Is Ron Paul correct on Iran?

Your summation is completely incorrect. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

LMAO, really? That is what you offer up as a rebuttal? I, unlike you don't deal in opinions so unless you have some facts to back this up, you are wasting everyone's time with your blind support of the Military Industrial Complex and eventually the collapse of the US economy.

Iranians plan to bomb two foreign embassies in Washington D.C., this nation's capital city, killing and maiming scores, or perhaps hundreds of innocent people in the process . . . please explain exactly what resources the U.S. would get out of that scenario. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

This is more fearmongering put out by our Government and the corrupt Main Stream Media.

LMAO, really? That is what you offer up as a rebuttal? I, unlike you don't deal in opinions so unless you have some facts to back this up, you are wasting everyone's time with your blind support of the Military Industrial Complex and eventually the collapse of the US economy. Originally Posted by Texaspride74

You posted a bull-shit, revisionist interpretation - not facts - of historical events; that's all the rebuttal that was required.

You posted a bull-shit, revisionist interpretation - not facts - of historical events; that's all the rebuttal that was required. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

PROVE IT!!! You are the one promoting bullshit and that is why I just took one isssue you brought up and totally destroyed it with declassified information optained from the Library of Congress and other Freedom of Information Act aquired from the Military and Government. Next, your going to tell me that the announcement that Pearl Harbor was to be attacked was printed on the front page of a Hawaii news paper before the day of the attack.

Look. I can tell you clearly have no desire to ever open your eyes and feel right at home swimming in Government propaganda but this doesn't change what really happened.

PROVE IT!!! You are the one promoting bullshit and that is why I just took one isssue you brought up and totally destroyed it with declassified information optained from the Library of Congress and other Freedom of Information Act aquired from the Military and Government. Next, your going to tell me that the announcement that Pearl Harbor was to be attacked was printed on the front page of a Hawaii news paper before the day of the attack.

Look. I can tell you clearly have no desire to ever open your eyes and feel right at home swimming in Government propaganda but this doesn't change what really happened. Originally Posted by Texaspride74

Your "evidence" is saying the Japanese JN-25 Codes were decipherable before December, 1941, and that is not true. Any author who claims that the U.S. "knew of" - or suspected - an imminent Japanese attack before midnight December 6th is a revisionist liar. It was 1 PM Eastern time when the last part, Part 14 wherein Japan states it is breaking diplomatic relations with the U.S., of the diplomatic message was deciphered and delivered to Cordell Hull. This was less than thirty minutes before the first bombs were dropped on Pearl Harbor.

FDR did anticipate the Japanese might attack Guam, Midway or the Philippines, but no one "knew" the Japanese would attack Pearl Harbor. The Philippines were reinforced in anticipation of an eventual attack. Pearl Harbor was believed to be safe.

It wouldn't hurt to have the military budget reduced to a reasonable level after we leave Iraq.

we do have too many overseas bases and they do cost money to maintain.

NATO lost its relavancy and now seems to be more of a extension of the UN army and we should either leave NATO or disband it.

I say its time to bring troops home from Germany & Japan and other overseas bases and reduce our presence in S. Korea.

Iranians plan to bomb two foreign embassies in Washington D.C., this nation's capital city, killing and maiming scores, or perhaps hundreds of innocent people in the process . . . please explain exactly what resources the U.S. would get out of that scenario. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Well Iran has a shit pot more oil than say North Korea. You don't see us finding any excuse to fire up nutcases like you over North Korea. You know why? They do not have any oil and China will not let us fuc with them. They are China's buffer from South Korea and Japan.

Look , we are not going to war with Iran so quit drooling and sell your Defense stocks, we are going to start spending less on the vast military industrial complex. That is a fact. We do not have the money to do so. SS?MC are no longer running a surplus so you can not get your warmongering hands on that and nobody wants to pay more in taxes for your wars.

Well Iran has a shit pot more oil than say North Korea. You don't see us finding any excuse to fire up nutcases like you over North Korea. You know why? They do not have any oil and China will not let us fuc with them. They are China's buffer from South Korea and Japan.

Look , we are not going to war with Iran so quit drooling and sell your Defense stocks, we are going to start spending less on the vast military industrial complex. That is a fact. We do not have the money to do so. SS?MC are no longer running a surplus so you can not get your warmongering hands on that and nobody wants to pay more in taxes for your wars. Originally Posted by WTF

You are so clueless. There are about 30,000 U.S. troops in Korea, and there over 35,000 U.S. troops in Japan. They are there to keep N. Korea on a short leash. BTW, if you look for a peace treaty ending the Korean War, you won't find it.

Iran, by its recent actions, has demonstrated that it will initiate hostile actions against the U.S. Yet, even as Iran has threatened to use WMDs in the capital of this country, you are just the type of moron who will keep your head stuck up your ass and say it has nothing at all to do with the U.S.

I know exactly why we are over there. My brother served over in that shithole. That does not make me an expert but I damn sure know we have troops stationed all over the world. Mostly for resource protection. Next Iran is not going to do shit even if they get a nuke. You are the little bitch that keeps running around crying the sky is falling. Go suc you thumb after you pull it out of your ass you crybaby who wants to spend money we don't have so ou aren't afraid of the boogie man.

I know exactly why we are over there. My brother served over in that shithole. That does not make me an expert but I damn sure know we have troops stationed all over the world. Mostly for resource protection. Originally Posted by WTF

And you have a problem with the government looking out for the interests of the U.S. citizens?

