Rush Limbaugh gives up on Afghanistan; sides with Ron Paul

[nedomedo]

WTF IS GOING ON?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhRMyG8RWTY

[KingNothing]

The Republican party found out that peace is popular, and unless they advocate it (in terms even the hawkiest of chickenhawks can swallow) they will lose in November.

So they're saying that the uncivilized barbarians in that far off land were driven into a tizzy over burnt pieces of paper, and if they don't want our noble bombs in their country they can go screw! We'll go straight home and leave them to their savage, backwards ways!

I'm cool with that. Let's end this war by any means possible, then work on stopping the next one. You know they'll be longing for another in no time.

[freejack]

Add Bill Bennett to the list also. Yesterday on his show he basically said straight up that he was wrong about Afghanistan and that we should no longer be there.

[Bruno]

Bandwagon jumpers. They can't deny much longer what Ron and others have been saying for years. We are bogged down there and it has cost us thousands of lives and trillions of dollars. We will be forced out by going bankrupt, or we can choose our own timetable and try to save face by saying we've accomplished what we wanted to there and it is time to come home.

Expect Shammity to be saying the same thing, soon, they all read from the same script.

Of course, I don't expect them to say they are siding with him, they will just use his arguments as their own as they have down many times already, "Ron Pauling" our stance on Afghanistan.

[rp08orbust]

Does he actually name Ron Paul and compliment him? I'm not going to listen to that tool for 5 minutes unless I'm getting a rongasm.

[thoughtomator]

funny on another thread there is someone despairing that we're not achieving anything

[jmdrake]

http://www.maxfreak.com/diablo3/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/HellFrozenOver.jpg

http://humor.beecy.net/misc/hellfrozeover/hell-froze-over.jpg

Of course I wonder if he, like Michael Savage, is giving up on one war (Afghanistan) so he can gear up for another war (Iran)?

[bronxboy10]

I'd rather them jump on the peace bandwagon than continue with the warmongering.

[pacu44]

WTF IS GOING ON?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhRMyG8RWTY


The onslaught is upon them, they are and will continue to position themselves for the self evident reality that Dr Pauls posistions on FP are the future (though I bet they feel it is wrong)

We are winning, they sense it... they are CYA's

[jmdrake]

Does he actually name Ron Paul and compliment him? I'm not going to listen to that tool for 5 minutes unless I'm getting a rongasm.

No. It's just a "Thinks are so botched up and Obama's screwed up that we ought to consider leaving now if we're going to apologize and possibly punish soldiers for burning the Koran". Rush didn't give up his chickenhawk card by that statement.

[AhuwaleKaNaneHuna]

Even a popular morning radio show in my area (that has ripped on Paul a lot-think he's a mitt guy) was taking that same line today, doing all they could, to get a guy from the Military to agree with them that afghanastan is a pointless waste and that we should leave.

Something is up.

Maybe they think it's a huge way to get the troops to settle down their passion for getting behind Paul.

[nedomedo]

Unless they need to bring the troops back from Afghanistan so that they could use them in Iran now.

[ryanmkeisling]

They are making way for an Iranian conflict and they know the public will not support all these wars, so they are ready to make concessions. Scumbags, all of them.

[bronxboy10]

Unless they need to bring the troops back from Afghanistan so that they could use them in Iran now.

Ah...this makes sense! If this is the true purpose, boy, then Rush is a SNAKE.

[CaptUSA]

We are winning the argument.

Listen, the argument on the economy has come Paul's way. The argument on the Fed has comes Paul's way. Now, the foreign policy argument is coming Paul's way (even if they don't quite understand the big picture of "WE TOLD YOU THIS WOULD HAPPEN!")

Once the argument begins to come our way on social issues and the drug war, you will know that Paul is President. (whether he wins this silly election or not!)

[EBounding]

Does he actually name Ron Paul and compliment him? I'm not going to listen to that tool for 5 minutes unless I'm getting a rongasm.

