Is Ron Paul correct on Iran?

Whoa! I need some medical attention, because I am agreeing more and more with WTF. The Soviet Union is getting the band back together. Putin is KGB, and likely Stalin without a shirt.

However, as much as I distrust Republicans (and Democrats) I think Ron Paul would quickly and decisively act if genuine American interests were being threatened. The wars we are fighting now are not against terrorism, they are to protect oil interests for the big oil companies. They are not worth American blood and treasure. What would happen if Middle East oil were cut off? Prices would skyrocket, so we would either have to develop our own oil resources, or find a 21st century fuel to run a 21st century society. The oil companies have a vested interest in keeping us dependent on archaic fuel.

We would be much more secure, and need a much smaller defense budget, if we developed a modern fuel system that didn't depend on oil. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Exactly COG, the real cost of oil is much more than we actually pay. We should put a tax on it and give the proceeds to Defense spending. That way we could vote with our gas peddle as to how much we wanted to spend meddling in other countries affairs.

I will also say that there will be no embargo to speak of....they need our money as bad as we need their oil.

What do you think Americans would say about the real cost of gas?
The Actual Cost of Gaoline

April 5, 2011
America consumes roughly 145bn gallons of gas a year, so dividing aggregate costs into that number gives a per gallon cost. The $10-15 estimate includes known costs – nonlinear impacts like climate change are not included.
Current price: $3.45
Actual cost: $10.45 to $15.45
Known off-balance sheet costs
Security premium (military spending, $700bn – 1 Trillion): $4-6
Externalized pollution costs on human mortality ($345bn via Union of Concerned Scientists) : $2-3
Gov’t subsidies, traffic, accidents, free parking ($200-400bn via Center for Technology Assessment), etc: $1-3
Unknown off-balance sheet costs
Climate change
Additional unknowable risks (BP oil spill cleanup, health costs, etc)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44861178...ity/?gt1=43001

That harmless little misunderstood country. Yes, Ron Paul, there are our friends.

"The case started when Arbabsiar, who lived in Texas, allegedly made contact with an undercover DEA informant in Mexico and asked for assistance from a major drug cartel to assassinate the ambassador, Adel al-Jubeir, at a restaurant that he frequented. Sources told NBC News that the group being recruited was the Zetas cartel.

"This case illustrates that we live in a world where borders and boundaries are increasingly irrelevant," said FBI Director Robert Mueller. "A world where individuals from one country sought to conspire with a drug trafficking cartel in another country to assassinate a foreign official on United States soil. And though it reads like the pages of a Hollywood script, the impact would have been very real and many lives would have been lost."

Who needs Cuba .... "we" got our good neighbor Mexico to cover our butts.

. . .you might wanna tell Putin that.
Originally Posted by WTF

Whoa! I need some medical attention, because I am agreeing more and more with WTF. The Soviet Union is getting the band back together. Putin is KGB, and likely Stalin without a shirt. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Gentlemen (loosely applicable in WTF’s case), you do realize that the argument you are now proposing is more for maintaining the present level of defense spending . . . or more, do you not?

Exactly COG, the real cost of oil is much more than we actually pay. We should put a tax on it and give the proceeds to Defense spending. That way we could vote with our gas peddle as to how much we wanted to spend meddling in other countries affairs. Originally Posted by WTF

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?

You have missed my point, we are in this mess partially due to the stranglehold the oil companies have on government and the economy. We need to get off oil. It's an 18th century technology. But we won't as long as Big Oil is able to quash innovation before it gets started, or hold it back.

I'm not willing to send my kids to war so BP can continue raping our economy and ecology.

You have missed my point, we are in this mess partially due to the stranglehold the oil companies have on government and the economy. We need to get off oil. It's an 18th century technology. But we won't as long as Big Oil is able to quash innovation before it gets started, or hold it back.

I'm not willing to send my kids to war so BP can continue raping our economy and ecology. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

It's a 19th century technology, but otherwise no argument here about the U.S.'s over dependence on oil.

