Video: Ron Paul: Iran Has The Right To Kill Americans In Iraq
On H&C after the debate, Sean Hannity asked Ron Paul why he said America should not “threaten” Iran, given that they were killing Americans. Ron answered “Iran has more justification than we do to be in Iraq.” Given that Iran “being in Iraq” only means Iran “killing Americans in Iraq”, Mr. Paul needs to explain why he is justifying Iran “being in Iraq”.
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
Here’s hoping the American people see him for the lunatic he is. Man, that guy needs to crawl into a hole and disappear.
September 5th, 2007 at 9:17 pmtheres no other thing he could be implying. firing squad while swingin from a rope at same time.
September 5th, 2007 at 9:22 pmMr. Paul needs to explain that to a grand jury when he’s indicted for treason. That son of a bitch.
September 5th, 2007 at 9:38 pmHe also said in the debate that we were the aggressors to Iran. I also love how he got 33% of the vote as to who won the debate. I wonder how many paulbots were calling all night placing their votes. Sounds like the same shit that happened on American Idol with that fuck face Sanjaya.
Paul Sucks.
September 5th, 2007 at 9:43 pmLibertarians have no moral standards. It’s not that they are immoral but they live by a credo that nothing should be judged, neither behavior not intent. All should be free to do what they please. Libertarians are all for the bill of rights as long as it does not allow the passing of any moral judgment upon them by any entity and not just the government. That’s fine but on the same token they feel that there is also nothing worthing defending of value. This is where Libertarians and Conservatives show major differences. There is a disregard for the acceptance of morality in general because it would require judgment and condoning value in that choice. If you value something then you are compelled to defend it. Libertarians as a philosophy and political movement don’t accept or condone value in one’s or another’s ideas. Pacifism is the result and appeasement will always be the result.
By this line of thinking then there is nothing worth standing up for no morality worth fighting for. They don;t suffer from a lack of morality but just the opposite, they stand in a moral vacuum. absence of the defense of moral choice. Conservative thinking is not a religious bound church going lot full of rednecks. True conservatives have values and principles that they will defend but will not deprive others of the same choice. Conservatives are not illusioned by the fact that allowing someone freedom does not let them off with paying the consequences for choices or lack of.
This guy has no morality he is willing to stand for at all. He believes all cultures are the same, all ideas have no more merit than the other persons. There is no value or judgment of value. No one is better than the other. The lazy are as valuable as the hard working Socialism and Capitalism are not worthy of differentiating. Murder’s are no better than cops, etc, etc,…
This is actually worse than a real leftist because leftist at least actually stand for something.
September 5th, 2007 at 9:54 pmI think RP looked like a complete moron during his argument with Huckabee during the debate, and his comments to Hannity are in line with his previous comments about 9/11.
Besides all that, President moonbat just doesn’t have the right ring to it.
September 5th, 2007 at 10:06 pmLftBhndAgn, I was so confused, I thought that guy was Sanjaya, but it was really Ron Paul or rhu paul, see I’m still confused.
September 5th, 2007 at 10:35 pmIt’s amazing how paulbots could vote more than once, when “real” text voters for the rest of the candidates could only vote one time. What a bunch of idiots.
September 5th, 2007 at 11:16 pmOmg he’s mean. Iran is making the situation in Iraq worse! They’ve killed hundreds of American soldiers, Iraqi Army soldiers and civilians. Ron Paul should just move to Iran.
September 5th, 2007 at 11:20 pmMany of the RP supporters are Dems trying to pump him up so they can paint Republicans as loonies by association. Don’t be fooled.
September 5th, 2007 at 11:44 pmThe War in Iraq most likely caused al Qaeda’s recruiting power to increase double or triple; And you people try to pin Ron Paul as the treasonous one.
~Leftist drivel from a conservative in response to the inflammatory inane warhawk drivel posted above; so, by all means, delete this.
September 6th, 2007 at 12:05 amhe sounds like another liberal weenie, justifying everything our enemies do, and condemning the rest of us.
September 6th, 2007 at 12:40 amThe moral equivalence disease is like HIV. It won’t kill you, but will weaken you enough for something else to finish you off.
September 6th, 2007 at 12:51 amwtf
September 6th, 2007 at 2:02 amPaul Melnyk,
Your statement shows utter lack of intellect. While none of the Republicans in last night’s debate said so, removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq was the wisest decision made by the Bush Administration.