No, he doesn't name Ron, but listen at 2:16.

RON IS RIGHT

People like Rush think Paul would apologize. He wouldn't. He would just leave and not cede any sovereignty to global government organizations (NATO, UN).

[bobmurph]

This is a slippery slope for them. If they start advocating shades of non-interventionism more of their followers will wake up. I was attracted to Ron Paul by his fiscal policies. The foreign policy took some time to digest, but only because I had been so inundated by talk radio with the militant Islam rhetoric. Rush, Hannity, Bennett and the like better be careful...you can't have it both ways on foreign policy.

[AhuwaleKaNaneHuna]

Unless they need to bring the troops back from Afghanistan so that they could use them in Iran now.

I thought that at first. Isn't that too obvious though? lol Why not just say that or just redeploy them to Iran as needed. It's no secret they all want to bomb Iran and that our military is getting stretched to thin by this madness.

[AhuwaleKaNaneHuna]

This is a slippery slope for them. If they start advocating shades of non-interventionism more of their followers will wake up. I was attracted to Ron Paul by his fiscal policies. The foreign policy took some time to digest, but only because I had been so inundated by talk radio with the militant Islam rhetoric. Rush, Hannity, Bennett and the like better be careful...you can't have it both ways on foreign policy.

Eaxactly. It will make it much harder for them to do a 180 tomorow convincing everyone we do need to go occupy Iran.

I think they want to end" the Troops support Paul fever" ASAP by making it look like they are all going to get to come home if they support anyone else just the same.

[RDM]

It's been hashed about that Iran is twice the size of Afghanistan and their military is about 3x more powerful in manpower and weaponry. A war with Iran will cost nearly twice the amount to wage then what Afghanistan cost us. Plus there's the possibility of having Russia get involved. You are seeing the beginning stages of WW3 being laid out and its going to get ugly if it does. The war-mongers, in their delusional minds think its a winnable war, but it will not. Their pea-brains think pulling troops out of Afghan is the winnable strategy.

[TheGrinch]

Even a popular morning radio show in my area (that has ripped on Paul a lot-think he's a mitt guy) was taking that same line today, doing all they could, to get a guy from the Military to agree with them that afghanastan is a pointless waste and that we should leave.

Something is up.

Maybe they think it's a huge way to get the troops to settle down their passion for getting behind Paul.

Bingo... I was sitting here just trying to figure this out, because it didn't make much sense to me that they would actually think that even Paul's soft supporters are going to be swayed by this (in fact, I'd say the soft supporters are those less passionate about the wars; for those of us who are passionate it's obviously NOBP), but I forgot about the story where Obama's about to cut the military & vet's medical benefits, and also my most "pro-war" buddy just got back from Afganistan, where he doesn't see us accomplishing anything...

You could be correct that it's an appeal to settle the troops and their families down before they make up their mind (and probably also just gearing up for the general, when they can say they've been calling for it for "a while"). I do not think this is a strategy they plan to use much for the primaries however, as it doesn't make much much sense, and is very unlikely to sway most primary voters who either disagree with Dr. Paul on FP or are with him for other reasons (and again, we know Limbaugh isn't influencing the real anti-war crowd, i.e., us).

I guess the other possibility is gearing up for Iran. I certainly wouldn't put it past them to end one to start another (they'd pretty much have to, the way they're spread out now); But hoping that it's simpler than that, as naive as it may be....

[InTradePro]

http://www.mediaite.com/online/limbaugh-maybe-it%E2%80%99s-time-to-bring-our-troops-home-and-say-the-hell-with-afghanistan/

and duplicate thread (sort of) in general politics

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?363659-So-Rush-Limbaugh-hates-Ron-s-foreign-policy-but-doesn-t-realize-he-actually-supports-it

[AhuwaleKaNaneHuna]

It's been hashed about that Iran is twice the size of Afghanistan and their military is about 3x more powerful in manpower and weaponry. A war with Iran will cost nearly twice the amount to wage then what Afghanistan cost us. Plus there's the possibility of having Russia get involved. You are seeing the beginning stages of WW3 being laid out and its going to get ugly if it does. The war-mongers, in their delusional minds think its a winnable war, but it will not. Their pea-brains think pulling troops out of Afghan is the winnable strategy.

