PDA

View Full Version : My Father, the Stubborn One




rpwasright
10-07-2011, 07:58 PM
It seems to me the younger generation like myself are having a hard time converting our fathers to Ron Paul. I am having the same issue. My mom was easy (even though she still would have voted for Palin if she had entered, such blatant sexism). Even though my dad agrees with Paul on everything but foreign policy he still wont vote for him in the primary. I get the classic "If we weren't over there 9/11 would be a weekly occurrence" I'm paraphrasing of course but you get my point.

I really am at a loss as to what more I can say. I have told him about all the people (especially those from the CIA) that tell us that we were attacked because of our intervention in the politics of the middle east. I have made him realize the Pentagon isn't immune to the waste and corruption that befalls all bureaucratic nightmares (there just the Post Office with guns) and that our occupation alone is pretty much our entire budget deficit but notta. Its like talking to a wall. I even got him to admit he would vote for him if he got the nomination in the general. Of course then I argue if you feel so strongly about foreign policy why then wouldn't you vote for Obama because he is exactly the same as you in that regard. Thats when he just wont talk about anymore (and that happens all the time because he can't win an argument with me).

I really don't know what else I can say. Has anyone else broken through in a similar situation? If so what did you do or say. I know my dad and I know he believes in everything else Paul stands for so I know hes so close to being like us its just that finally huge obstacle I can't seem to get over.

Paulistinian
10-07-2011, 08:03 PM
I can't get through to my dad. He is 71 and very stubborn. He likes Romney. He liked Romney in 07 as well. He will "vote for Mickey Mouse against Obama", so he has agreed Paul is better than Obama and right when I think I've got him coming around to our side, Paul will say something controversial like 'the walls can keep us in' or Awlaki should not have been assassinated, etc. That loses my dad.

What I believe would sway people like our fathers is for their favorite talk radio/fox news hosts to come around. Unfortunately, my dad's favorites are Michael Medved and Rush Limbaugh. Medved is about as anti-Paul as a person can be and Rush Limbaugh talks a lot about conservatism but doesn't support the real conservative. My dad also likes Judge Nap, which helps keep him open to Paul. I am fairly sure if Romney wasn't in the race my dad would be backing Paul. He thinks Romney is the best businessman for the job and "he turned those Olympics around". Sadly, it will take Rush, Hannity, Medved or their ilk vocally supporting Ron in order to sway guys like our dads.

You could do what I do, and write to these people that your dad likes. I write to Rush and Hannity fairly frequently now, I don't waste my time with Medved (he loves Israel even more than Glenn Beck).

Sola_Fide
10-07-2011, 08:06 PM
This argument has worked well with some of my tea party friends:



First ask him if he thinks the bailouts and the stimulus was a good idea. He should say no.

If he doesn't support the idea of bailouts, ask him why he supports bailouts for other countries in the form of infrastructure, police, healthcare, defense, etc....

If the government shouldn't pick winners and losers domestically, why should it do it internationally?

FSP-Rebel
10-07-2011, 08:07 PM
Maybe say something along the lines of you don't want a future of indentured servitude and that is why the troops need to come home as well as dealing with entitlements. Or, I really hope the govt and Fed doesn't steal your retirement to pay for nation building around the world forever ad infinitum.

Even if it were true that we're safer by having our troops over there forever, I'd rather save the money and the country and take my chances. As an individual, you're far more likely to get hurt by a domestic criminal and/or cop than you'll ever be by some foreign terrorist threat. How bout use the guard units stationed abroad to help the border patrol and customs keep us safe while spending their paychecks here rather than boosting the economy of socialist european countries or spending ten times as much getting contractor supplies to middle eastern countries..

If your dad is collecting SS right now, ask him how he likes the Fed keeping interest rates low (causing the prior bubble as well gearing us up for a currency crises) has helped him make any supplemental income off of his savings to boost his SS? Or, keeping with the same theme (and only if I had to stoop this 'low'), aren't you gonna leave me squat when you pass on?:o
Keep chipping away at'em!

rpwasright
10-07-2011, 08:09 PM
Well since my Dad lives and breathes Bill Orielly you can be sure that will never happen. He loves Perry and he loved Bush. He is just a diehard supporter of anyone with an R next to there name, at least in the whitehouse, kind of guy.

rpwasright
10-07-2011, 08:12 PM
This argument has worked well with some of my tea party friends:



First ask him if he thinks the bailouts and the stimulus was a good idea. He should say no.

If he doesn't support the idea of bailouts, ask him why he supports bailouts for other countries in the form of infrastructure, police, healthcare, defense, etc....

If the government shouldn't pick winners and losers domestically, why should it do it internationally?

Wont work. The only chance I have is convincing him hes wrong on Terrorism.

rpwasright
10-07-2011, 08:16 PM
Maybe say something along the lines of you don't want a future of indentured servitude and that is why the troops need to come home as well as dealing with entitlements. Or, I really hope the govt and Fed doesn't steal your retirement to pay for nation building around the world forever ad infinitum.

Even if it were true that we're safer by having our troops over there forever, I'd rather save the money and the country and take my chances. As an individual, you're far more likely to get hurt by a domestic criminal and/or cop than you'll ever be by some foreign terrorist threat. How bout use the guard units stationed abroad to help the border patrol and customs keep us safe while spending their paychecks here rather than boosting the economy of socialist european countries or spending ten times as much getting contractor supplies to middle eastern countries..

