Thread: According to Ron Paul the war in Iraq is Illegal?

Originally Posted by Geaorge W. Bush

The constitution is just a god-damned piece of paper

.

I tend todisagree with the generalizations about war being, at its core, a class struggle between the rich and the poor. Such a view leaves out many war advocates who never make a dime off of it, or suffer heavily to promote it.

During the Cold War, Pentagon officials devised a retaliation plan against the Soviet Union that consisted of ~12,000 targets, including all major cities in China. China was not viewed as any sort of military threat, but the fight against Communism demanded that it be a target. Nixon, on occasion, scrambled nuclear-armed B-52's and had them fly in loops toward Russia and back, to win political concessions. To their credit, the Soviets never did such a thing, and did not respond to the B-52's.

No one got paid extra to risk the survival of the human race, but such activities continued anyway. The entire problem was the irrational ideology that gripped policy. Government officials believed in it to the point that they were willing to risk the survival of the human species for the sake of fighting an enemy they believed was worse than death, a belief enshrined in the phrase,"Better dead than Red!"

I don't think war is something produced by the rich. Rather, the rich merely take advantage of war, and in so doing reinforce the ideology that produced it, an ideology that is self-destructive and irrational. Who can doubt that the Republican party is capsizing, yet the rats refuse to abandon ship?

Originally Posted by moe007

The lies that Saddam had WMDs, and was a threat to US entities in the gulf and the surrounding regions. Or that Osama Binladen was hiding in Afghanistan, which he might have been, but a government like ours that has intelligence and technology that is unprecedented, still has not found the man that looks like a caveman and still rubs stones together for fire..

The Hussein regime was an enemy terrorist government with a history of WMD terrorism and other terrorism and that hated us severely. He could have given his WMD's to any terrorist organization that wants to kill us. That is a threat. The WMD stockpile intelligence we acted on came from five other governments and officials at the U.N. It is not just a stretch to call it a lie. It is a lie to call it a lie.

Originally Posted by moe007

We bombed and raided every village in Afghanistan and still have not found our caveman. The country is in civil war (as with Iraq) And we havent pulled out, NOT because that would cause FURTHER civil war, but because that would be a slap in our army's face, and we would lose the precious oil that lies under both countries. (that supposedly belongs to the people of Iraq and Afghanistan, but who knows)

We have not bombed an raided every village in Afghanistan. Where did you get that? We have liberated Afghanistan. Would you like for the Taliban to still be running the place?

Originally Posted by moe007

Really? Come on now, you really believe that Saddam hid them underground in the desert? And that the greatest country in the world, the biggest strongest and more technologically advanced specialists could not find ONE WMD?
....
"no telling for sure."
Well, when you tell a nation that theres WMD that we need to go and invade a country for, then after you destroy their country so that for another 100 they will be rebuilding it, you say "opps we were wrong, we couldnt find anything but its underground we promise." that doesnt make sense.

We liberated Iraq for many reasons, not just the WMD intelligence. We are the most powerful country in the world, but we have not developed x-ray vision satellite drone technology... yet. We are not fool proof at finding everything that gets buried no telling where.

Originally Posted by moe007

We went to "purge" them out of Iraq and Afghanistan, they are stronger than ever, with more people joining their manpower every day.

No they are not. They have two fewer governments to fund them and give them superweapons. They also have to deal with a future of Middle East stabilization.

Originally Posted by moe007

Hmm awkward situation dont you think? What happened to his national guard? His PERSONAL guard? A man that had not one palace, but PALACES plastered with gold, and had BILLIONS of dollars in cash, wouldnt hide in a random hole.

You think his palaces would be safer? Don't you think his palaces were the first places people looked? I don't think his hole in the desert was the first place anybody looked. What do you think?

Originally Posted by moe007

Are you sure he wasnt in the hole just for the cameras? Where YOU there? Did you see him get out of the whole? ... As far as I know, everything we see on the news is what they WANT us to see.

For that matter, how do you even know we have soldiers in Iraq?

Originally Posted by moe007

Go to histroy and read about what this man has done, and how he thinks. There is no way in hell that he would hide in a hole, without any guards, and then surrender everything just like that.

His major goal was to hide. Having guards with him after the overthrow would have made him very paranoid. He wanted to do the best hiding job he could possibly do. His guards worked for him out of fear and for power. We removed both of those factors, so there was nothing left for Hussein to do but hide the best he could.

Originally Posted by moe007

But im sure his guards would love some extra cash, in exchange for giving him up.

Exactly. Especially when Saddam no longer had power.

Originally Posted by moe007

And getting HIM was symbolic, it had no meaning. We won, we destroryed their country. If he hid in the hole and DIED, it would have made no difference. But we needed to plaster the picture of him looking disheveled all over the news, to show how big and strong we are.

