ignore or are too dumb to understand:
It's also America's war.
Apparently you nitwits think it's a joke when the Iranians and other mooozies are screaming their mantra of 'Death to the great satan America, Death to the little satan Israel'.
No, I'm sorry. Iranian nukes pose a grave threat to not only Israel, but to America and the entire civilized world.
But you Ron Paul supporters have your heads so far up your small intestines that you can't see this.
Truly pathetic.
-
I thought the Fred Thompson was awful and sounded like he didn't even have the energy and stamina to finish...
Giuliani sounded good, and gained some ground...
Huckabee also was wonderfully witty and gave great answers.
Romney I think slipped a little, with his socialized healthcare plan and social security reforms
Ron Paul like a typical Nazi and didn't disappoint...
The Best Line of the night belonged to John Mccain! I don't like him but he was very good at one point in the Debate...
I agree about Fred Thompson. To his supporters, though, he could do no wrong. He sounds like he has some trouble talking. McCain who is older than him, seems more animated than Thompson.
What did Romney say about social security that sounded socialized? I thought he mentioned four potential proposals and then he said which of the four could improve it and which wouldn't. I think he promoted the idea similar to the one that Bush had proposed a couple years ago. Huckabee said that he calls it "personal accounts" rather than "private accounts".
After the debate, each candidate talked with Hannity and Colmes for a little bit. Hannity pointed out to Huckabee that the main complaint that people have of him are his past comments about "illegal aliens" from as recently as 2006 and 2005.
-
You state that Iran is Israel's war. This is true, and Israel should take out Iran's nuke potential.
But here's something you and the rest of the Paul supporters conveniently ignore or are too dumb to understand:
It's also America's war.
you nitwits.
No, I'm sorry. Iranian nukes pose a grave threat to not only Israel, but to America and the entire civilized world.
But you Ron Paul supporters have your heads so far up your small intestines that you can't see this.
Truly pathetic.
Debate will suffice, Muck. No need for defamtion.
Relax. Take a deep breath.
-
I apoligize Scriabin.
I probably wen't overboard there.
Sorry.
But I'm really passionate about this.
Forgive me, my friend.
-
Ron Paul sounded like his usually whinny self on all the others i agree
To have any chance of defeating Hillary, the troop levels in Iraq will need to be decreased. According to polls, too many people are unhappy with the current troop level and want them lowered--probably by a lot. Despite the fact that Hillary will keep troops in Iraq, a greater percentage of people believe that she would withdraw more troops sooner than any of the GOP candidates--not including Ron Paul.
Hillary has said several times that she would keep troops in Iraq in various roles. Dick Morris wrote a good analysis related to this in the past. She refuses to say how many troops she'd keep but it's probably more than 50,000. So if the troop levels could be reduced to under 100,000 before the election, then Hillary's rhetoric of "If this president doesn't end this war, when I'm president, I will", will lose credibility because then Hillary's position in Iraq and troop levels would then become identical to Bush's.
-
I apoligize Scriabin.
I probably wen't overboard there.
Sorry.
But I'm really passionate about this.
Forgive me, my friend.
No problem.
I too want to see Israel prosper and flourish. I too want to see the Muslims defeated.
I too am passionate.
I understand. :)
-
Quotes from Cohen the Ron Paul supporter:
Ron Paul doesn't hate Israel, he doesn't exactly care for them either. He doesn't hate the muslims but he doesn't really care about them either. Ron Paul is neutral, he doesn't pick sides, and he has stated that.
Iran is Israels war and this is their obligation to destroy Iran or to take out the nukes. This doesn't make Ron Paul and Anti-Semite as again you are taking out of context what he says. He has never specifically called Israel an enemy, he has never called muslims are friends. He has no stance on the middle east period.
Here's the problem with this rational as an endorsement of Ron Paul.
I don't know about you, but I don't want a President that's neutral.
I want a President that's pro-Israel and hates moooozies.
Apparently, you don't.
Your convoluted thinking is that a neutral President that isn't pro-Israel and anti-moooozie will help Israel by forcing Israel to be entirely self-reliant.
Yes, Israel should strive to be self-reliant and independent of foreign influences. That's essential and a given. But in the real world that's not going to happen overnight and Israel's enemies have worldwide support.
You state that Iran is Israel's war. This is true, and Israel should take out Iran's nuke potential.