If your dad is collecting SS right now, ask him how he likes the Fed keeping interest rates low (causing the prior bubble as well gearing us up for a currency crises) has helped him make any supplemental income off of his savings to boost his SS? Or, keeping with the same theme (and only if I had to stoop this 'low'), aren't you gonna leave me squat when you pass on?:o
Keep chipping away at'em!

I do as well. But he doesn't. And no he isn't on SS and like I said he knows that is a farce just as we do. Bill ORielly has completely brainwashed him on Terrorism. Its just one of the many reason I now can't stand the arrogant prick.

And oh BTW he says if he leaves anything to me he misfigured somewhere. Which I'm fine with. He earned the money he deserves to spend it. I ask of no man (never have once asked for money from my parents since I've been on my own, the last 4 years) especially not the gov't.

Verrater
10-07-2011, 08:17 PM
Well since my Dad lives and breathes Bill Orielly you can be sure that will never happen. He loves Perry and he loved Bush. He is just a diehard supporter of anyone with an R next to there name, at least in the whitehouse, kind of guy.

So he voted for bushes humble foreign policy but doesn't like Ron's foreign policy that is basically the same thing?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9SOVzMV2bc

SchleckBros
10-07-2011, 08:18 PM
Show him this. My dad had a completely different view of Paul after watching this.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ohKz9OeiI0g

rpwasright
10-07-2011, 08:20 PM
So he voted for bushes humble foreign policy but doesn't like Ron's foreign policy that is basically the same thing?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9SOVzMV2bc

Like I said hes a straight R voter. In the General he literally doesn't vote for a single democrat unless its someone local he knows and trusts.

king_nothing_
10-07-2011, 09:03 PM
It seems to me the younger generation like myself are having a hard time converting our fathers to Ron Paul. I am having the same issue. My mom was easy (even though she still would have voted for Palin if she had entered, such blatant sexism). Even though my dad agrees with Paul on everything but foreign policy he still wont vote for him in the primary. I get the classic "If we weren't over there 9/11 would be a weekly occurrence" I'm paraphrasing of course but you get my point.

I really am at a loss as to what more I can say. I have told him about all the people (especially those from the CIA) that tell us that we were attacked because of our intervention in the politics of the middle east. I have made him realize the Pentagon isn't immune to the waste and corruption that befalls all bureaucratic nightmares (there just the Post Office with guns) and that our occupation alone is pretty much our entire budget deficit but notta. Its like talking to a wall. I even got him to admit he would vote for him if he got the nomination in the general. Of course then I argue if you feel so strongly about foreign policy why then wouldn't you vote for Obama because he is exactly the same as you in that regard. Thats when he just wont talk about anymore (and that happens all the time because he can't win an argument with me).

I really don't know what else I can say. Has anyone else broken through in a similar situation? If so what did you do or say. I know my dad and I know he believes in everything else Paul stands for so I know hes so close to being like us its just that finally huge obstacle I can't seem to get over.
What you just described is my exact situation as well. My mom used to follow along with my dad regarding politics, but once I started talking to her about it, she got completely behind him.

My dad, too, agrees with him on most things other than foreign policy. The phrase "talking to a wall" you used, though, couldn't describe it better. Once I present logic that he's unable to even attempt to refute regarding Ron's foreign policy, his response is one of the following: ad hominem, says "I don't wanna hear it" and turns up the volume on the TV, or walks out of the room. "He doesn't have a chance" and "he's unelectable" are also popular mantras, regardless of how irrelevant they are to the discussion.

I seriously doubt I'll ever be able to change his mind. I've exhausted every angle of debate I can think of. Something tells me that even if I were to convince him deep down, he would never admit it. He's that stubborn.

eleganz
10-07-2011, 09:07 PM
Geez, these people arguing against the very people that told them to be afraid of terror, won't listen to them when they say we played a major factor.

Make it easy for them to understand, maybe put it into terms of you vs your neighbors and how some other neighbors are CIA/DoD/Pentagon and some other neighbor is Ron Paul. If your dad can't understand that just tell him you can't help if he wants to be a whiny little girl that will never face reality to benefit the safety of his own family.

specsaregood
10-07-2011, 09:09 PM
//

TIMB0B
10-07-2011, 09:18 PM
I've been very fortunate, I guess. I seem to be the only one in my family heavily involved in politics. They listen to me like I'm the MSM. And why not, though? I've got truth on my side!

FSP-Rebel
10-07-2011, 09:51 PM
I've been very fortunate, I guess. I seem to be the only one in my family heavily involved in politics. They listen to me like I'm the MSM. And why not, though? I've got truth on my side!
Groovy. I've got fam members older and younger on board with Ron, tho there are a few extendeds that are drones of either side. I can't claim all the fame, my dad had me listening to talk radio (Mark Scott, a belated objectivist here in Det) when i was 11 ['83] (and on) and I've developed ever since even tho we're Catholic and I've been sent to such schools thru college. I became a paying LP member @ 13 and learned about Paul soon after. Fast forward..

driller80545
10-07-2011, 10:22 PM
Pretty funny. I have middle aged sons who I am trying to convince to vote for RP. And my 86 year old mother told me yesterday that she will be voting for RP this time around.

Carole
10-07-2011, 11:06 PM
Show him these. It is a good start.

