PDA

View Full Version : If Ron Paul Loses, AQ wins...




Malum Prohibitum
01-31-2008, 12:51 PM
How annoying is it that if the thread title doesnt have Rons name in it, it gets moved to the dustbin... anyway...

If any of you have seen 'Charlie Wilson's War' or even were alive, breathing, and paying attention to the world during the Reagan administration, you know that our funding of the Afgani rebels allowed us to bankrupt the USSR by sending $20k stinger missles, which were used to down $15M helicopters and tanks. We supported these insurgents because they bled Russia dry economically, which eventually resulted in the dissolution of the USSR.

I have suspected that today, AQ and Iran are using our own tactics against us. We are committing VERY expensive hardware to counter guys who fight us with old bombs, car phones as detonatoors, and AKs. Iran gives AQ just enough technology to continue to get us to ramp up our investment. Instead of fighting them smart, in a cold war style, by employing only CIA, special ops, navy and locals, we are committing hundreds of billions of dollars to attempt to completely remodelling the Middle East, on the assumption that 1. it is possible to force change on an entire subcontinent, and 2. thats the only way to do it.

We know its not the only way. Jefferson dealt with muslim fanatic pirates in his day very effectively without bankrupting the nation, unfortunately, we havent had any Jeffersons in power for a long time.

Today, a tape was released which confirmed my suspicions. AQ isnt interested in killing ALL Americans, they are only interested in bleeding us dry economically until we collapse under our own weight.... And the Neocons are doing exactly what AQ wants us to do.

Ron Pauls approach to AQ is the correct one. AQ in the grand scheme of things is a few annoying flies in our ointment. You dont use a billion dollar MOAB to kill a fly, when a 29cent flyswatter and an eager kid will do the job....

linky.

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/01/binladen.tape/index.html

Broken Record
01-31-2008, 01:17 PM
Osama Bin Laden actually stated in 2004 that the goal was to bankrupt the US.

eckstein88
01-31-2008, 01:22 PM
Osama Bin Laden actually stated in 2004 that the goal was to bankrupt the US.

Do you have a link to him stating that? That would be VERY useful in convincing several people I have been talking to.

risiusj
01-31-2008, 01:24 PM
Do you have a link to him stating that? That would be VERY useful in convincing several people I have been talking to.

http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Bin_Laden_Goal_is_to_bankrupt_U_S_5

Google's a wonderful thing.

derdy
01-31-2008, 01:24 PM
AQ has little to do with this.

How many seasoned politicians do we have in Washington right now that have been there for 20+ years?

These people aren't stupid; they're criminal and they know exactly what they're doing.

LibertyEagle
01-31-2008, 01:26 PM
How annoying is it that if the thread title doesnt have Rons name in it, it gets moved to the dustbin... anyway...



It has nothing to do with whether Ron Paul's name is in the title. It concerns whether the body of your message relates to getting Ron Paul elected.

Yours does not. So, this message too will be moved to General Politics & Other.

Thank You. :)

Naraku
01-31-2008, 02:13 PM
I don't care about al-Qaeda, they're small potatoes to what else is at stake here. We're talking about more than terrorism. This is about fighting imperialism and Fascism, two of the greatest evils in this world. John McCain is at least exemplary of the former and despite his position on torture is probably a threat in the latter area as well.

Our government is trying to contain the Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians, the terrorists, and the American people all at the same time. It simply won't end well for us as it has never ended well for any other country in our position.

Redcard
01-31-2008, 02:45 PM
You know, I didn't let the Neocons scare me this way, and I sure as hell am not going to let Ron Paul supporters scare me this way.

Why don't you , instead of using fear and intimidation, find a better way to make your point?