But here's something you and the rest of the Paul supporters conveniently ignore or are too dumb to understand:
It's also America's war.
Apparently you nitwits think it's a joke when the Iranians and other mooozies are screaming their mantra of 'Death to the great satan America, Death to the little satan Israel'.
No, I'm sorry. Iranian nukes pose a grave threat to not only Israel, but to America and the entire civilized world.
But you Ron Paul supporters have your heads so far up your small intestines that you can't see this.
Truly pathetic.
Your never going to get a president elected that truly supports Israel and hates muslims. You must have missed the point of my post that the fact remains that America will use anyone they can and that includes muslims. We supported the very people we went to war with, we did this in the phillipines with the rebels and we did it in Afghanistan as well as in Iraq.
Why Ron Paul’s Answer Terrifies Them
by Jacob G. Hornberger
by Jacob G. Hornberger
Save a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.comSave a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.com Email a link to this articleEmail a link to this article Printer-friendly version of this articlePrinter-friendly version of this article View a list of the most popular articles on our siteView a list of the most popular articles on our site
DIGG THIS
In one short answer to a moderator’s question in the South Carolina debate in which Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul suggested that U.S. foreign policy motivated the 9/11 terrorists, Paul produced an earthquake that is shaking the Republican establishment.
The chairman of the Michigan Republican Party proposed banning Paul from future debates. Besieged by adverse public reaction, however, he quickly backed down.
FoxNews commentator John Gibson and columnist Michelle Malkin somehow reached the warped conclusion that Paul was suggesting that U.S. officials had committed the 9/11 attacks. After bloggers pointed out the inherent contradiction between that claim and Paul’s point that foreign terrorists motivated by U.S. foreign policy had committed the attacks, Malkin quickly issued a retraction.
Other members of the Republican establishment suggested that Paul was “blaming America” for the 9/11 attacks. That’s because they think that the federal government is America. In actuality, as our American ancestors understood, the federal government and the country are composed of two separate and distinct groups of people – those within the federal government and those within the private sector, a point reflected in the Bill of Rights, which expressly protects the country from the federal government.
What’s going on here? Why the enormous, almost panicky, overreaction to what is a rather simple point about U.S. foreign policy? Why the attempts to suppress, distort, and misrepresent? What are they so scared of?
The answer is very simple: The Republican establishment knows that if the American people conclude that Ron Paul is right, the jig is up with respect to the big-government, pro-empire, interventionist foreign policy that Republicans (and many Democrats) have supported for many years.
Paul’s point is a straightforward one: U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East generated the anger that motivated the 9/11 terrorists. If he had had more time, Paul undoubtedly would have pointed out the U.S. policies in the Middle East that made people so angry: (1) the U.S. government’s ardent support of Saddam Hussein and the furnishing of biological and chemical weapons of mass destruction to him; (2) the more than 10 years of brutal sanctions against Iraq, which contributed to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children; (3) UN Ambassador Madeleine Albright’s infamous statement to Sixty Minutes that the deaths of half a million Iraqi children from the sanctions had been “worth it”; (4) the stationing of U.S. troops on Islamic holy lands, knowing the adverse impact such action would have on Muslims; (5) the “no-fly zones,” which were never authorized by either the UN or the U.S. Congress and which killed still more Iraqis, including 13-year-old Omran Harbi Jawair, whose head was shot off by a U.S. missile while he was tending his sheep in 2000; (6) and the long-time, unconditional financial and military aid provided the Israeli government.
Thus, by invading Iraq the U.S. government was simply engaging in the same course of interventionist conduct that had produced prior acts of terrorism against the United States (not only the 9/11 attacks but the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center, the 1998 terrorist attacks on U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and the 2000 terrorist attack on the USS Cole). As Paul stated in the debate and as U.S. intelligence agencies now confirm, the 2003 invasion of Iraq, which has killed and maimed countless more Iraqis, has been a dream-come-true for Osama bin Laden’s recruiters.
The 9/11 terrorist attacks also generated the “war on terror,” which in turn has given us ever-increasing budgets for the military-industrial complex, out-of-control federal spending that debauches the currency, omnipotent power to the CIA, an endless stream of color-coded fear-mongering, warrantless monitoring of telephone calls and emails, torture, kidnapping and rendition, secret overseas prison camps, indefinite detention, cancellation of habeas corpus, military tribunals, “enemy combatants,” and ever-increasing infringements on civil liberty.