Great Speeches Warned Us of Our Future

1961 speech Eisenhower Warns us of New World Order
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rd8wwMFmCeE&feature=related


Major General Smedley D. Butler
WAR IS A RACKET
http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm




President John F Kennedy Secret Society Speech version 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhZk8ronces



Excerpt from Robert Welch Speech
1958 - Great Speech by Robert Welch Founder of John Birch Society

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLhidgtu12o

Great speech from the early 70's from a 1958 document, proof that what is happening today with our governments crazy spending, high taxes, and huge deficits are no accident. Poll-iticians are not blundering idiots like we are lead to believe, they just act well.


Congressman McFadden on the Federal Reserve Corporation

http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/mcfadden.html


DavidDeGraw.org

The U.S. War Addiction: Funding Enemies to Maintain Trillion Dollar Racket
http://www.alternet.org/story/147217/the_u.s._war_addiction%3A_funding_enemies_to_maint ain_trillion_dollar_racket/?page=entire

The Crash, the Depression, and the Coup d’etat
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/41336.html

Full Report: The Economic Elite Vs. The People of the United States of America
http://www.ampedstatus.com/full-report-the-economic-elite-vs-the-people-of-the-united-states-of-america/


Smedley Butler on Interventionism
http://www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm
-- Excerpt from a speech delivered in 1933, by Major General Smedley Butler, USMC.
War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.
I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.
I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.
There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big Boss" Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism.
It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty- three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.
I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.
I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 (where have I heard that name before?). I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.
During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.

notsure
10-07-2011, 11:11 PM
Some fathers just won't or can't listen to or try and understand anything their children say.

Carole
10-07-2011, 11:45 PM
rpwasright

Explain the CIA's admission that "Blowback" fuels the hatred toward America.

Read this:
Michael Scheuer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Scheuer


Michael Scheuer, is a former CIA intelligence officer, American blogger, historian, foreign policy critic, and political analyst. He is currently an adjunct professor at Georgetown University's Center for Peace and Security Studies. In his 22-year career, he served as the Chief of the Bin Laden Issue Station (aka "Alec Station"), from 1996 to 1999, the Osama bin Laden tracking unit at the Counterterrorist Center. He then worked again as Special Advisor to the Chief of the bin Laden unit from September 2001 to November 2004.

Scheuer became a public figure after being outed as the anonymous author of the 2004 book Imperial Hubris, in which he criticized many of the United States' assumptions about Islamist insurgencies and particularly Osama bin Laden. He depicts bin Laden as a rational actor who is fighting to weaken the United States by weakening its economy, rather than merely combating and killing Americans. He challenges the common assumption that terrorism is the threat that the United States is facing in the modern era, arguing rather that Islamist insurgency (and not "terrorism")[2] is the core of the conflict between the U.S. and Islamist forces, who in places such as Kashmir, Xinjiang, and Chechnya are "struggling not just for independence but against institutionalized barbarism."[2][3] Osama bin Laden acknowledged the book in a 2007 statement, suggesting that it revealed "the reasons for your losing the war against us".[4][5]

(There is much more at the website)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Here is a list of U.S. interventions and meddling in the mid east.


U.S. Intervention in the Middle East
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6308.htm

"Why do people in the Middle East hate the United States," people are asking, in the wake of the events of September 11.

This partial chronology of U.S. intervention in the Middle East illustrates the lengths to which the U.S. power structure has gone to gain and maintain U.S. domination of the Middle East--a region considered key to the U.S.'s standing as an imperialist world power. This is not a complete list of the invasions, bombings, assassinations, coups and other interventions by the U.S. government, its allies, or its client states, nor does it fully document the U.S.'s economic domination and exploitation of the region's people and resources.

1918-1945:
BREAKING INTO THE MIDDLE EAST:
THE FIGHT FOR INFLUENCE & OIL

1920-28: U.S. pressures Britain, then the dominant Middle East power, into signing a "Red Line Agreement" providing that Middle Eastern oil will not be developed by any single power without the participation of the others. Standard Oil and Mobil obtain shares of the Iraq Petroleum Company.

1932-34: Oil is discovered in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, and U.S. oil companies obtain concessions.

1944: U.S. State Department memo refers to Middle Eastern oil as "a stupendous source of strategic power, and one of the greatest material prizes in world history." During U.S.-British negotiations over the control of Middle Eastern oil, President Roosevelt sketches out a map of the Middle East and tells the British Ambassador, "Persian oil is yours. We share the oil of Iraq and Kuwait. As for Saudi Arabian oil, it's ours." On August 8, 1944, the Anglo-American Petroleum Agreement is signed, splitting Middle Eastern oil between the U.S. and Britain.

Between 1948 and 1960, Western capital earns $12.8 billion in profits from the production, refining and sale of Middle Eastern oil, on fixed investments totaling $1.3 billion.

1945-1955:
REPLACING RIVALS AND WAGING WAR
ON NATIONAL LIBERATION

1946: President Harry Truman threatens to drop a "super-bomb" on the Soviet Union if it does not withdraw from Kurdestan and Azerbaijan in northern Iran.

November 1947: The U.S. helps push through a UN resolution partitioning Palestine into a Zionist state and an Arab state, giving the Zionist authorities control of 54% of the land. At that time Jewish settlers were about 1/3 of the population.