If this is the case, then the Paul campaign and we, need to use this to our advantage by informing people that the turn face on bringing the troops and resources out of Afghanastan is to better gear up for our waging WWIII on Iran, and indirectly Russia and China and whoever else has Irans back. This is nuts. Ready to vote for Paul yet? How do we make it backfire and get even more support for Paul?

On a side note, I really wish we had another peaceful planet to move too. ~sigh

[Athan]

WTF IS GOING ON?
Maybe they checked the Debt clock?

[Boss]

It doesn't sound much like they're agreeing with us.

It sounds more like Rush is feeling that US troops might have stayed a bit too long in Afghanistan, although under the Bush years good things were being accomplished, and now under Obama its all bad. It also sounds like Rush sees this as an isolated incident and that he doesn't hold a universal opinion that we shouldn't be nation building, rather that we only shouldn't be nation building in Afghanistan under Obama.

[Fredom101]

He praised Bush in that diatribe, and is wrong that Afghanistan was ever "stateless", suggesting that that's how Al Qaeda took over. That's a bunch of bullshit. I'm not sure what is going on but it seems like this is one of those "Bush was fighting the war properly and Obama is fucking it up" mantras.

[Tyler_Durden]

Added to the Ron Pauling (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?350505-quot-Ron-Pauling-quot-or-quot-Ron-Pauled-quot) Database :)

[AhuwaleKaNaneHuna]

Added to the Ron Pauling (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?350505-quot-Ron-Pauling-quot-or-quot-Ron-Pauled-quot) Database :)

lol Sweeet!

[phil4truth]

Does he actually name Ron Paul and compliment him? I'm not going to listen to that tool for 5 minutes unless I'm getting a rongasm.

Lol. Eloquently put.

[CaptUSA]

It doesn't sound much like they're agreeing with us.

It sounds more like Rush is feeling that US troops might have stayed a bit too long in Afghanistan, although under the Bush years good things were being accomplished, and now under Obama its all bad. It also sounds like Rush sees this as an isolated incident and that he doesn't hold a universal opinion that we shouldn't be nation building, rather that we only shouldn't be nation building in Afghanistan under Obama.Yeah, they don't get it completely, but it's a start.

The situation in Iraq was entirely predictable. Just like the housing bubble, the debt bubble, the financial crisis, the education bubble...

The good part is that his listeners should begin to discover a new distaste for continued action in Afghanistan. Whether it's for the right reasons or not, it plays into our wheelhouse. Ron Paul is out there screaming, "Let's end this mess!" and now some neocons are beginning to agree. It shows that maybe Paul isn't so crazy after all. And just maybe, they'll take a deeper look into why Paul keeps getting all of his predictions right.

[Antwan15]

Rush says somthing new everyday, tomorrow he'll be screaming about bombing syria.

[D.A.S.]

Jeez he's not siding with Ron Paul!! Rush is just advancing his agenda whatever that may be. Probably setting up a more important conflict for the US, such as Iran. This is nothing new. Hell hasn't frozen over yet.

[opinionatedfool]

He's going to endorse the grinch probably. Grinch just came out saying he was against it too. A neocon has to do what other neocons are doing to stay a neocon.

[Agorism]

lol @ funny title

[Oddone]

Troops in Afghanistan come home + Troops from Iraq come home = Now we have the people to attack Iran.. lol...

[alucard13mmfmj]

*edit for quote*


He's going to endorse the grinch probably. Grinch just came out saying he was against it too. A neocon has to do what other neocons are doing to stay a neocon.