If the U.S. government’s foreign policy of interventionism is, in fact, the root cause of terrorism against the United States, as Congressman Paul contends, there is an obvious solution to the problem: End the U.S. government’s role as international policeman, invader, intervener, interloper, provider, and sanctioner. Foreign terrorism against Americans would disappear along with the need for a “war on terror.” Civil liberties that were suspended could be restored. A sense of balance and harmony could return to our lives.
Ending interventionism, terrorism, and the “war on terror” would also mean that the era of big government in foreign affairs could be brought to an end. No wonder the Republican establishment is so terrified of Ron Paul’s foreign-policy message.
May 24, 2007
Jacob Hornberger [send him mail] is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. He will be among the 22 speakers at FFF’s upcoming conference on June 1–4 in Reston, Virginia: “Restoring the Constitution: Foreign Policy and Civil Liberties.”
Copyright © 2007 Future of Freedom Foundation
-
It was annoying how Romney, Giuliani, Thompson and McCain were all given questions to get them to argue about which one of them is more conservative. People should realize that none of them are the most conservative.
You have to feel bad for Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo. People who watch the debates hardly notice them because debate moderators hardly give them any questions. They're lucky if they're asked two questions during the entire debate. One of them criticized the "paleoconservative" and "neoconservative" classifications and mentioned how Republicans need to be real conservatives.
-
About Ron Paul... he has some good points. However, he intentionally neglects the fact that Iran has declared war on both the US and Israel and he also intentionally downplays the time line of Iran having nuclear weapons.
-
You have still yet to answer the question
Are you going to vote for a gun grabber like Guiliani?
I don't think Giuliani is going to try to get a federal law passed to ban all guns. I think he considers it to be more of a states issue.
-
Then you haven't learned a damn thing about Bushes mistakes.
As for Guiliani being a gun grabber, why don't you listen to the facts straight from the horses mouth then?
http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php?topic=8515.0
Watch the videos, he even admits his stance on guns.
Any candidate that attempts to INFRINGE on my rights, especially gun rights is a enemy to the state IMO.
If the United States had never sent foreign aid to Israel, they would be in a much better position right now. Israel would have kept the Galil in service, they would have a booming military industry as well as the LAVI project instead of the F-16. They would have Sinai, gaza, and the west bank and probably would have taken back Jordan by now. They would have been able to have succeeded in many things. US with control of Israel has done nothing but screw them over, both sides. You can thank the Neocons in control which aren't even real Conservatives, they are a bunch of liberals who claim to be Conservatives. Left wing at that.
[/quote]
Stop it with your neocon garbage. The term you really mean is "globalist" as opposed to the "isolationist" than Ron Paul advocates.
-
Ron Paul sounded like a kook in the debate. Frank Luntz's focus group was against Ron Paul 100%. He's an internet phenomenon, thats all. It's already established that he's an Israel-hater, supported by Nazis and 9/11 'truthers', and has absolutely no chance of winning a real primary or caucus much less the general election. He's the Republican Howard Dean.
I saw the debate, recorded it, and thought Duncan Hunter did better in this one, than the previous ones (although what can beat "Kennedy wing of the Republican party"?). He and Tom Tancredo got the least amount of time to speak on the debate floor.
Fox News thinks Rudy McThomney + Huckabee and Paul make up the bulk of the candidates, conveniently leaving out the two most conservative in the debate.
-
You have still yet to answer the question
Are you going to vote for a gun grabber like Guiliani?
I don't think Giuliani is going to try to get a federal law passed to ban all guns. I think he considers it to be more of a states issue.
Gee thats funny, if you watch his past statements from the videos I posted, you will note that he claimed New Yorks gun crime was ineffective because other states refused to pass gun control legislature therefore most of the guns in New York were out of state. Then he completely contradicts himself saying that what works in one state doesn't necessarily work in another state. If his stance keeps changing on gun control, makes me wonder what his real thoughts on islam is. Does a zebra change it's stripes?
You don't think Guiliani would sign a brady bill assault weapon ban if it came to his desk? I can guarantee you he would. He's milking the NRA right now for all he can to get endorsed and votes, we aren't fooled by his rhetoric.
-
Then you haven't learned a damn thing about Bushes mistakes.