May 14, 1948: War breaks out between newly proclaimed state of Israel, and Egypt, Iraq, Jordan and Syria, who had moved troops into Palestine to oppose the partition of Palestine. Israeli attacks force some 800,000 Palestinians--two-thirds of the population--to flee into exile in Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Gaza, and the West Bank. Israel seizes 77 percent of historic Palestine. The U.S. quickly recognizes Israel.

March 29, 1949: CIA backs a military coup overthrowing the elected government of Syria and establishes a military dictatorship under Colonel Za'im.

1952: U.S.-led military alliance expands into the Middle East with Turkey's admission to NATO.

1953: The CIA organizes a coup overthrowing the Mossadeq government of Iran after Mossadeq nationalizes British holdings in Iran's huge oilfields. The Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlevi, is put on the throne, ruling as an absolute monarch for the next 25 years--torturing, killing and imprisoning his political opponents.

1955: U.S. installs powerful radar system in Turkey to spy on the Soviet Union.

1956-1958:
UPHEAVAL AND INTRIGUE IN EGYPT,
IRAQ, JORDAN, SYRIA & LEBANON

July 1956: After Egypt's nationalist leader, Gamal Abdul Nasser, receives arms from the Soviet Union, the U.S. withdraws promised funding for Aswan Dam, Egypt's main development project. A week later Nasser nationalizes the Suez Canal to fund the project. In October Britain, France and Israel invade Egypt to retake the Suez Canal. President Eisenhower threatens to use nuclear weapons if the Soviet Union intervenes on Egypt's side; and at the same time, the U.S. asserts its regional dominance by forcing Britain, France and Israel to withdraw from Egypt.

October 1956: A planned CIA coup to overthrow a left-leaning government in Syria is aborted because it was scheduled for the same day Israel, Britain and France invade Egypt.

March 9, 1957: Congress approves Eisenhower Doctrine, stating "the United States regards as vital to the national interest and world peace the preservation of the independence and integrity of the nations of the Middle East."

April 1957: After anti-government rioting breaks out in Jordan, U.S. rushes 6th fleet to the eastern Mediterranean and lands a battalion of Marines in Lebanon to "prepare for possible future intervention in Jordan." Later that year, the CIA begins making secret payments of millions a year to Jordan's King Hussein.

September 1957: In response to the Syrian government's more nationalist and pro-Soviet policies, the U.S. sends Sixth Fleet to eastern Mediterranean and rushes arms to allies Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Turkey and Saudi Arabia; meanwhile the U.S. encourages Turkey to mass 50,000 troops on Syria's northern border.

1958: The merger of Syria and Egypt into the "United Arab Republic," the overthrow of the pro-U.S. King Feisal II in Iraq by nationalist military officers, and the outbreak of anti-government/anti-U.S. rioting in Lebanon, where the CIA had helped install President Camille Caiman and keep him in power, leads the U.S. to dispatch 70 naval vessels, hundreds of aircraft and 14,000 Marines to Lebanon to preserve "stability." The U.S. threatens to use nuclear weapons if the Lebanese army resists, and to prevent an Iraqi move into the oilfields of Kuwait, and draws up secret plans for a joint invasion of Iraq with Turkey. The plan is shelved after the Soviet Union threatens to intervene.

1957-58: Kermit Roosevelt, the CIA agent in charge of the 1953 coup in Iran, plots, without success, to overthrow Egypt's Nasser. "Between July 1957 and October 1958, the Egyptian and Syrian governments and media announced the uncovering of what appear to be at least eight separate conspiracies to overthrow one or the other government, to assassinate Nasser, and/or prevent the expected merger of the two countries." (Blum, p. 93)

1960: U.S. works to covertly undermine the new government of Iraq by supporting anti-government Kurdish rebels and by attempting, unsuccessfully, to assassinate Iraq's leader, Abdul Karim Qassim, an army general who had restored relations with the Soviet Union and lifted the ban on Iraq's Communist Party.

1963: U.S. supports a coup by the Ba'ath party (soon to be headed by Saddam Hussein) to overthrow the Qassim regime, including by giving the Ba'ath names of communists to murder. "Armed with the names and whereabouts of individual communists, the national guards carried out summary executions. Communists held in detention...were dragged out of prison and shot without a hearing... [B]y the end of the rule of the Ba'ath, its terror campaign had claimed the lives of an estimated 3,000 to 5,000 communists."

1966: U.S. sells its first jet bombers to Israel, breaking with 1956 decision not to sell arms to the Zionist state.

June 1967: With U.S. weapons and support, Israeli military launches the so-called "Six Day War," seizing the remaining 23 percent of historic Palestine--the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem--along with Egypt's Sinai Peninsula and Syria's Golan Heights.

September 17, 1970: With U.S. and Israeli backing, Jordanian troops attack Palestinian guerrilla camps, while Jordan's U.S.-supplied air force drops napalm from above. U.S. deploys the aircraft carrier Independence and six destroyers off the coast of Lebanon and readies troops in Turkey to support the assault. The U.S. threatens to use nuclear weapons against the Soviet Union if it intervenes. 5000 Palestinians are killed and 20,000 wounded. This massacre comes to be known as "Black September."

1973: The U.S. rushes $2.2 billion in emergency military aid to Israel after Egypt and Syria attack to regain Golan Heights and Sinai. U.S. puts forces on alert, and moves them into the region. When the Soviet Union threatens to intervene to prevent the destruction of Egypt's 3rd Army by Israel, U.S. nuclear forces go to DEFCON III to force the Soviets to back down.

