Ron Paul on Bill O’Reilly discussing the Middle East

September 11, 2007

It's really hard to add to this. Does it really sound like good policy? I'm inclined to agree with Bill here. That doesn't mean I'm against a redeployment of forces (preferably to Tehran), but getting out of the middle east would be suicidal. Ron does stick to his beliefs though. A reasonably sound piece of journalism here. No attacks particularly, and Ron was allowed to present his facts.

Advertisements

The middle east arms race is on

July 30, 2007

   The Bush Administration, in an effort to firm up the belief that we are not ending our interest in the security of the middle east is on the brink of a multibillion dollar arms sale to Egypt, The United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia.  To Keep Israel in its box, we’re discussing the stealth technology equipped F-22 Raptor, as part of a 3 billion dollar a year package of incentives.

    Irans brinkmanship politics have created nervous neighbors, and the discussion to leave Iraq without completing the job has created some very skittish American allies.  It’s hard to see how Russia can ignore the buildup of technologically advanced weapon systems like the J-DAm and the F-22 Raptor.  They havel ong supported Iran’s radical government, and its not hard to project an increasei n the quality of weapons systems they will be intent on distributing to their long standing ally.

    This is diplomacy.  Do You like it?   For those of you who don’t support Ron Paul, this is the one area I think he has it right.  Selling advanced munitions to these countries is only going to create a much more dangerous Middle East for future leaders, and generations to deal with.

Congress is unlikely to block this deal.  What they may do is use it to put pressure on the Iraq situation, but they really don’t want that to end either.


Ron Paul, The Middle East, and religion

July 22, 2007

    I’m not sure how much more succinctly he could’ve put it.  “We should get out.” “Now.”  This is the one shining light in the sky for Ron Paul.  It makes him look head and shoulders more intelligent than the rest.  While I’ll grant that his comment about Vietnam going better than anyone thought was a little insensitve seeing as how 3 million people were killed after our withdrawal, he is stilll right here.

Now I know I’m going to hear about the humanitarian catastrophe that will follow our withdrawal.  Sorry, its going to anyway, and we can do the no fly zone thing again to limit it, and even provide air support from outside of Iraq. Either way, the fanatics are going to win this one for two reasons.

1. they are in fact fanatics.

2. this is in fact the Middle East.

See how easy that was?  So why wait?  why spend millions?  Why have more of our young men and women killed? It makes absolutely no sense to prolong it.

oh wait? I forgot about “better to fight the terrorists there than here. ”  You know what I have to say to that?  “blow me.”

that’s right.  “blow Me.”  That is perhaps the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard in my life.  Do you really think us fighting in Iraq keeps some psychotic islamic dude from blowing up a bus in Poughkeepsie?  Neither does George.  Or Ron. Or Hillary.

Would you like  to know the difference between those three?  Ron Paul doesn’t need any big investors (he has Steve Forbes). George Bush has a lot of buddies making money off Iraq.  Hillary wants to help her buddies make a lot of money off Iraq.

Plus, Ron Paul knows more about religious fanatics than either of them.  He knows because, well, sorry Pauliacs…he kind of is one.  The man talks entirely to much about his religous beliefs for me, and he do get that glazed over zealot look about him. Whether the righties like it or not we are starting to lean more and more secular, and people are beginning to understand that not believing in god does not make you a bad person.  It just means you’re going to hell boys and girls.

   Ron Paul, to far right for me, but right on about the Middle East.