As for Guiliani being a gun grabber, why don't you listen to the facts straight from the horses mouth then?
http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php?topic=8515.0
Watch the videos, he even admits his stance on guns.
Any candidate that attempts to INFRINGE on my rights, especially gun rights is a enemy to the state IMO.
If the United States had never sent foreign aid to Israel, they would be in a much better position right now. Israel would have kept the Galil in service, they would have a booming military industry as well as the LAVI project instead of the F-16. They would have Sinai, gaza, and the west bank and probably would have taken back Jordan by now. They would have been able to have succeeded in many things. US with control of Israel has done nothing but screw them over, both sides. You can thank the Neocons in control which aren't even real Conservatives, they are a bunch of liberals who claim to be Conservatives. Left wing at that.
Stop it with your neocon garbage. The term you really mean is "globalist" as opposed to the "isolationist" than Ron Paul advocates.
[/quote]
Conflict with Libertarian conservatives
There is also conflict between neoconservatives and libertarian conservatives. Libertarian conservatives are ideologically opposed to the expansiveness of federal government programs and regard neoconservative foreign policy ambitions with outspoken distrust. They view the neoconservative promotion of preemptive war as morally unjust, dangerous to the preservation of a free society, and against the principles of the Constitution. Rep Ron Paul, a Republican libertarian who holds a Texas district, and is a 2008 Presidential candidate, has spoken out against the Bush Administration's foreign policy, specifically against the influence of "neocons."[31]
-
Unfortunately Tancredo isn't a great public speaker. His presentation just isn't polished. Romney on the other hand is very quick on his feet and polished but lacks substance.
Hunter and Tancredo are the best of the lot as far as I'm concerned but I don't think they have a chance.
Out of the remaining Republicans, who's left ?
Can't stand McCain. He's out of the question after his romance with Kerry and his stance on immigration.
Thompson sets off my bullshiite detector big time, and puts me to sleep.
Romney looks very Presidential and is smart as hell, but he's a huge phony.
Huckabee ? Says the right things about energy policy but I just don't like the guy, and I really don't think he has the organization behind him to make a serious run.
Guiliani ? Yeah, he has his warts to be sure, but I like the guy. In my mind he has the best chance to defeat Hillary (or whoever the Dhimmirats nominate). Plus I trust him on dealing with the mooos with strength.
I'm not worried about him taking my guns away and I don't think any candidate is about to change Roe vs. Wade abortion laws. To me those are almost non-issues.
My primary concern is which candidate is viable to defeat Hillary and most aware of the threat Islam presents and will deal with the moooozies most effectively.
That's why I support Guiliani, and predict JTF will be endorsing him in 2008.
-
I'm not worried about him taking my guns away and I don't think any candidate is about to change Roe vs. Wade abortion laws. To me those are almost non-issues.
Yes. Abortion/Feminism has already done its dirty work.
-
Then maybe you need to listen to Guiliani on his stance on guns, heres all the videos directly.
These are videos that show Rudy Giuliani specifically stating his views on guns. He may have good points on terrorism and what not, but do you really want to support a guy who supports gun registration? Does anyone realize the Gun Control Act of 1968 is based off the old Nazi gun laws relating to possession of a gun for sporting or hunting purposes only?
Rudy Giuliani announces lawsuit against gun companies
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zs5DxwzEXHQ
Rudy Giuliani on Gun Control and NRA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJ99sBfdqE0
Rudy on guns again
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhe38wJ86Do
Rudy Giuliani entertains an idea on gun control
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWZgaWr6QYE
Rudy contradicting himself, I guess he only defends the constitution when he wants votes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2xEHeaX6JM
Giuliani on gun control - 1993
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZDjGnGCygs
Giuliani supports handgun registration and licensing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emeu2KRt2Vg
Rudy Giuliani On Gun Control, Immigration & 9/11
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yed9QQhCCII
Giuliani calls Second Amendment an "Overstated Argument
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ekye0ZS2egM
Giuliani: First Amendment Protects Gun Owners (The idiot doesn't even know what amendment protects the right to bear arms)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lQXY_FUEh4
Rudy defends his position claiming he supports gun rights yet feels he was in the right to violate the peoples constitutional rights to lower crime in NYC. If you listen carefully, he completely contradicts his past ideas by saying gun crime was high because the other states didn't have the same licensing as New York, yet he claims in this video that it should be up to the communitys and states to enforce gun control. What a hypocrite.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eh7WOhFkmSI
A person like this with as long of a history as he does with gun control? Are you the type of person to vote for Sarah Brady after she appears in front of a NRA meeting one time to tell you that she supports the 2nd amendment?