1973-1975: U.S. supports Kurdish rebels in Iraq in order to strengthen Iran and weaken the then pro-Soviet Iraqi regime. When Iran and Iraq cut a deal, the U.S. withdraws support, denies the Kurds refuge in Iran, and stands by while the Iraqi government kills many Kurdish people.

1979-84: U.S. supports paramilitary forces to undermine the government of South Yemen, which was allied with the Soviet Union.

THE FALL OF THE SHAH AND
THE SOVIET INVASION OF AFGHANISTAN

1978: As the Iranian revolution begins against the hated Shah, the U.S. continues to support him "without reservation" and urges him to act forcefully against the masses. In August 1978, some 400 Iranians are burned to death in the Rex Theater in Abadan after police chain and lock the exit doors. On September 8, 10,000 anti-Shah demonstrators are massacred at Teheran's Jaleh Square.

1979: The U.S. tries, without success, to organize a military coup to save the Shah. In January, the Shah is forced to flee and the reactionary Shi-ite Islamists led by Ayatollah Khomeini take power in February.

Summer 1979: The U.S. publicly supports the Khomeini regime's efforts to suppress the Kurdish liberation struggle and maintain Iranian domination of Kurdestan.

1979: U.S. President Jimmy Carter designates the Persian Gulf a vital U.S. interest and declares the U.S. will go to war to ensure the flow of oil.

1979: In response to Soviet military maneuvers on Iran's northern border, Carter secretly puts U.S. forces on nuclear alert and warns the Soviets they will be used if the Soviets intervene.

Summer 1979: U.S. begins arming and organizing Islamic fundamentalist "Mujahideen" in Afghanistan. National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski writes, "This aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention," drawing the Soviets into an Afghan quagmire. Over the next decade the U.S. alone passed more than $3 billion in arms and aid to the Mujahideen, with another $3 billion provided by the U.S. ally Saudi Arabia.

November 4, 1979: Islamic militants, backed by the Khomeini regime, seize the U.S. embassy in Teheran and demand the U.S. return the Shah to Iran for trial. The Embassy and 52 U.S. personnel are held for 444 days; this international embarrassment prompts new U.S. actions against Iran--including an abortive rescue attempt.

December 1979: Soviet troops invade Afghanistan--which the U.S. rulers considered a "buffer state" between the Soviet Union to the north and the strategically important states of Iran and Pakistan to the south--overthrowing the Amin government and installing a more pro-Soviet regime.

1980: U.S. begins organizing a "Rapid Deployment Force," increasing its naval presence and pre-positioning military equipment and supplies. It also steps up aid to reactionary client states such as Turkey, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. On September 12, Turkey's military seizes power and unleashes a brutal clampdown on revolutionaries and Kurds struggling for liberation in order to "stabilize" the country as a key U.S. ally.

Summer 1980: As the Carter administration tries to bully Iran into surrendering the U.S. hostages, supporters of presidential candidate Ronald Reagan cut a secret deal with the Islamic Republic: promising that the Reagan administration will allow Israel to ship arms to Iran if Iran continues to hold the hostages during the coming presidential campaign to cripple Carter's campaign for re-election. (Gary Sick)

September 22, 1980: Iraq invades Iran with tacit U.S. support, starting a bloody eight-year war. The U.S. supports both sides in the war providing arms to Iran and money, intelligence and political support to Iraq in order to prolong the war and weaken both sides, while trying to draw both countries into the U.S. orbit.

1981: U.S. holds military maneuvers off the coast of Libya to bully the Qaddafi government. When a Libyan plane fires a missile at U.S. planes penetrating Libyan airspace, two Libyan planes are shot down.

1981: The Reagan administration secretly encourages Israel and other allies, such as South Korea and Turkey, to ship hundreds of millions of U.S.-made arms to Iran despite a ban on the shipment of U.S.-made weapons.

From the fall of 1981 through the winter of 1982, forces led by the Union of Iranian Communists, Sarbederan, mount an historic resistance to the Islamic Republic; the uprising at Amol at the end of January 1982 is brutally crushed by the forces of the Islamic Republic.

1982: After receiving a "green light" from the U.S., Israel invades Lebanon to crush Palestinian and other anti-U.S. and anti-Israeli forces. Over 20,000 Lebanese and Palestinians are killed, and Israel seizes southern Lebanon, holding it until 2000.

September 14, 1982: Lebanon's pro-U.S. President-elect, Bashir al-Jumayyil, is assassinated. The following day, Israeli forces occupy West Beirut, and from 16 to 18 September, the Phalangist militia, with the support of Israel's military under now-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, move into the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps and barbarically massacre over 1,000 unarmed Palestinian men, women, and children.

1983: U.S. sends troops to Lebanon, supposedly as part of a multinational "peace-keeping" operation but in reality to protect U.S. interests, including Israel's occupation forces. U.S. troops are withdrawn after a suicide bomber destroys a U.S. Marine barracks.

1983: CIA helps murder Gen. Ahmed Dlimi, a prominent Moroccan Army commander who seeks to overthrow the pro-U.S. Moroccan monarchy.

Spring 1983: The U.S. provides the Islamic Republic of Iran with a list of Soviet agents.

1984: U.S. shoots down two Iranian jets over Persian Gulf.

