Bachmann criticizes Obama's Action [read Inaction] on Syria.
"White House hopeful Michele Bachmann says President Barack Obama has moved too late and with too little force in response to Syria’s crackdown on dissent.
The Republican presidential candidate tells South Carolina residents that “better late than never” is no way to conduct foreign policy."
"Bachmann says the U.S. should expel the Syrian ambassador to the U.S. and recall the U.S. ambassador. She told a rally in Columbia, S.C., that they need a “tough hombre-ette” in Washington."
For all I know this was already posted and/or created by a member here, but I've only just seen it. Seems to be an accurate depiction of the events in Iran Dr. Paul speaks of.
I have a friend who says that if elected president Ron Paul would allow Iran to get Nukes and that's bad since they have made it clear they want to attack us. They are friends with North Korea (our enemy). Is this true? Can someone clear this up for me?
The past few days after the debate I have read a few online forums, reactions and also listened to radio conversations: it is clear to me that Chris Wallace just like in the first SC debate (with regard to heroin) has very intentionally sought out an issue which he could isolate, take out of context to try to hit Paul. Politics is dirty and Dr. Paul is absolute clean and honest. It was just as the Giuliani-debate, which had a double-ended sword/effect to it: attracted Independents to Paul, also also lead to some "conservatives" trashing Paul, either via misunderstanding (e.g.
Ron Paul was called a "kook" today, concerning his stance on Iran, in the comment section of an article at THE HILL entitled "Ron Paul shines in Iowa; major media cheats him." Follows Sergeant Lewis' response to said comment:
I am a Sergeant in the U.S. Army. I support Ron Paul and I support his foreign policy. I am sure you would not dare call me a Paultard to my face.
No, you would give me the same parroted line I hear 100 times a day, "Thank you for your service". When I hear some flabby couch potato like you say that to me it makes me sick. Yes, I serve our country, but our wars do not.
A few months back, I wrote back-to-back weekly messages regarding globalism and isolationism. In writing those columns, I focused on the fact that our nation’s interventionist foreign policy was precisely what was isolating us from other countries.
Turkey’s recall of their U.S. ambassador in the wake of last week’s resolution, passed in the House Foreign Affairs Committee in condemnation of Turkey, is a perfect example of what I wrote in those columns, as well as what I have been saying for years.
The House has passed similar resolutions for years, praising some foreign countries or political groups while chastising others. It is my policy to vote against resolutions of this sort whenever they have the impact of placing our country in the middle of an internal political problem of some other nation, or involving us in some regional conflict. In fact, this is almost always the specific intent of resolutions of this sort. Often, I am the only Member of Congress to vote against these resolutions.
Some have questioned these votes, arguing that they are meaningless statements of opinion. However, I have always been more skeptical, and careful, about voting for these measures. Last week’s reaction by Turkey , a long term ally and NATO member, shows that Congress should be a lot more restrained in sticking our government’s nose into the affairs of other nations.
Ron Paul's speech at the Future Freedom Forum right before the last debate is up on UTUBES. It is a six-parter...a must listen.