They wont dare side with Ron and it seems convenient that Gingrich is starting to support this side. Heck, I am sure that we will start hearing how Gingrich is against the war since day one! Gingrich would probably get a surge later/soon, otherwise he should've dropped out by now.

[GrahamUK]

Of course I wonder if he, like Michael Savage, is giving up on one war (Afghanistan) so he can gear up for another war (Iran)?

Maybe they want increase their chances of actually WINNING one, law of averages says they'll win one eventually =)

[GeorgiaAvenger]

Only because Obama won't even try to win the war.

I am against the war at this point, but for goodness sakes either try to make progress or leave, don't just sit there.

[RickyJ]

Only because Obama won't even try to win the war.

I am against the war at this point, but for goodness sakes either try to make progress or leave, don't just sit there.

At this point? WTH? The war in Afghanistan has been a joke from the start. What do you call "winning?" Killing all the Afghans before we leave?

[alucard13mmfmj]

4 Trillion dollars. 10+ years. Thousands of veterans KIA. Tens of Thousands of veterans commit suicide or homeless. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of middle eastern civilians displaced, maimed or killed.

To kill 1 guy and his gang called Al Qaida =|... Besides the side adventure of going after the Taliban and forcing western ways on to the people.

I'd say it was pretty fail. Yes. Al Qaida needed to pay... but at what cost to us?!

[ryanmkeisling]

At this point? WTH? The war in Afghanistan has been a joke from the start. What do you call "winning?" Killing all the Afghans before we leave?


4 Trillion dollars. 10+ years. Thousands of veterans KIA. Tens of Thousands of veterans commit suicide or homeless. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of middle eastern civilians displaced, maimed or killed.

To kill 1 guy and his gang called Al Qaida =|... Besides the side adventure of going after the Taliban and forcing western ways on to the people.

I'd say it was pretty fail. Yes. Al Qaida needed to pay... but at what cost to us?!

This^^^ Imagine that there are millions that think it was worth it, even here at RPF, there are hawks who claim going after bin Laden made all of this justifiable.

[jmdrake]

Only because Obama won't even try to win the war.

I am against the war at this point, but for goodness sakes either try to make progress or leave, don't just sit there.

1) Do you think Bush tried to win? Cause he didn't.
2) Do you think the Soviet Union tried to win? Cause they didn't.

Seriously, at what point do people wake up and realize some wars are just unwinnable from the jump? It's not like the Soviets weren't ruthless enough.

[rprprs]

No. It's just a "Thinks are so botched up and Obama's screwed up that we ought to consider leaving now if we're going to apologize and possibly punish soldiers for burning the Koran". Rush didn't give up his chickenhawk card by that statement.I'm afraid I must agree. This was just another attempt at trashing Obama. Rush is no closer to embracing non-interventionist policies than he was a year ago, or a decade ago.

[Demigod]

Does he have a golden microphone?

[GeorgiaAvenger]

1) Do you think Bush tried to win? Cause he didn't.
2) Do you think the Soviet Union tried to win? Cause they didn't.

Seriously, at what point do people wake up and realize some wars are just unwinnable from the jump? It's not like the Soviets weren't ruthless enough.

No actually I don't.

[dancjm]

Only because Obama won't even try to win the war.

I am against the war at this point, but for goodness sakes either try to make progress or leave, don't just sit there.

Don't worry. As soon as terror has been defeated we will have won :)

[liveandletlive]

If anyone wants to watch a good documentary on the Afghan war, watch RESTREPO

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DjqR6OucBc

this is really one pointless war, our guys are like sitting ducks over there, i find it insulting that someone like Rush who didnt lift a finger in the fighting should have the nerve to be fed up. F Rush

[jmdrake]

No actually I don't.

So let me see if I understand. You don't believe the Soviets actually wanted to win? So what do you think they were doing? And what would "General Georgia Avenger" have done with his Spentznaz shock troops and Hind helicopters that the Soviets were unwilling to try?