1985-1986: The U.S. secretly ships weapons to Iran, including 1,000 TOW anti-tank missiles, Hawk missile parts, and Hawk radars. The weapons are exchanged for U.S. hostages in Lebanon, and in hopes of increased U.S. leverage in Iran. The secret plot collapses when it is publicly revealed on November 3, 1986, by the Lebanese magazine, Al-Shiraa. (The Chronology)

1985: U.S. attempts to assassinate Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, a Lebanese Shiite leader. 80 people are killed in the unsuccessful attempt. (Blum)

1986: When a bomb goes off in a Berlin nightclub and kills two Americans, the U.S. blames Libya's Qaddafi. U.S. bombers strike Libyan military facilities, residential areas of Tripoli and Benghazi, and Qaddafi's house, killing 101 people, including Qaddafi's adopted daughter.

1987: The U.S. Navy is dispatched to the Persian Gulf to prevent Iran from cutting off Iraq's oil shipments. During these patrols, a U.S. ship shoots down an Iranian civilian airliner, killing all 290 onboard.

1988: The Iraqi regime launches mass poison-gas attacks on Kurds, killing thousands and bulldozing many villages. The U.S. responds by increasing its support for the Iraqi regime.

July 1988: A cease-fire ends the Iran-Iraq war with neither side victorious. Over 1 million Iranians and Iraqis are killed during the 8-year war.

1989: The last Soviet troops leave Afghanistan. The war, fueled by U.S.-Soviet rivalry, has torn Afghanistan apart, killing more than one million Afghans and forcing one-third of the population to flee into refugee camps. More than 15,000 Soviet soldiers die in the war.

July 1990: April Glaspie, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, meets with Saddam Hussein, who threatens military action against Kuwait for overproducing its oil quota, slant drilling for oil in Iraqi territory, and encroaching on Iraqi territory--seriously harming war weakened Iraq. Glaspie replies, "We have no opinion on the Arab- Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait."

August 1990: Iraq invades Kuwait. The U.S. seizes the moment to assert its hegemony in the post-Soviet world and strengthen its grip on the Persian Gulf: the U.S. condemns Iraq, rejects a diplomatic settlement, imposes sanctions, and prepares for an all-out military assault on Iraq.

January 16, 1991: After a 6-month military buildup, the U.S.-led coalition launches "Operation Desert Storm." For the next 42 days, U.S. and allied planes pound Iraq, dropping 88,000 tons of bombs, systematically targeting and largely destroying its electrical and water systems. On February 22, 1991, the U.S. coalition begins its 100-hour ground war. Heavily armed U.S. units drive deep into southern Iraq. Overall, 100,000 to 200,000 Iraqis are killed during the war.

Spring 1991: Shi'ites in the south and Kurds in the north rise up against Hussein's regime in Iraq. The U.S., after encouraging these uprisings during the war, now fears turmoil and instability in the region and refuses to support the rebels. The U.S. denies the rebels access to captured Iraqi weapons and allows Iraqi helicopters to attack them.

1991: Iraq withdraws from Kuwait and agrees to a UN-brokered cease-fire, but the U.S. and Britain insist that devastating sanctions be maintained. The U.S. declares large parts of north and south Iraq "no-fly" zones for Iraqi aircraft.

1991-present: U.S. military deployments continue after the war, with 17,000 to 24,000 U.S. troops in the Persian Gulf region at any given time. (CSM)

1992: U.S. Marines land near Mogadishu, Somalia, supposedly to ensure humanitarian relief and "restore order." But the U.S. also plans to remove the dominant warlord, Mohammed Aidid, and install a more pro-U.S. regime. In June 1983, after numerous gun battles with Aidid forces, U.S. helicopters strafe Aidid supporters, killing scores. In October, when U.S. forces attempt to kidnap two Aidid lieutenants, a fierce gunbattle breaks out. Five U.S. helicopters are shot down, 18 U.S. soldiers killed and 73 wounded, while 500 to 1000 Somalians are killed and many more injured.

March 1992: U.S. Defense Department drafts new, post-Soviet "Defense Planning Guidance" paper stating, "In the Middle East and Southwest Asia, our overall objective is to remain the predominant outside power in the region and preserve U.S. and Western access to the region's oil."

1993: U.S. brokers a "peace" agreement between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization at Oslo, Norway. The agreement strengthens Israel and U.S. domination, while leaving Palestinians a small part of their historic homeland, broken up into isolated pieces surrounded by Israel. No provisions are made for the return of the four million Palestinian refugees living outside of Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza.

1993: U.S. launches missile attack on Iraq, claiming self-defense against an alleged assassination attempt on former president Bush two months earlier.

1995: The U.S. imposes oil and trade sanctions against Iran, reinforcing sanctions in effect since 1979, for alleged sponsorship of 'terrorism', seeking to acquire nuclear arms and hostility to the Middle East process. (BBC, CSM)

1995: With U.S. backing, Turkey launches a major military offensive, involving some 35,000 Turkish troops, against the Kurds in northern Iraq.

1998: Congress passes the "Iraq Liberation Act," giving nearly $100 million to groups attempting to overthrow the Hussein regime.

August 1998: Claiming retaliation for attacks on U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, President Clinton sends 75 cruise missiles pounding into rural Afghanistan --supposedly targeting Osama Bin Laden. The U.S. also destroys a factory producing half of Sudan's pharmaceutical supply, claiming the factory is involved in chemical warfare. The U.S. later acknowledges there is no evidence for the chemical warfare charge.

