Ron Paul: If Iran nukes Israel, as president I would do nothing.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Grandluxe, Aug 29, 2011.

  1. rew

    rew

    I agree with that, as a paleoconservative. I'm sick of all the AIPAC whores (95% of our federal politicians) who think Israel is more important than any of our 50 states.

    Israel has 300 nuclear warheads. Nobody is going to be stupid enough to nuke Israel.
     
    #61     Aug 30, 2011
  2. jem

    jem

    AK is a party line socialist commie on just about every issue.
    Even on this subject. In which I blame the dems for not getting us out of wars as promised... he got cute and inserted the word "completely".

    Only a partisan fool would parse ideas like that.
    Who gives a shit about "completely".
    Ak Blames bush for the wars. OK. But any rational person would say then why the hell don't those democrat liars act on their promises off getting us out.

    We really do not need to go destroying the bodies of our solidiers and our financial health without a proper end game.
    Just play to win or get the hell out when you said you would get us the hell out.

    When the dems won I was like, well at least they will end the wars.
    They on election night I heard the dem operatives on CNN saying those were just campaign promises.
     
    #62     Aug 30, 2011
  3. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    Neither one of you guys can make a reasonable argument. And you've proved it repeatedly. In fact you're both famous for it.
     
    #63     Aug 30, 2011
  4. Ricter

    Ricter

    So when I, for example, post data showing that the US is a comparatively low-tax country, and you reply with, "Nope!", or "No sale", or a picture of a guy with his head in the ground, you are making a reasonable counter-argument?
     
    #64     Aug 30, 2011
  5. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    Nope
     
    #65     Aug 30, 2011
  6. Ricter

    Ricter

    Ok, fair enough, you're admitting that you are at least occasionally guilty of exactly what you're criticizing in others.
     
    #66     Aug 30, 2011
  7. You implied that Obama Reid and Pelosi promised to completely end the wars when in fact they never did which is why you couldn't post a source when I asked for one.Obama said he would send more troops to Afghanistan and leave 50,000 troops in Iraq and thats exactly what he has done

    Do I like the fact that we are still there ? NO.I voted for Obama because he would end the wars faster then McCain not because I thought nor did he promise to completely end them

    As I said I dont like that we are there and I would vote for a candidate who promised to end them faster then Obama...Which is one of the reasons I would vote for Paul over Obama



    This is what Obama promised and this is what he did


    [​IMG]



    [​IMG]
     
    #67     Aug 30, 2011
  8. Ricter

    Ricter

    Lest we forget, at the time of the surge's announcement, (some of) the righties here were screaming, "it's not enough!"
     
    #68     Aug 30, 2011
  9. rew

    rew

    It's been more than two years since Obama's inauguration and we still have troops in Iraq. (BTW, I count replacing regular troops with U.S. mercenaries as still having troops in Iraq.) So Obama loses on that one. Obama is getting us mired more in Afghanistan, just as he promised. We must protect those opium crops.
     
    #69     Aug 30, 2011
  10. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    According to YOUR image BO promised to END the war within 16 months. He did NOT end the war, he only scaled back the number of troops. Americans are still there doing exactly what they were doing before and STILL dying. How the fuck is that rated as a "promise kept"?
     
    #70     Aug 30, 2011