-
Conflict with Libertarian conservatives
There is also conflict between neoconservatives and libertarian conservatives. Libertarian conservatives are ideologically opposed to the expansiveness of federal government programs and regard neoconservative foreign policy ambitions with outspoken distrust. They view the neoconservative promotion of preemptive war as morally unjust, dangerous to the preservation of a free society, and against the principles of the Constitution. Rep Ron Paul, a Republican libertarian who holds a Texas district, and is a 2008 Presidential candidate, has spoken out against the Bush Administration's foreign policy, specifically against the influence of "neocons."[31]
[/quote]
Bill Clinton is a globalist. So does this mean you would call him a "neoconservative"? The correct term is globalist.
-
I dont yet, just waiting for my permit to come through
Muslim groups seem to support ron paul in large numbers, what is his policy on islamic terrorism, will he advocate profiling muslims, not arabs.....MUSLIMS of any shade or race. I havent paid much attention to him, he doesnt seem to have that good of a chance of getting the nomination.
Ron Paul voted in favor of having the Empire State Building observe Ramadan.
Although he got some applause after some of his comments at the debate, he also received boos after some of his statements. I think he was the only candidate who received any boos.
-
Conflict with Libertarian conservatives
There is also conflict between neoconservatives and libertarian conservatives. Libertarian conservatives are ideologically opposed to the expansiveness of federal government programs and regard neoconservative foreign policy ambitions with outspoken distrust. They view the neoconservative promotion of preemptive war as morally unjust, dangerous to the preservation of a free society, and against the principles of the Constitution. Rep Ron Paul, a Republican libertarian who holds a Texas district, and is a 2008 Presidential candidate, has spoken out against the Bush Administration's foreign policy, specifically against the influence of "neocons."[31]
Bill Clinton is a globalist. So does this mean you would call him a "neoconservative"? The correct term is globalist.
[/quote]
I believe their both in bed together, I think both the democrat and republican parties have been infiltrated.
-
I dont yet, just waiting for my permit to come through
Muslim groups seem to support ron paul in large numbers, what is his policy on islamic terrorism, will he advocate profiling muslims, not arabs.....MUSLIMS of any shade or race. I havent paid much attention to him, he doesnt seem to have that good of a chance of getting the nomination.
Ron Paul voted in favor of having the Empire State Building observe Ramadan.
Although he got some applause after some of his comments at the debate, he also received boos after some of his statements. I think he was the only candidate who received any boos.
Source?
-
How can Paul have voted on the Empire state being lite up the owners liite it up
-
He voted on rammadan becoming a national Holiday
-
He voted on rammadan becoming a national Holiday
That's what I meant.
-
Anyone know if there's a senate version of this bill:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll928.xml
-
I don'nt know
-
Any more opinions?
-
They are worse than the democrats ,ecause they don't even believe what they say.There are no good candidates so I think Ill write myself in.Or vote for John f.Kennedy.Hey what ever happened to him?Just kidding I know ;)
-
They are all awful. They all want to continue welfare and want cheap Mexican labor to make the MEGArich get richer.
-
all want mexican immigration except for Tancredo, I believe.
-
They are all awful. They all want to continue welfare and want cheap Mexican labor to make the MEGArich get richer.
You know there are a couple candidates who don't fit this description, but debate moderators intentionally neglect them.
-
They are all awful. They all want to continue welfare and want cheap Mexican labor to make the MEGArich get richer.
AGREED!
However, We must Choose the lesser of the Evils...
-
An he's Mexican!Go figure!
-
They are all awful. They all want to continue welfare and want cheap Mexican labor to make the MEGArich get richer.
You know there are a couple candidates who don't fit this description, but debate moderators intentionally neglect them.
Like Hunter, Tancredo...
-
I saw a little bit of the debate. I remember thinking to myself, "is this the best we can do"?
-
I saw a little bit of the debate. I remember thinking to myself, "is this the best we can do"?
Which part of what you saw, in particular, did you dislike?