Look at the situation at the time. Saddam Hussein was openly supporting terrorism by sending payments to families of suicide bombers in Israel. Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction (I know you kooks don’t believe he was, but 8 TONS of partially enriched uranium was found in Iraq - look it up.) Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator, and he openly defied U.N. resolutions, one after another. A terrorist training camp was found in Iraq.
You state that the war has strengthened al Qaeda, but the facts don’t support that assertion. Have many joined the battle? Of course. But that’s what happens when you define a battlefield - people on both sides come to that battlefield to fight. The Bush administration was brilliant in defining Iraq as that battlefield, because it was a place more easily accessible than Afghanistan, and it allowed to focus much of our anti-terror efforts in one place. We moved the battleground from America to Iraq, and one of the reasons we haven’t had another attack on American soil since 9/11. Meanwhile, al Qaeda has suffered major losses in the past 6 years, both in personnel and resources, and they now have limited countries that will allow them to base there. The next country in their sights, which you will know if you have been following this web site for very long, is Pakistan, which is why we must support/encourage Musharraf’s regime, which is currently the only thing standing between al Qaeda and Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.
Now consider what happened since the invasion. Saddam Hussein is no more. Free elections have been held in Lebanon and Egypt, and democratic movements are expanding in Saudi Arabia. Libya has given up any nuclear ambitions.
Have we had casualties? Of course, and while tragic, they are miniscule compared to previous conflicts. In the Civil War battle of Antietam, there were 23,000 casualties on a single day.
There have been ancillary benefits. Medical technology has improved such that what were previously deadly wounds are now able to be treated so that our soldiers can live normal lives. Military technology and tactics have improved drastically. The U.S. (well, Republicans at least) has shown that we are willing to defend ourselves against attack, and that we will not cut and run in the event that things get tough. And we have shown the world that the American military is the highest character, best trained, most capable military the world has ever seen.
Were there setbacks? Were mistakes made? Of course! That happens in any war. Have you forgotten that in World War II, we started off poorly in North Africa? But we learned from our mistakes, kicked Germany out of North Africa, then Sicily, then Iraly, all before the Normandy Invasion.
And, including those in Afghanistan, there are FIFTY MILLION more free people in the world, thanks to the United States.
I am not, as Ron Paul seems to think, a Neo-con; I lean more toward paleo-conservativsm. All Ron Paul did last night is show that he, like all of the Democrats, are neither capable, nor willing, of providing for this nation’s security. But unlike you and the other Liberal whiners, I can see past the end of my nose and what the potential benefits of overthowing the Iraqi regime were, and believe that we did the right thing.
And Iran and Syria should be next.
September 6th, 2007 at 3:55 amOde to Ron Paul
Oh, I’m Texan Ron Paul
Of them 2008′ers I may be worst of all
Ain’t no difference ‘tween us n’ them you see
All I’m about is moral equiv-a-len-cee.
I just told everyone I’m Republi-can
Ain’t no money from Libber-taryans
I’ll defend Ahab’s rights, there can be no loss
You can’t listen to his phone calls, no matter the cost.
If you look at my model, the Dimmy-crats
September 6th, 2007 at 4:20 amLots of hyperbole is where it’s at
It ain’t important really, what’s in a name
I’m just another politician playin’ the fuckin’ game.
Hey Ron, all your high-and-mighty talk of constitutional behavior is just mere words. The founding fathers never meant for the document to cripple our efforts to defend ourselves, and we reserve every right to project power as need be. This following of your that has garnered so much attention is comprised of fringe elements of the political sphere, not the real Americans. I say let Iran get what’s coming to them, in the form of a MOAB for each of the 12 Imams.
September 6th, 2007 at 4:25 amIt should come as no surprise that every moonbat and psychotic in this country is drawn to this piece of shit like a magnet. How this walking/talking pile of garbage was the top man as voted by text message on Fox is beyond me.
Are there that many fucked up people in this country or was Kanada allowed to vote in that survey too?
September 6th, 2007 at 5:03 ammore people joing aq because of the war in iraq, whats wrong with that? flush ‘em out and kill ‘em like cockroaches..
September 6th, 2007 at 5:10 amI watched parts of the debate last night. Rhue Paul has never impressed me. He’s too much of a weenie to get my vote. His comments vis vis Iran and the US, just cemented my opinion of him as being a fool and an idiot.