December 16-19, 1998: The U.S. and Britain launch "Operation Desert Fox," a bombing campaign supposedly aimed at destroying Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs. For most of the next year, U.S. and British planes strike Iraq every day with missiles. (BBC)

October 1999: The U.S. Department of Defense shifts command of its forces in Central Asia from the Pacific Command to the Central Command, underlining the heightened importance of the region, which includes vast oil reserves in and around the Caspian Sea.

January 2001: Tenth anniversary of the U.S. war on Iraq: sanctions are still in place and the UN estimates that 4,500 children are dying per month from disease and malnutrition as a result. The U.S. planes, which have flown over 280,000 sorties in Iraq over the past decade, continue to attack from the air. In the past two years, over 300 Iraqis have been killed in these bombings.

October 2001: U.S. begins bombing Afghanistan, as the first act of war in "Operation Enduring Freedom"--the U.S. "war against global terrorism."

SOURCES

Many different sources were used in compiling this chronology of U.S. aggression. Here are the main ones:

Numerous issues of the Revolutionary Worker newspaper including:

"Palestine: A History of Occupation and Resistance," November 10, 1991

"Fort Apache: The Middle East" a four-part series, January 6-27, 1984

"Israel: A State of Occupation," November 20, 2000

William Blum, Killing Hope--U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II (Common Courage Press 1995)

Berch Berberoglu, Turmoil in the Middle East--Imperialism, War, and Political Instability (State University of New York Press 1999)

Peter Mansfield, The Arabs (Pelican Books 1980)

Daniel Yergin, The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, and Power (Touchstone Books 1993)

Micah L. Sifry and Christopher Cerf, eds., The Gulf War Reader (Times Books 1991)

Michio Kaku & Daniel Axelrod, To Win a Nuclear War (South End Press 1987)

Joseph Gerson, ed., The Deadly Connection: Nuclear War & U.S. Intervention (American Friends Service Committee 1983)

Thomas Naff, ed., Gulf Security and the Iran-Iraq War (National Defense University Press and Middle East Research Institute 1985)

The National Security Archive, The Chronology (Warner Books 1987)

Gary Sick, October Surprise--America's Hostages in Iran and the Election of Ronald Reagan (Times Books 1991)

"50 Years of U.S. Policy in the Middle East," Christian Science Monitor, September 27, 2001

Zoltan Grossman, "A Century of U.S. Military Interventions: From Wounded Knee to Afghanistan," online at zmag.org

V. K. Sin, "Israel: Imperialism's Attack Dog in the Middle East," A World To Win, 1988/11

Noam Chomsky, The Fateful Triangle (South End Press 1983)

Nicholas Guyatt, The Absence of Peace--Understanding the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (Zed Books 1998)

Edward W. Said, Ibrahim Abu-Lughod, Janet L. Abu-Lughod, Muhammad Jallaj, Elia Zureik, "A Profile of the Palestinian People," in Edward Said & Christopher Hitchens, eds., Blaming the Victims--Spurious Scholarship and the Palestinian Question (Verso 1988)

Bob Woodward, VEIL: The Secret Wars of the CIA 1981-1987 (Simon & Schuster 1987)
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6308.htm

Carole
10-08-2011, 12:09 AM
I do as well. But he doesn't. And no he isn't on SS and like I said he knows that is a farce just as we do. Bill ORielly has completely brainwashed him on Terrorism. Its just one of the many reason I now can't stand the arrogant prick.

And oh BTW he says if he leaves anything to me he misfigured somewhere. Which I'm fine with. He earned the money he deserves to spend it. I ask of no man (never have once asked for money from my parents since I've been on my own, the last 4 years) especially not the gov't.

He believes O'Reilly?

Please ask him to start listening between the lines when watching O'Reilly. Tell him to notice how O'Reilly and so many others belittle Ron Paul and try to ignore and marginalize him. Ask your Dad why RP is the ONLY one who doesn't follow the crowd? Get him to think and pay closer attention to all the pundits and neocons on FOX. Ask him to watch and listen for the hypocrisy with O'Reilly and others. Ask him to watch how all the other politicians use their canned talking points like slick politicians, but RP speaks the truth and never wavers.

Good luck

rpwasright
10-08-2011, 06:16 AM
What you just described is my exact situation as well. My mom used to follow along with my dad regarding politics, but once I started talking to her about it, she got completely behind him.

My dad, too, agrees with him on most things other than foreign policy. The phrase "talking to a wall" you used, though, couldn't describe it better. Once I present logic that he's unable to even attempt to refute regarding Ron's foreign policy, his response is one of the following: ad hominem, says "I don't wanna hear it" and turns up the volume on the TV, or walks out of the room. "He doesn't have a chance" and "he's unelectable" are also popular mantras, regardless of how irrelevant they are to the discussion.

I seriously doubt I'll ever be able to change his mind. I've exhausted every angle of debate I can think of. Something tells me that even if I were to convince him deep down, he would never admit it. He's that stubborn.

Wow thats like looking into a mirror. Its amazing how much that sounds like my dad. I tell him things like (because he's a big Perry guy) you do know that Perry was on Al Gore's campaign or how he supported Hillarycare and that's verbatim what I get "I don't want to hear it". You don't want to hear the negatives about the man you want as President? How ridiculous.