It's 18th century, you moron! Provide a cite to your BS! (j/k)

Gentlemen (loosely applicable in WTF’s case), you do realize that the argument you are now proposing is more for maintaining the present level of defense spending . . . or more, do you not?
Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Yes I do but the spending would be IN THIS COUNTRYand on things that Amercians can use. Like education so we do not continue to think like you warmongers. Nation building is not in the Constitution. That is why Ron Paul is correct in this matter.

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

God Damnit you are dense....they pay for the increased cost now in the form of taxes that go to the vast military industrial complex. All I ask is to quit spending on nation building in other countries and rebuild this fucking nation.

I get it, you would rather spend money in other countries so they can out compete us and you can then whine about the left screwing this country.

It's a 19th century technology, but otherwise no argument here about the U.S.'s over dependence on oil. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Yet you endorse nation building which is nothing but a front for our oil companies to continue with wtf they have been doing for 100 years.

Yet you endorse nation building which is nothing but a front for our oil companies to continue with wtf they have been doing for 100 years. Originally Posted by WTF

Cite where it says nation building in Japan, Germany, Austria, Italy, Greece, the Philippines, Hawaii and S. Korea was a front for oil companies.

a front for our oil companies to continue with wtf they have been doing for 100 years. Originally Posted by WTF

Which is helping the local economy here in Houston.Thank God.

Yes I do but the spending would be IN THIS COUNTRYand on things that Amercians can use. Like education so we do not continue to think like you warmongers. Nation building is not in the Constitution. That is why Ron Paul is correct in this matter.




God Damnit you are dense....they pay for the increased cost now in the form of taxes that go to the vast military industrial complex. All I ask is to quit spending on nation building in other countries and rebuild this fucking nation.

I get it, you would rather spend money in other countries so they can out compete us and you can then whine about the left screwing this country.

Originally Posted by WTF

You didn't address any of the questions.

.... nation building in Japan, Germany, Austria, Italy, Greece, the Philippines, Hawaii and S. Korea was a front for oil companies. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Well it works like this:

Destroy the country, and then buy petrochemical products to rebuild it.

Kinda like we'll have to do when Iran marries its nuke with a delivery system .... and then we can rebuild our own country ... errr.... may be not.

So much for Iran being a piss-ant problem.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...?newsfeed=true

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/...20118692.shtml

@ London - Is Iran still funny; are you still laughing?

Ron Paul is quite wrong!

Well it works like this:

Destroy the country, and then buy petrochemical products to rebuild it.

Kinda like we'll have to do when Iran marries its nuke with a delivery system .... and then we can rebuild our own country ... errr.... may be not. Originally Posted by LexusLover

In his film, The War, Ken Burns says Texas supplied 50% of the oil it took to defeat the axis powers. He didn't provide his source, but surely he got that interesting piece of trivia from some where.

In his film, The War, Ken Burns says Texas supplied 50% of the oil it took to defeat the axis powers. He didn't provide his source, but surely he got that interesting piece of trivia from some where. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

The Houston metro area has been "ground zero" on the Soviet hit list, since there was one ... with San Antonio on the list also, because of the military presence there .... and with the inaccurate control of warheads utilized by the Soviets a falling warhead that just happened to miss and hit SA was considered a "two-fer" .... and certainly not wasted.

The estimates now are about 2/3rds of the domestic petrochemical production .... one decent lob from Cuba would contaminate the area beyond use for 1,000's of years, and probably kill more than were lost in 9-11 attacks or the unpopular war with the anti-Bush crowd. I suspect the economic consequences would be off the charts, and "rebuilding a city" would exceed the costs of "nation building" spent since 2000.

Some folks need to recall that the Japanese believed the U.S. was incapable of delivering the blow dealt to them. My physics professor worked on the Manhattan Project. The belief by Japanese scientists was that the U.S. lacked a delivery system (airplane) large enough and powerful enough to deliver an explosive device that could create an explosion as did "the bomb." At the same time the Japanese thought we had more than three of them. They miscalculated 2 times: Pearl Harbor and "the end." We have had one miscalculation so far: 9-11.

Some of the comments on here remind me of John Kerry's remarks to Larry King just after 9-11 on Larry's show: Paraphrase: "We knew it could happen ...."

I agree that Ron Paul is not Nervous Champlain ... Paul will never be President.