He can’t be from Texas. There’s no way. But then again Texas did produce that other witty and winsome character Natalie Maines (Note sarcasm)…
Texas is WAY better and WAY smarter than Rhue Paul.
September 6th, 2007 at 5:32 amDr. Death will be the death of us.
September 6th, 2007 at 6:06 amSteven D,
Nice try, but there’s no way a koolaid drinker like this Melnyk tool could comprehend one word of it. Chances are he is in his 40s, still living with his parents, and for sure has not a clue about what’s going on around him.
Oh, by the way, his vote counts the same as yours. Sorry.
September 6th, 2007 at 6:28 amNo one can be as clueless as Ron Paul by accident. He is not only an complete fucking idiot, he is a CFI on purpose.
He is also a walking, talking breathing example of why we should never, ever let Libertarians have any power in government. I’d vote for Hillary Obama Romney before I’d vote for that asshat.
September 6th, 2007 at 6:57 amToo bad Rhue Paul isn’t smart enough to read books like “Future Jihad” by Prof Phares. Then again, even if he did, he’d probably still be another kool-aid drinker with a tinfoil antenna on his head.
September 6th, 2007 at 7:05 amReal nice the way the vid was clipped, not allowing Ron Paul to finish his explanation. Enjoy your soundbite popularity contest, er, election. May your chains rest lightly.
September 6th, 2007 at 7:05 amWord up my brothers!! Kill them all, we can’t let other peoples ideologies get in the way of our defenses!! Iran, Syria, North Korea, hell lets just run into communist China while we’re at it!!!
September 6th, 2007 at 7:38 amDan,
September 6th, 2007 at 8:09 amI knew I could count on you to stand up for my great state. I would never claim Ron Paul, if this were a western movie, he’d be the villain that everyone wanted run out of town. People’s vehement support of this clown is beyond me, he sounds like an anarchist - and while a sufficient lack of government involvement sounds great to me, he seriously does not want to play by those rules, there would be no retribution for hunting him down.
Now that Fred’s in the race I look forward to his participation in future debates. There will be less drivel and mealy mouthed answers for sure.
I thought Mr. Huckabee had the best words for Ron Paul last night. Huckabee flat-out said he could give two-shits if the Republican party falls flat on its face if it means that we stick to doing that which is right.
Ron Paul on the other hand is an insepid poltician who would rather pan-handle to the electorate on popular issues than take a stand on his own two feet. His comments during the debate outlined everything I hate about politics in this country. Politicians like him have no morals, no backbone, no agenda, and no intellect. They are parrots on the Senate floor that retrain themselves before every election. They’re interest lie not in the preservation and continuation of this great nation, but are instead dedicated to self-interests and self-preservation. To them, being an elected official is a job they’re just trying to keep. Poltical cronies, the real traitors to the Constitution.
September 6th, 2007 at 8:34 am@egfrow
If you don’t know what you’re talking about, you’d better not blow your horn like this. Ron Paul’s stance on Irak has nothing to do with libertarianism.
Your statement “All should be free to do what they please. Libertarians are all for the bill of rights as long as it does not allow the passing of any moral judgment upon them by any entity and not just the government.” could not be more off the mark.
Libertarianism is the closest thing to the original American Constitution, in that it grants people only three rights (negative, natural rights): life, freedom and the pursuit of happiness. Not happiness itself: you’ve got to put effort in it. A fourth right, following from this is the right to earned property: you get to keep the produce of your work. You don’t have the right to a house, a car, a boat or a million dollars in the bank; you’ve got the right to work for it, and once you earned it, by honest labour (physical or mental), then it’s yours to keep.
Basically libertarianism knows only one rule: you are free to pursue your own goals, as long as you do not impose on anybody else’s same freedom to do so. This is quite a bit different from ‘doing as you please’. The freedom to live your own life comes with the responsibility to bear the consequences of your voluntary choices. Ground rule is: no violence, except in self-defense. If you think about it, you do not need any other laws than this Constitutional rule.