[Brett85]

This^^^ Imagine that there are millions that think it was worth it, even here at RPF, there are hawks who claim going after bin Laden made all of this justifiable.

No. Some of us just think that we should have gone after Osama Bin Laden and the other terrorists who were responsible for the 9-11 attacks, rather than invading Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9-11, and occupying and nation building in Afghanistan. The war authorization that was passed after 9-11 never gave the government the power to occupy the country of Afghanistan and rebuild the entire nation. The war resolution simply contained the authority to kill those who were responsible for the 9-11 attacks. What we're doing now in Afghanistan was NEVER authorized by Congress.

[socal]

If we really leave Afghanistan, we'd be abandoning all the military bases there, which I presume would come in handy during an Iran attack. Just like RP has said we really haven't left Iraq, maybe they're talking about saying we leaving, but not leaving completely,

http://solari.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Stars-US-Base_LG_537x493_.jpg

[Feeding the Abscess]

Without the philosophical underpinning in the argument for leaving Afghanistan, it's weightless and able to be molded at a whim's notice.

[jkob]

I imagine we'll see a lot of people saying they've seen the light when it comes to Afghanistan when in reality they just want to move on to the next adventure in Iran and Syria.

[nobody's_hero]

The Republican party found out that peace is popular, and unless they advocate it (in terms even the hawkiest of chickenhawks can swallow) they will lose in November.

So they're saying that the uncivilized barbarians in that far off land were driven into a tizzy over burnt pieces of paper, and if they don't want our noble bombs in their country they can go screw! We'll go straight home and leave them to their savage, backwards ways!

I'm cool with that. Let's end this war by any means possible, then work on stopping the next one. You know they'll be longing for another in no time.

I've been making that exact argument to some of my neoconservative neighbors for quite some time. It's, demeaning to middle easterners, yes, but it gets the point across. The question I've found most-effective in winning over converts: "Why should we put our troops' lives on the lines for the freedoms of people who don't even want or appreciate it?" They usually pause and say, "well, you have a point there."

And yes, the goal is: Whatever it takes to get our troops home.

(edit: not that we're actually fighting for their freedoms, but I don't tell my neighbors that; it'd be too much for them to comprehend at the moment)

[Hyperion]

Well it's encouraging that he sees the point of getting out albeit not for the right reasons. Although it's great to see he's harping on how organizations like the UN and NATO compromise our national sovereignty and aren't in our best interests. It's beyond time to remove our membership from both organizations.

If we are to believe that war with Iran is inevitable(which sadly i do); I find it very hard to believe the US will withdraw from Afghanistan as it would be a needed base of operations for the conflict. My god looking at that map, we've got Iran totally surrounded from every side. How can anyone say we're not a large contributing factor to a potential conflict?

One of the prior posts makes a great point, one that would be highly effective with hawkish conservative types: Why risk the lives of our soldiers for people who don't appreciate freedom?

[nedomedo]

This all reminds me of what Alex Jones said last year. I am paraphrasing:

"the more they attack Ron Paul the more popular he gets, they don't understand that yet. If they were smart they would start agreeing with him, because then people would ask why is the establishment agreeing with RP now?...something is fishy...he sold out to the NWO"

lol

[nobody's_hero]

Well it's encouraging that he sees the point of getting out albeit not for the right reasons.

Yep. We can stop all the bloodshed and then argue for the principled reasons for staying out of foreign adventurism later. Surely, we need to present the principled arguments to have any long-term effect, but they may not be necessary in the short term. 'Whatever it takes'

[KingNothing]

I've been making that exact argument to some of my neoconservative neighbors for quite some time. It's, demeaning to middle easterners, yes, but it gets the point across. The question I've found most-effective in winning over converts: "Why should we put our troops' lives on the lines for the freedoms of people who don't even want or appreciate it?" They usually pause and say, "well, you have a point there."