We did need to show the world what we do to ruthless dictators. That does not mean it was all an act. Also, we did not destroy Iraq. We liberated it and are building it up to be a great country. Stick around.

Originally Posted by moe007

His government isnt doing any better without him, or with America's help. There are still daily bombings, and people are living in chaos.

His government no longer exists. We overthrew it. What does exist now is a democracy where the people vote in higher percentages than we do, despite the death threats.

You cannot judge the rest of time by the transition phase. Of course there has to be a transition phase after liberating Iraq from the nightmare that ruled them.

Originally Posted by moe007

Yes Iraq is in a transitional phase, but they are doing worse than they were before Saddam. There would have been less destruction and they would have sustained a better economy if they just let Saddam live to his death.

It's not all about right now. It is about the rest of the time Iraq exists. They are better off now than they were under the Hussein regime any way. Do you know how that government was run? It was a horror story with no end in sight.

Originally Posted by moe007

Bush and his cabinet have showed interest in a war with Iran on multiple occasions.

It is a consideration, but not an actual plan.

Originally Posted by moe007

Yes it is a big problem, BUT are they not allowed the right to use nuclear technology as a resource? They too, need energy to live. Or is that only allowed for the West? When Iran's oil reserves extinguish, they are going to need an alternative energy source.

You realize that you are taking up for a terrorist government, right? They kill people for being homosexuals and train terrorist groups to target innocents for Islam mumbo jumbo screw virgins make Allah jolly Cuckoo Land reasons. They have no business with nuclear technology under any circumstances. They have blown it. If nuclear technology is the only chance they have of electricity at some point, which will never be the case, then we will just have to install a new government.

Originally Posted by moe007

They have repeatedly claimed to only use nuclear technology as a resource, not as a weapon. And the UN will monitor their use of it. So why not?

The U.N. sucks, and what the government Iran claims is worth less than mud.

Originally Posted by moe007

Its not? Lets think here.

The dollar is plummeting more and more everyday. Gas has now hit $5.00 a gallon in some states. Milk is $4.00. But the civilians still make the same amount of money.

How can somebody who makes $45,000 a year, and has a wife and 3 kids, live with the skyrocketing prices? He cant afford gas for that car he has that makes 17 miles a gallon, he has to buy another car, that makes 20+ miles a gallon. Since he put aside more money for gas and a car, he las less to spend on his family. Milk and what not, have also risen. Therefore he has even LESS money to use. After all expenses paid (gas, food, electricity, mortgage, water, etc payments) he has little to no money to spend. Before our economy started to drop, this same scenario, would have the man still end up with a little bit of cash.

Many businesses are shutting down because of less and less customers. people no longer have the extra money to spend on things that they WANT, but dont NEED.

We are three Trillion dollars in debt to China. Good job wealthiest nation in the world.

You're right. We're a third world nation. Life is just so hard here now since even our homeless people are fat and our poor have cars, computers, Ipods, and DVD players. Business is so third world here, and nobody cares about our entertainment industry any more. Technology is no longer advancing and never really did. Please come save us!

Originally Posted by moe007

But why are the Giants picking on the elementary kids?

Because they train terrorist groups, send terrorists at us in Iraq, and are working on nuclear technology. You need to re-examine who the bullies are. You are not going to convince me that Iran is an innocent country that minds its own business. It is an idea that has nothing to do with reality.

Originally Posted by Elis D.

UM and TKDyo are drinking the Kool-Aid, Saddam was a puppet, so was bin Laden.

Elis, I challenge you to debate me on everything I just said. You are drinking LSD laced Kool-Aid if you believe the things you say, which I don't think you actually do.

Seriously don't make jokes about our economy being strong, because it isn't. The dollar is dropping in value everyday. They been cutting interest rates like crazy trying to prop up the economy and its failing. Tons of people are losing their homes and their jobs.

I guess some people are just in denial about it. I guess when dollars are more valueable as toilet paper than money, and you are standing in a bread line, it will become obvious.

I agree with you that the dollar is falling in value by too much. That is why I was hoping Ron Paul would get elected. I wanted a candidate to focus on our economy, but now that it is down to these three, I have to pick the lesser of three evils

Originally Posted by Alric

Seriously don't make jokes about our economy being strong, because it isn't. The dollar is dropping in value everyday. They been cutting interest rates like crazy trying to prop up the economy and its failing. Tons of people are losing their homes and their jobs.

I guess some people are just in denial about it. I guess when dollars are more valueable as toilet paper than money, and you are standing in a bread line, it will become obvious.

Everything I said, or illustrated via sarcasm, is the truth. I know we are having what are difficult times by U.S. standards, but we are still the business capital of the world and doing a great job as far as countries in general go.

Countries all over the world are doing poorly though. Even then you could argue that we dont make as much as other countries do and our money is weaker than their own. About the only thing the US does better than everyone else is spend money. The only reason we can keep going is no one ever tries to collect the money the loan us, atleast not yet.