-
From what I saw ,just how pathetic their attacks on Hillery were.I cant stand her ,but It takes a real man to attack someone not around just to look tough.It is only making her look stronger!
-
If , if, if.
Do you live in the real world ?
Sure it would be great if Israel had built the Lavi.
But what was going to power the Lavi ?
Do you think Israel builds it's own jet engines?
The truth is Israel builds alot of it's own armaments but is still reliant on the USA to supply components and parts even for the stuff it builds on it's own.
In a perfect world the mooozies wouldn't be getting armed by the Soviets and the USA...and it would just be Israel versus the Arabs with no foreign intervention...let the best man win.
Israel would clean their clocks.
But this isn't a perfect world.
And Ron Paul isn't going to make it perfect or stop the arabs from getting arms. Nope. He doesn't have a problem with Iran getting nukes. He's oblivious not only to the danger to Israel but to the USA.
He's a dhimmi fool that doesn't have a clue what his isolationist position means in a modern era threatened by global islamic jihad.
But you go ahead and keep accepting Paul's asinine assertion that mooozies hate us only because of our foreign policy.
Doesn't really matter, because thankfully Ron Paul doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning the Republican nomination or gaining the Presidency.
But if it makes you feel better to be in bed with the candidate that the nazis and moooozies are supporting because Guiliani is a 'gun grabber', then go right ahead and lie down with them.
Just don't complain about the fleas when you wake up.
That's funny, many of the people complaining about Bush today are the ones who voted for him. I'll be laughing while everyones complaining about Guiliani if he happens to get elected.
You have no consideration about our constitution or our rights. Your primary focus is that America has an obligation to fight terrorism and aid Israel. You don't seem to understand that the fact remains, America is using Israel for it's own agenda. The people in power today are the same people that have been in power for quite some time now. The same ones that used other countries and set up their own governments and dictators in the name of "Democracy". The fact is, we are not a democracy, democracy is a illusion. We are a republic.
How many dictators did we put in power? How about Saddam who we sold weapons to? Aren't we selling to the Egyptians now as well? Whenever there is a dictator we don't like, we go in and overthrow the government and set up a new one. Do you not think that the United States would do the exact same to Israel if a right wing government came to power through elections similar to Meir Kahane? What do you think would happen if Meir Kahane was elected prime minister of Israel at that time? The United States knew he was a threat to their plan of a "American" Middle East. We cannot go around the world drawing lines in the sand, the British did this and look what happened to them? All empires fall, the Soviets fell, the Nazis fell, the British empire fell, the Romans fell. Do you really think America is exempt from this or are you too blind to see this for yourself?
Israel was of use to America at one point, they were of use during the cold war which the Soviets armed the communists in South America, the Middle East, Eastern Europe, chunks of Asia and Africa. We aided countries as well. The Israelis were not only fighting against muslims but also against leftist secular Arabs, many of the worst terrorists in history were leftists or had communist aid. This is why America saw a use in Israel. We did the same thing with Korea and Germany. The soviets took East Berlin and East Germany, we took the west. They took North Korea, we took South Korea. It was all about getting as many allies as we could during that period.
Now the cold war is over officially. Israel is now being used for something else, they are being used as a bargaining chip by the United States to stabilize the middle east. Do you not think every inch of land that is given to the PLO/Hamas Arab Muslim Nazis by order of King George is part of this so called peace process? It buys the United States time everytime Israel is forced to give up land. It's nothing more than to satisfy the muslims. The only thing foreign aid has done is make Israel dependent on America for weapons, guess what happened to all the other nations who were dependent on other countries for their survival?
Cuba? We placed an embargo on them, that's ok, the Soviet Union funded them and then when the Soviet Union collapsed, their country turned to excrement. You go there, there are all kinds of American cars there from the 50's because of the embargo. They are screwed. All those weapons they have now, at one time they were top of the line technology. What are they now? Pieces of excrement rust buckets that barely work and spare parts are running out.
North Korea? Wow, they were pretty stupid scary at one point. Now look at them, again all that technology has gone to waste.
South Africa? They had embargos placed on them, some say they didn't have television until 30 years after the world did. They got military aid from Israel, R4's (Galils), vehicles, helmets, nuclear weapon program. They couldn't survive with the apartheid system and whites being a minority and after Israel ditched them, the country started producing stuff domestically but it was too late. Israel is headed into a similar direction, Jews will soon become a minority because of this whole illusion of a democratic country in which Arabs will become the majority.