Next Iran is not going to do shit even if they get a nuke. You are the little bitch that keeps running around crying the sky is falling. Go suc you thumb after you pull it out of your ass you crybaby who wants to spend money we don't have so ou aren't afraid of the boogie man. Originally Posted by WTF

Notable it was your brother and others and not you. You need to walk the battlefields over there to truly appreciate the sacrifice for your "resources."

You're just a panty-wasted liberal SOB that hides behind others who serve and defend your interests in rat-holes around the world, and then you, sitting secure amidst your amassed possessions and creature comforts, have the audacity to complain about how much it cost. You're nothing but a phoney, hypocritical SOB.

BTW, you never addressed any of these questions: What of the increased “pedal costs” incurred by farmers in planting and harvesting, and the increased costs of producing fertilizer, and the increased cost of bringing all meat, dairy and produce to market? What of the increased costs for heating and cooling? How will that help the American economy? Should the government then increase the subsidies given to the poor to meet the increased short fall? How exactly will that work? Where does that money come from?

Ron Paul is still wrong.

We are not looking out for the interests of US citizens, we are protecting the oil and defense industry. If we were looking out for the interests of US citizens, we would be developing domestic energy resources, alternative energy resources and getting off the Middle East oil tit.

We are not looking out for the interests of US citizens, we are protecting the oil and defense industry. If we were looking out for the interests of US citizens, we would be developing domestic energy resources, alternative energy resources and getting off the Middle East oil tit. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

If it's not in the interests of U.S. citizens to lower fuel costs, then perhaps you can answer these questions: What of the increased “pedal costs” incurred by farmers in planting and harvesting, and the increased costs of producing fertilizer, and the increased cost of bringing all meat, dairy and produce to market? What of the increased costs for heating and cooling? How will that help the American economy? Should the government then increase the subsidies given to the poor to meet the increased short fall? How exactly will that work? Where does that money come from?

And you have a problem with the government looking out for the interests of the U.S. citizens?

. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Yes I do. Citizens who travel abroad for profit should pay for their own safety. Citizens who travel abroad for pleasure should too. If I travel to Germany and get robbed or shot, should I expect the United States Government to come to my rescue. That is WTF the oil companies do. You are just to dumb to realize it. That is wtf is meant by pricing oil at the correct price, price the defense of the oil companies resources into a gallon of gas. Do you even understand wtf that means?

If I went to Africa and brought back a ton of gold to sell I would subtract all the expense I had to get that gold. If the United States government had to send troops over there to insure my safety but I did not have to pay for it, you did and all of my felloew citizen did too, that my ignorant friend is wtf you call a transfer of wealth. I have gotten you to subsidize my gold operation.

Notable it was your brother and others and not you. You need to walk the battlefields over there to truly appreciate the sacrifice for your "resources."

. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

My brother was a ignorant 18 year old in 1972 who didn't have a clue as to what to do with his life, six years later after a stint in NK, when I graduated from HS he steered me away from that BS.

And for the record, they are not my resources. I would never send a fellow citizen of mine from this country to go spill his blood for some rich cat CEO.

You're just a panty-wasted liberal SOB that hides behind others who serve and defend your interests in rat-holes around the world, and then you, sitting secure amidst your amassed possessions and creature comforts, have the audacity to complain about how much it cost. You're nothing but a phoney, hypocritical SOB.

BTW, you never addressed any of these questions: What of the increased “pedal costs” incurred by farmers in planting and harvesting, and the increased costs of producing fertilizer, and the increased cost of bringing all meat, dairy and produce to market? What of the increased costs for heating and cooling? How will that help the American economy? Should the government then increase the subsidies given to the poor to meet the increased short fall? How exactly will that work? Where does that money come from?

. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

I have already addressed it, you are to dumb to realize it so I will try again. The price of oil is artificially low but it is paid for in taxes already. Federal taxes that fund having our military protect the top 1% of Americans assets all over the world.

If we priced the cost of oil for wtf it really cost then we damn sure would not use as much of it and we would hurry the fuc up on finding alternative sources. But that would not be good for the oil companies or the vast industrial military complex.

That is probably to complex for you to understand. Most Americans are not even aware of the true cost of oil. You damn sure aren't and you have a grasp of the political system but have been brainwashed by rightwing think tanks. That is their job and they do it well.

I have always been a natural savant on being able to follow the money. I do not expect you to be able to.

Ron Paul is still wrong. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Ron Paul can follow the money, we are brothers like that. It is almost a curse in this country with so many ignorant fucs on each side of the asile slinging shit at each other and missing the big picture.

IB, read my post. I already identified what the government would be doing if they were interested in any of those things you mentioned. They aren't, and they don't. They care about their own power and wealth.

Where does that money come from? Originally Posted by I B Hankering

It comes from the saving on not sending troops overseas to protect a privileged fews interest.

God Damn if your sister was a hooker that kept going to the hood to work and you had to send a body guard with her that cost twice as much as she made and she came home bragging about how much money she made , wouldn't you tell her to stay the fuc home and quit bitching about the money she no longer makes working in the hood? In the big picture it is a push, hell even a net gain for you. Your hooker sister may not think so but who gives a fuc. It is a simple math problem that you can not seem to grasp.

The oil companies are the hooker and the industrial military complex are the guard. You are the idiot that wants to keep sending out your sister to the hood because of all the money she makes. You are a little picture guy.