PDA

View Full Version : Proof That Ron Paul is Not Presidential Material



huntinman
05-12-2011, 04:57 PM
I always thought he was a little nutty, he just proved me wrong. He is off his rocker.

Ron Paul: I Would Not Have Ordered Bin Laden Raid
Published May 12, 2011 | FoxNews.com


Rep. Ron Paul, a soon-to-be presidential candidate known for opposing U.S. military intervention overseas, said if he were president, he would not have duplicated President Obama's plan for taking out the man responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

Paul plans to announce his candidacy Friday in New Hampshire, two sources told Fox News. Ahead of that announcement, he suggested in a radio interview Tuesday that the U.S. government could have worked with Pakistan to secure Usama bin Laden's capture instead of unilaterally entering the country and killing him -- despite concerns that the Pakistanis could have tipped him off.

"It was absolutely not necessary," Paul said of the May 1 CIA-led Navy SEALs raid.

The Texas congressman questioned whether Obama could have gotten away with the operation if Usama bin Laden had been in a country other than Pakistan.

"What if he had been in a hotel in London?" Paul said on Newsradio 1040 WHO. "So would we have sent the ... helicopters into London because they were afraid the information would get out? No, you don't want to do that."

Paul said the United States should have gone after bin Laden the same way it went after Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, architect of the Sept. 11 attacks, by working with the Pakistan government.

"They arrested him, actually, and turned him over to us," Paul said, suggesting the same formula should have applied to bin Laden.

Though Paul is credited by some with inspiring the Tea Party movement, one faction of that movement was not happy with the comment.

"If there is any doubt that Ron Paul should not even get near the Oval Office, even on a tour of the White House, he has just revealed it," Tea Party Nation founder Judson Phillips said on his website. "For a Congressman to say the raid to kill the man who is one of the greatest mass murderers of Americans in history was, 'not necessary,' is simply nuts."

Other potential GOP candidates have expressed support for the way Obama handled the bin Laden operation. Asked about Paul's comments, an aide to businessman and potential candidate Herman Cain reiterated that sentiment.

"Mr. Cain believes that bringing Usama bin Laden to justice was absolutely the right thing to do," spokeswoman Ellen Carmichael said.

Paul, who ran unsuccessfully for president in 2008, is expected to make his candidacy announcement Friday in New Hampshire, site of the first-in-the-nation presidential primary. He has already started a presidential exploratory committee, opened an office in Iowa and raised more than $1 million online last week on the day of the first Republican presidential debate, hosted by Fox News and the South Carolina Republican Party.

Pakistani officials, while saying the death of bin Laden is a positive development, have decried the U.S. raid as a violation of their sovereignty. Obama officials have staunchly defended the mission.

Paul has used the death of bin Laden to renew his push to withdraw U.S. troops from Afghanistan. Paul also wants to drastically reduce the U.S. military presence around the world.

Hew
05-12-2011, 06:16 PM
Proof That Ron Paul is Not Presidential Material

One of about 43 other reasons this crazy little squirrel has no business near the White House, and one of about 14 serious holes in the Libertarian Party platform.

Franco
05-12-2011, 09:18 PM
I don't think there are many here on RTF that aren't delighted that bin Laden was executed. I know I was smiling from ear to ear.

What we don't know is if Pakistan is trust worthy. He give them billions annually in cash tribute for friendship yet, when it came down to it, we didn't think we could trust them. Trust them to arrest and turn the mass murdered over to US officials.

So, what it we were to tell the Pakistani President that we know where OBL is and we want then to arrest him and turn him over? Would that be a real test of the Pakistanis and thier willingness to be trusted?

Maybe we as a country may have gottem more out of the deal than a dead OBL. We would have been able to identify Pakistan's place in the world as well get OLB if we had to. Because, once we knew where he was hiding, he wasn't getting away again.

huntinman
05-12-2011, 09:56 PM
I don't think there are many here on RTF that aren't delighted that bin Laden was executed. I know I was smiling from ear to ear.

What we don't know is if Pakistan is trust worthy. He give them billions annually in cash tribute for friendship yet, when it came down to it, we didn't think we could trust them. Trust them to arrest and turn the mass murdered over to US officials.

So, what it we were to tell the Pakistani President that we know where OBL is and we want then to arrest him and turn him over? Would that be a real test of the Pakistanis and thier willingness to be trusted?

Maybe we as a country may have gottem more out of the deal than a dead OBL. We would have been able to identify Pakistan's place in the world as well get OLB if we had to. Because, once we knew where he was hiding, he wasn't getting away again.

:confused:

Franco
05-12-2011, 10:12 PM
:confused:

Sorry if what I wrote went over your head.

OBL wasn't getting away again. Even if someone in the Pakistani government tried to tip him off.

By asking them to turn OBL, like they did with #2 guy, we know where they stand in the world. They either support or don't support terrorism. Our Foreign Policy might be better served in forcing them to make a decision.

We still wouild have wound up with OBL either way. And, with all the intel.

huntinman
05-12-2011, 10:27 PM
Sorry if what I wrote went over your head.

OBL wasn't getting away again. Even if someone in the Pakistani government tried to tip him off.

By asking them to turn OBL, like they did with #2 guy, we know where they stand in the world. They either support or don't support terrorism. Our Foreign Policy might be better served in forcing them to make a decision.

We still wouild have wound up with OBL either way. And, with all the intel.

At least you think thats what would have happened. But there is no way to know is there? We thought we had him trapped in the mountains at Tora Bora and he got away then... By doing it the way we did, there was no wiggle room for the rat to get away again. Defend Ron Paul all you want, the only way he is getting in the White House is if the President invites him in for the Super Bowl.

Franco
05-13-2011, 05:21 AM
You can bet that once we knew where OBL was that we had on ground survellience 24/7, he wasn't getting away again. The answer of what to do with Pakistan would be clearer. Of course, under Ron Paul they wouldn't be receiving cash tribute payments of over a billion a year because RP doesn't believe in Foreign Aide! He believes in America first!

Nor would we have invaded Iraq and A'stan costing us 8,000 U S lives and close to two trillion dollars. And, we wouldn't have bailed out the crooks on Wall St. WE wouldn't be printing money and borrowing more causing inflation and the devaluation of the dollar. A balanced budget would be mandatory.


We wouldn't be spending billions annually on useless departments and agencies like Education, Energy, DEA and others. Gas wouldn't be $4. plus a gallon because we would be on a Free Trade footing. Domestic mfg. could be competitve again without the government's interference of artifical labor cost.

The list goes on and on.

huntinman
05-13-2011, 07:35 AM
You can bet that once we knew where OBL was that we had on ground survellience 24/7, he wasn't getting away again. The answer of what to do with Pakistan would be clearer. Of course, under Ron Paul they wouldn't be receiving cash tribute payments of over a billion a year because RP doesn't believe in Foreign Aide! He believes in America first!

Nor would we have invaded Iraq and A'stan costing us 8,000 U S lives and close to two trillion dollars. And, we wouldn't have bailed out the crooks on Wall St. WE wouldn't be printing money and borrowing more causing inflation and the devaluation of the dollar. A balanced budget would be mandatory.


We wouldn't be spending billions annually on useless departments and agencies like Education, Energy, DEA and others. Gas wouldn't be $4. plus a gallon because we would be on a Free Trade footing. Domestic mfg. could be competitve again without the government's interference of artifical labor cost.

The list goes on and on.

Good ideas, but un-electable.

Franco
05-13-2011, 08:28 AM
Good ideas, but un-electable.



Looking at the field of potential GOP hopefuls, I would say that Ron Paul has as good or a better chance than any of them.