And yes, the goal is: Whatever it takes to get our troops home.

(edit: not that we're actually fighting for their freedoms, but I don't tell my neighbors that; it'd be too much for them to comprehend at the moment)

I completely agree with this.

Stop the killing. Stop the suffering. Bring the tragedy to an end. If we can do that only by leaving intact the mostly unjustified superiority complexes of chickenhawks and neoconservatives, so be it. We can work to make them see the folly of their pro-war agenda before they start the next one. But for now, let's just stop wasting so many lives.

[WilliamC]

Unless they need to bring the troops back from Afghanistan so that they could use them in Iran now.

Iraq/Afghanistan exit strategy.

http://www.blackfive.net/photos/uncategorized/iraqexitstrategy.jpg

[Captain Shays]

Does he actually name Ron Paul and compliment him? I'm not going to listen to that tool for 5 minutes unless I'm getting a rongasm.

A Rongasm? HEHEHEHEHE LOLOL

[SonofThunder]

LOL "A stateless society is just perfect for Al Quaeda to come in"

[ONUV]

how many soldiers have been killed because of the koran burning incident?

[roderik]

The story makes no sense at all by the way.

1. They didn't know they were burning the Koran (because they weren't printed in english)
2. They did know these books contained incendiary messages

That's called paradox. It's bloody paradox and a friggen lie.
Sorry, but a 5 year old kid makes up better lies than that.

[Tudo]

Someone there said that ( his words) Rush is moving in Ron Paul's direction.
My response is:
limbaugh doesn't have the integrity to "move in Dr Paul's direction". This isn't rocket science. Ever wonder why the vast majority of people who find fee dot org or lewrockwell dot com look at the founders and libertarianism and never go back? Because it's so simple and it's so right. Limbaugh knows this yet works to cheat us all out of seeing Dr Paul in an honest light and as such limbaugh and his ilk work to cheat us all out of our lives and freedom. He's a traitor.

[Tudo]

The story makes no sense at all by the way.

1. They didn't know they were burning the Koran (because they weren't printed in english)
2. They did know these books contained incendiary messages

That's called paradox. It's bloody paradox and a friggen lie.
Sorry, but a 5 year old kid makes up better lies than that.

Bingo. I caught that too as did my Wife who was listening.

[Revolution9]

Only because Obama won't even try to win the war.

I am against the war at this point, but for goodness sakes either try to make progress or leave, don't just sit there.

There is no such thing as progress in this case unless that means stacking bodies like cordwood. Afghanistan always wins. They are like a street scrapper of 110 pounds that just never gives up and takes down the 350 pound muscle guy who can never catch his breath and eventually drops because of it. Alexander the Great conquered North America even, it seems from recent archaeological finds, but he couldn't take the Afghanis.

Rev9

[JJ2]

The story makes no sense at all by the way.

1. They didn't know they were burning the Koran (because they weren't printed in english)
2. They did know these books contained incendiary messages

That's called paradox. It's bloody paradox and a friggen lie.
Sorry, but a 5 year old kid makes up better lies than that.

Actually, if you listen carefully to the clip in the OP, he says that the people who discovered the messages were different people than the ones who burned the books (who couldn't read them).

[HigherVision]

Someone there said that ( his words) Rush is moving in Ron Paul's direction.
My response is:
limbaugh doesn't have the integrity to "move in Dr Paul's direction". This isn't rocket science. Ever wonder why the vast majority of people who find fee dot org or lewrockwell dot com look at the founders and libertarianism and never go back? Because it's so simple and it's so right. Limbaugh knows this yet works to cheat us all out of seeing Dr Paul in an honest light and as such limbaugh and his ilk work to cheat us all out of our lives and freedom. He's a traitor.

I really think we're going to beat them eventually and that Austrian economics based libertarianism will become the most popular political movement. We're just gonna continue to grow, it really is an intellectual battle more so than anything. If libertarianism was a stock I would buy it.