Working Poor
10-08-2011, 06:17 AM
Funny I am having trouble converting my son to Ron Paul

rpwasright
10-08-2011, 06:21 AM
That actually might work if I could somehow plant the seed of mistrust in the great Fox News Network. The guy is so stubborn I don't think he'd admit it even if I did convince him. But Orielly/Fox News is the big obstacle in my way.

rpwasright
10-08-2011, 06:29 AM
Funny I am having trouble converting my son to Ron Paul

Really I find the younger generation (like all my cousins) to be easy to convert. They usually all realize its all coming crashing down and we get to pick up the pieces for the rest of our lives. You might want to turn him onto Peter Schiff's comments about Ford in the early 20th century. And how they were making $2500 a week compared to now around a 5th of that and how that's because of the Fed and losing all links to gold. Every new Generation for the past century has slowly became less and less wealthy.

BlueFloyd
10-08-2011, 06:33 AM
Fuck your father, tell him to pull his stupid head out of his ass...or is the federal reserve pimps have their dick too far up his ass?

He he

Fr0m_3ur0pe
10-08-2011, 06:50 AM
Show him all downsides of Romney. When he realises how bad choice Romney is, there is nothing but Paul left to him.

king_nothing_
10-08-2011, 06:52 AM
Wow thats like looking into a mirror. Its amazing how much that sounds like my dad. I tell him things like (because he's a big Perry guy) you do know that Perry was on Al Gore's campaign or how he supported Hillarycare and that's verbatim what I get "I don't want to hear it". You don't want to hear the negatives about the man you want as President? How ridiculous.
lol, wow. My dad likes Perry too, despite the fact that I repeatedly mention the same bad qualities about him as you just did (and others).

This is getting eerie.

TruckinMike
10-08-2011, 07:30 AM
Show him these. It is a good start.

Great Speeches Warned Us of Our Future

1961 speech Eisenhower Warns us of New World Order
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rd8wwMFmCeE&feature=related


Major General Smedley D. Butler
WAR IS A RACKET
http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm




President John F Kennedy Secret Society Speech version 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhZk8ronces



Excerpt from Robert Welch Speech
1958 - Great Speech by Robert Welch Founder of John Birch Society

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLhidgtu12o

Great speech from the early 70's from a 1958 document, proof that what is happening today with our governments crazy spending, high taxes, and huge deficits are no accident. Poll-iticians are not blundering idiots like we are lead to believe, they just act well.


Congressman McFadden on the Federal Reserve Corporation

http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/mcfadden.html


DavidDeGraw.org

The U.S. War Addiction: Funding Enemies to Maintain Trillion Dollar Racket
http://www.alternet.org/story/147217/the_u.s._war_addiction%3A_funding_enemies_to_maint ain_trillion_dollar_racket/?page=entire

The Crash, the Depression, and the Coup d’etat
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/41336.html

Full Report: The Economic Elite Vs. The People of the United States of America
http://www.ampedstatus.com/full-report-the-economic-elite-vs-the-people-of-the-united-states-of-america/


Smedley Butler on Interventionism
http://www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm
-- Excerpt from a speech delivered in 1933, by Major General Smedley Butler, USMC.
War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.
I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.
I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.
There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big Boss" Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism.
It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty- three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.
I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.
I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 (where have I heard that name before?). I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.
During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.

+rep -- no time for dilly-dallying around!!

The ONLY way* is to destroy their trust in government -- show them the truth. After all, that is exactly how many Paul supporters became Paul supporters. Remember Freedom to Fascism? That vid was making more rounds than a New Orleans whore at Mardi Gras.

These Bush-like supporters believe in their government. Show them that its not their government. These are the same folks that think the pledge of Allegiance was penned by our founding fathers, and think Pearl Harbor was a surprise attack. Its time to go full blown Alex Jones on them -- there is no time left for softball education tactics.:)


TMike

* ok, its not the only way

Paulatized
10-08-2011, 08:13 AM
Don’t know if this would help but this is how I defend my support of Ron Paul in the face of almost all critics, especially the “He can’t win” argument.

Ask him if he supports the form of government our founders gave us? (Constitutional Republic) and does he believe that it is the law of the land?

Does he believe the Constitution should be the guiding principle by which we are governed? And in that light that we are a nation based on the rule of law rather than the rule of man?

That our federal government should operate based on the guidelines set up by the Constitution?

If yes, then point out that Ron Paul is the ONLY person running that truly respects the Constitution and uses a strict Constitutional standard when determining his stance on governmental policy (domestic or foreign, economic or social) and will thereby protect the foundation upon which our nation was established and has a voting record to back it up. And that that is the reason why he has been consistent with his opinions for the last 30 years and why he takes the stands he takes. And that this is the reason he sometimes sounds out of line with establishment type Republicans because they test the wind to see what the popular opinion currently is to determine their talking points of the day because votes are more important to them that the rule of law, they are in it for power, influence and money. Ron Paul stands on principal and is in it to save our form of government which was instituted to protect our natural rights and give us the freedom to live our lives as we choose.

Does he want to live in a nation governed by the rule of law (Constitution) or the rule of man (Democracy)?

And because you love our country and respect the Constitution as the law of the land Ron Paul is the only one you can vote for President.

Maybe, if he has a shred of independent thinking in him, it will, in time, give him a cause to question his current engrained reasoning…

Tell him, just check it out, that's all you ask...