Venezuela? Same things happening now. US won't send them the parts they need for F-16's, they are now getting armed from the Russians.
Unlike these countries, I doubt the Russians are going to help the Israelis, the Chinese may sell them weapons but do you really want to go that route?
You really think it's wise for Israel to be under American aid? If it becomes dependent on America and one day America decides to ditch them, all those pretty F-16's and F-15's, and small arms will be useless rust buckets come 20-30 years from now. That is why it is crucial for Israel to start producing all of it's military gear domestically and get rid of the foreign aid. Instead, get contracts from major American defense companys like Boeing and Lockheed like they have been doing. They don't need this 6 billion dollar aid a year or whatever it is now. Israel was smart to produce their own tanks (Merkava series), they should have stuck with the space program but they retired the shavit launcher and are now using India to launch their satellites, that was stupid. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the LAVI project, yet America told them to cut the funding and send them F-16's instead?
Israel could have also been a major oil producer, who told them to give up the Sinai? There was plenty of oil there.
The United States in specific is not to blame, it's the people in power, the Neocons. These are not real Conservatives, they are nothing more than people who use others for their own gains and benefits. We have gone completely astray from our founding fathers wishes. Yet the situation we're in now, is all because we elected these people to power. We will continue to elect these people into power because they say they support Israel and will fight the war on terror. These people are deceptive and twist their words to get the support they need. They don't give a damn about Israel and they certainly don't give a damn about America. They just want to mold America into their own vision which is closer to a mix of Fascism and Communism.
Ron Paul doesn't hate Israel, he doesn't exactly care for them either. He doesn't hate the muslims but he doesn't really care about them either. Ron Paul is neutral, he doesn't pick sides, and he has stated that. He feels we have no need to get involved with the world yet he is endorsed by Nazis because of the fact he does not specifically support Israel financially. You see this as a threat because he does not want to get involved with Iran, it is not Americas priority to get involved with Iran. The reason most people do not support a war with Iran is they feel it has absolutely nothing to do with America, but to do with Israel. We are Jews, we live by the laws of the land, we do not change countries into our own vision. As we are in exile, we must abide by the laws of the land as long as they don't conflict with our own. Israel HAS the capability to take out Iran therefore it is Israels responsibility to defend themselves, not Americas. Likewise, why didn't you see Israelis in Vietnam? or how about Iraq? I'll answer that, because it wasn't Israels war. Iran is Israels war and this is their obligation to destroy Iran or to take out the nukes. This doesn't make Ron Paul and Anti-Semite as again you are taking out of context what he says. He has never specifically called Israel an enemy, he has never called muslims are friends. He has no stance on the middle east period.
These are some strong arguements from Cohen. Interesting ideals...hmmmm
However, Paul doesn't have a chance of winning...so...whatever.
-
NOt a chance for Ron!
-
From what I saw ,just how pathetic their attacks on Hillery were.I cant stand her ,but It takes a real man to attack someone not around just to look tough.It is only making her look stronger!
Could you explain? Why do their attacks on Hillary make them look bad?
-
Well, They're giving the Democratic nomination to Hitlery before the Primary election even took place... for 1, and
2 They should talk about their own agenda for the future as President instead of attacking Hitlery, there will be time for that type of reaction after she get elected President. G-d forbid!
-
Well, They're giving the Democratic nomination to Hitlery before the Primary election even took place... for 1, and
2 They should talk about their own agenda for the future as President instead of attacking Hitlery, there will be time for that type of reaction after she get elected President. G-d forbid!
I think the moderators of the debates usually ask a question involving Hillary.
I think Newt Gingrich's suggestion for the format of debates should possibly be used.
-
Well, They're giving the Democratic nomination to Hitlery before the Primary election even took place... for 1, and
2 They should talk about their own agenda for the future as President instead of attacking Hitlery, there will be time for that type of reaction after she get elected President. G-d forbid!
I think the moderators of the debates usually ask a question involving Hillary.
I think Newt Gingrich's suggestion for the format of debates should possibly be used.
I'm sorry I'm not aware of that format... what is it?
-
I'm sorry I'm not aware of that format... what is it?
http://newt.org/tabid/102/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/2833/Default.aspx