Ron Paul seems to think that self-defense is only that once you respond to being attacked. In my view, a pre-emptive strike is better, but only once you can be absolutely certain that you will be attacked. Iran/Irak started with Jimmy Carter, in a way this evil dhimmy is responsible for 9/11, as was rightly argued on American Thinker:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/08/jimmy_carters_human_rights_dis.html
For Irak, the basis was iffy at best, but it’s not so much that America attacked, but how it attacked, with soft gloves. Now, support for a pre-emptive strike on real danger Iran has crumbled, and leftists in India are weakening the free world’s position towards Pakistan. The strike should have been swift and brutal, and it would have known a lot less casualties. But Political Correctness forbade it. Have a look at my blog.
You should not judge libertarianism based on the misguided opinion of one man who in most of his other stances is right on what’s morally correct or not. Libertarian life is hard work; there’s no welfare, you can’t force someone to care fro you. You’ve got to earn it. Leftists hate that, they want to pamper ‘the poor’ with other people’s money, and they go into extortion to obtain it (try not paying taxes, or only what you feel is enough).
Read Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged (objectivism is related to libertarianism), or some of Walter Block’s essays, or Murray Rothbard, or Friedrich A. Hayek, or… the list goes on quite a bit. Read, think hard, think again, and then form an opinion. You’ll be surprised by the conclusions you’ll reach.
Thanks for your time.
September 6th, 2007 at 9:06 amRon Paul…
LOL.
I will say one thing good about him: He has a cyber-army that the rest of the candidates could take a lesson from, heh heh…
Otherwise…the guy is only serving the Perot/Forbes/Nader purpose of “diluting” the vote, to use his verbage with regard to Thompson’s entering the race(I speak just in the Rep primary sense instead of the gen election sense).
September 6th, 2007 at 9:54 amHe can’t be from Texas
Ron Paul is a Loony Libertarian posing as a Republican so that cancels his Texas Citizenship! Actually I am so thrilled that Paul took this year to put himself in front of a national audience so his district constituency (which is neighbor to mine) can see what a kook he is. He’s never really had the opportunity to show his true self relative to local issue races. Now, they are so embarrassed by him he will be replaced in the next election by a REAL REPUBLICAN. Having him in the House as a Republican has been such a sham because he mostly does not support any Republican issues. But he’s done a good job of bringing home earmarks contradictory to his libertarian disgust with big government.
I do agree with the suspicion that the internet and phone polls are being manipulated by ‘Paulbots’ (I like that characterization) to both elevate him as a serious candidate for the Republican ticket but he’ll never make it thru the primaries. Selfishly, I don’t want the GOP to eliminate him from the debates. I want him to keep right on talking!!
September 6th, 2007 at 10:35 amduring my morning bowel movement this morning, while using the earth friendly, rock star approved one square of toilet paper, I raised my hand from the bowl and in my horror I thought of Ron Paul
or simply : shitstain
…..
September 6th, 2007 at 11:16 am(sorry for that)
Allen:
Some of my best friends come from Texas…and that includes my wife. Rhue Paul can’t be from the Texas that I heard about…I’ll tell you one thing, he wouldn’t last two seconds around the Texans that I know….
Two beers for Texas
September 6th, 2007 at 4:35 pmHey you Fing minions!
September 6th, 2007 at 11:11 pmWAKE THE F UP!
What is going down in the USA today?
WAKE UP!
We’re wide awake. Are you?
September 6th, 2007 at 11:49 pmActually, the shitstorm in Iran/Iraq, etc. got it’s real start in 1953, thanks to British Petroleum - do yourself a favor and do a bit of research on Operation Ajax…while you’re at it, you may want to ponder what the term ‘blowback’ means.
Sure, you can try to marginalize and demonize the people who actually think for themselves and actually read history (actual history, not what the media corporations pre-digest and feed to you) OR, you can open your eyes, read the history and try to notch down the fear-driven maniacal nationalism.
Once you let the crazed fire of ‘us vs. them’ fade a little bit, you’ll start to understand what is critically important for the United States of America and her future: adherence to the U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights and an understanding of what her founders intended.
Yup, it’s that simple…all of the foaming at the mouth about how ‘they hate our freedoms’ and ‘it’s treason to question the government’ can be answered simply by the concepts expressed in the Constitution and the words of our founding fathers.
Real patriots support the Constitution.
September 10th, 2007 at 12:21 pmI read history,
Have you ever met an islamic zealot, have you ever had a friend die, all because someone who believed his ticket to heaven was that button that detonated his suicide vest. I hardly doubt you have. While I support your statement ” ‘it’s treason to question the government’ can be answered simply by the concepts expressed in the Constitution and the words of our founding fathers.
