| |
  
|
||||||||||
Please stop posting on this thread and post here instead
Submitted by zackmario on Thu, 01/24/2008 - 19:25
conversation moved to http://www.dailypaul.com/node/29328 » |
|
|||||||||
The Daily Paul is a community website with no official affiliation with Ron Paul or his Presidential Committee. The content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original poster, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Paul. This site may contain adult language and adult concepts. If you are offended by such content, or feel you may be offended by such content, point your browser to a different site IMMEDIATELY. For more, read the Full Disclaimer
© 2007 - 2011 by The Daily Paul. Not paid for by, nor officially affiliated in any way with Ron Paul. | General Site Disclaimer | DMCA Disclaimer | Advertise here
Glen is a Neocon.
This mouthpiece for the Neocons flip flops trying to disguise his true identity. His main assignment is to label those who disagree with the neocons as fascists and to brainwash the American people to fight Iran. In fact he is happy to discuss any issue calmly except the issue of war. War mongering and brainwashing are his top assignments.
like a lot of folks I talk
like a lot of folks I talk to - afraid of being blown up by a muslim terrorist
TE
Glenn Has Brain Damage.
Number Of Iraqis Slaughtered Since The U.S. Invaded Iraq "1,168,058"
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq/iraqdeaths.html
I'm sure it is the drug war and foreing policy. Glenn's brain was damaged by many years of being a alcoholic so he thinks in a vaccumn and can't figure out that the Foreing policy is the economic problem. It is where ALL the money goes. They can cut domestic spending to $0 and not help.
two words
his paycheck
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau
Strike at the root - Watch Money Masters
Being as objective as possible
This is important. You need to get people to follow through every scenario to its logical conclusion. It is obvious that a non-interventionist foreign policy leaves open the possibility of random acts of terrorism- but how on earth does the "war on terror" eliminate these possibilities? Is it somehow possible that every terrorist that wants to do us harm must somehow pass through the magical portal of Iraq to face our military before they can come to our soil to harm us here? Logic defies it, yet we hear constantly that we must "fight them over there so that we don't fight them here." (My personal opinion is that we should have more respect for 2nd amendment rights, and then if they wish to come here, they would have a hell of a fight on their hands.) If the end result of these two policies really isn't that different, then it becomes important to examine which policy creates more incentive for the attacks. The current pro-war group would argue that a pullback would show weakness and encourage "the enemy." My question is, if "the enemy" believes that martyrdom for the cause of jihad earns an eternal reward, how does our show of brute force deter this? On the other hand, if Dr. Paul is correct and suicide bombing is most likely to occur when provoked by occupation, it seems to me it would at least be worth a try! We are in no worse shape for it! If it turns out that Dr. Paul is wrong, and we are attacked with absolutely no provocation, the money saved by not being involved in police actions around the world would allow us to finance a military that would allow us to truly win this struggle, and not Rumsfeld's "You go with the army you have."
Now before you flame me for looking at both sides, please understand that I think the current foreign policy is insane, and Dr. Paul is 100% right, but in the battle for hearts and minds, you have to sometimes concede some points so that others will follow them to a logical conclusion, and taht's all I'm doing here.
5% of people make things happen
10% of people watch things happen
85% say "What happened?"
Glenn Beck says he reads
Glenn Beck says he reads every e-mail. Why don't you copy this and send it to him? I just started reading Ron Paul's "Foreign Policy of Freedom" and wished everyone could get the long-term perspective of our role in the Middle East instead of one that only began 6 years ago.
excellent post
could I request you to repost it under this thread.. http://www.dailypaul.com/node/29328
Lets move the war conversation
to this thread http://www.dailypaul.com/node/29328
I think no candidate who supports the war on terror can answer it successfully. I believe this is THE most important question.
Beck Can't Endorse Paul
If he did, he'd be fired.
He seems to be making an effort to get Paul's message out there, but when I heard him say he'd lean toward Romney as the best alternative overall, it was obvious to me he's towing the Neocon line as a necessity. Romney is all business as usual and has said nothing about the fiat money system. Exactly what Beck deplores.
Here's the deal: Ron Paul is
Here's the deal: Ron Paul is a patriot and Glen Beck is a traitor. I don't have the link right now, but google "captain may ghost troop" and you should be able to find the article where Captain Eric May exposes Glen Beck's true allegiance.
The War
I believe he agrees with him on everything except the war. And the war he disagrees with him vehemently about. Now if he would just read Dr. Paul's book he might get a clearer picture.
Healthnuttie for Ron Paul
Healthnut4freedom
The lip of truth shall be established forever: but a lying tongue is but for a moment...Lying lips are abomination to the LORD: but they that deal truly are His delight. Prov 12:19,22
He cannot
It is just that he cannot endorse Dr. Paul, so he has to keep something that he disagrees with. I think it is totally phony. I think he totally agrees with everything Dr. Paul says, but he doesn't want to look like a spineless wimp who puts his job before his integrity.
We should be nice to Mr. Beck
It is clear that he has been reading, it will just take him some time to come around on the foreign policy stuff.
They always come around. 8]
and he and everyone else out there thought up
what the end game would be on the war on terrorism (muslim world)?
They dont believe in blowback?
They dont believe our foreign policy has contributed?
They dont believe that the only way to resolve this is economic?
What do they believe? That we should kill all muslims that hate America?
Will that not just create 10x the number we would have killed..
What is their end game?
Glenn beck is confused
I was listening to him talk about why he disagrees with Paul on the foreign policy issue. He is just confused. His logic doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
The War
and "Islamofascism."
http://suzanrobertson.blogspot.com
The war. I think he said he
The war. I think he said he would like McCain's war stance mixed with RPs economic understanding.
ah, heh?
That is an oxymoron.
Well, he thinks that we need
Well, he thinks that we need to kill all those evil Muslims over there and continue the war effort. That's all.
www.paulforronpaul.com
Foreign policy and the Iraq
Foreign policy and the Iraq War.