Real patriots support the Constitution. ”
I will have you know the people we are fighting now do hate our freedoms, they do hate our way of life. Why you may ask, is it because people took advantage of them earlier in History, probably.
However does it make it any less wrong what they are doing.
Does it make any of what the Democrats are doing anything less than traitorous. The answer to these questions are no.
You want something changed in America, vote for leaders who will change it, or leaders who can at keast get you to believe they will change it.
And I’m pretty sure, as I’ve read history as well, that our founding fathers completely supported our right to defend ourselves as a nation. So if you want to continue to read your books and talk about what you have only read, basing your opinions off of nothing but ink instead of seeing the truth right in front of your very eyes, you may. Or you can come to Iraq and find out that these zealots do hate us, and our way of life, and they would give anything to wake up that morning and be able to die while taking an American life.
So screw your senseless dribble the Constitution and The Bill Of Rights are beeing thrown out the window as we speak by Democrats that wish to control the masses with their media. How odd that conservatives are getting their opinions and ideas from an industry that for the most part, save a few channels here and there, is ran by the left. Face it the media’s slogan should read ” For Democrats, By Democrats”
Good day sir, and take a smiley face with you!:smile:
September 11th, 2007 at 1:08 pmNow fuck off
re: John (Infidel) - I have met zealots of all ilks, and they tend to have similar approaches to their rabid behavior:
- Inability to discuss the issues without personal attacks (”Now f*ck off”)
- Irrational fear-based need to classify the world as ‘us vs. them’ (Democrats/Republicans/liberals/conservatives/Muslims(bad)/Christian Americans(good))
Crazed zealots all have their own particular form of ’suicide vest’ - the coarser/poorer ones tend to use pipe bombs, etc. the more well-to-do ones have highly-charged divisive talk-radio and internet forums…
Maybe you should read a bit more history, and possibly interact with the people in the streets a bit more. Most Muslims (just like most people of any religious/ethnic stripe) are moderate people who are happy to tolerate and interact with people from other traditions.
You find this even in the Middle East (actually, especially in the Middle East) where Christians, Jews, Muslims and other people of non-Abrahamic faith have worked and lived and intermarried for hundreds of years.
Without a doubt there have been skirmishes based on real estate, tribal issues and what have you…but this current (read:the last 50+ years) trend of ‘terrorism’ has some very traceable and definable beginnings.
Take a look/listen to what the EXPERTS have to say - people like Michael Scheuer, who headed the CIA’s Bin Laden Issue Station during the 90’s (and assisted his replacement from ‘01-’04). Read about Operation Ajax, etc to find out what factions within the U.S. government have done in the Middle East.
Also, you may want to read what the 911 Commission had to say about U.S. foreign policy’s workings in the Middle East…
If you truly care about the United States of America, you will make it one of your top priorities to get an understanding of what our foreign policy actions have been and what the outcome from them has been.
This in no way is to imply ANY sense that ‘the U.S. is wrong’ or that ANY terrorists are off the hook for the horrible actions that they’ve taken.
Once a sane and balanced understanding of the cause and effect of foreign policy is gained, my party (and country) can hopefully work towards the traditional values that it once held:
-Real security for our country (which means hunting down, in a Constitutionally-allowed manner those that have attacked or tried to attack us)
-Limited federal government & fiscal responsibility (not rampant interventionalism/imperialism & the bloat of policing the world)
-Free trade, not corporate welfare
On another note, I wouldn’t hold too much stock in the idea that the media industry is controlled by one political faction or another. Yeah, without a doubt certain networks put a certain spin on some stories, but for the most part the media corporations don’t have the average American citizen’s well-being in mind when they create their stories.
As is evident on this and many other sites, the media loves that fact that so many Americans are at odds with one another.
At the end of the day, we are all Americans - we need to get back to the fundamentals of what made this country great. The U.S. Constitution and the ideals of the founding fathers are the best place, IMO to start.
September 11th, 2007 at 2:52 pmJohn(Infidel),
My apologies for a less-than-peaceful response to you - I tend to be a bit passionate when it comes to my feelings of loyalty and love for my country, it’s people, and the works of her founding fathers…
September 12th, 2007 at 12:59 pm