PDA

View Full Version : Newt Gingrich on Ron Paul




jasonoliver
12-10-2007, 08:04 PM
I recently came across this:

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

Thomas Jefferson sent the Marines to Tripoli without a declaration of War from Congress. I wonder what Ron Paul thinks about this.

DrNoZone
12-10-2007, 08:04 PM
Thomas Jefferson sent the Marines to Tripoli without a declaration of War from Congress. I wonder what Ron Paul thinks about this.

The exact same thing he thinks about Bush doing it today, I'm sure.

0zzy
12-10-2007, 08:06 PM
I recently came across this:

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

Thomas Jefferson sent the Marines to Tripoli without a declaration of War from Congress. I wonder what Ron Paul thinks about this.

Paul has thought about it, it's called the Letters of Marque and Reprisal.

Ron Paul Fan
12-10-2007, 08:07 PM
The Barbary Pirates were not a nation! The authorization to use force in Afghanistan was not against the nation of Afghanistan! It was against Bin Laden and the Taliban! DECLARE WAR IF YOU WANT TO GO TO WAR! This is why Ron Paul introduced the Letters of Marque for Osama and the Taliban! We were not meant to be an empire! We were meant to be a republic protecting liberty here at home!

jasonoliver
12-10-2007, 08:10 PM
Paul has thought about it, it's called the Letters of Marque and Reprisal.

Was the 2002 War Authorization against Iraq considered a Letter of Marque?

tsetsefly
12-10-2007, 08:13 PM
The Barbary Pirates were not a nation! The authorization to use force in Afghanistan was not against the nation of Afghanistan! It was against Bin Laden and the Taliban! DECLARE WAR IF YOU WANT TO GO TO WAR! This is why Ron Paul introduced the Letters of Marque for Osama and the Taliban! We were not meant to be an empire! We were meant to be a republic protecting liberty here at home!


exactly, newt is an idiot... and he knows this btw, so it was not out of ignorance...

Ron Paul Fan
12-10-2007, 08:14 PM
Was the 2002 War Authorization against Iraq considered a Letter of Marque?

Absolutely not.

ItsTime
12-10-2007, 08:14 PM
pretty much what he said


The Barbary Pirates were not a nation! The authorization to use force in Afghanistan was not against the nation of Afghanistan! It was against Bin Laden and the Taliban! DECLARE WAR IF YOU WANT TO GO TO WAR! This is why Ron Paul introduced the Letters of Marque for Osama and the Taliban! We were not meant to be an empire! We were meant to be a republic protecting liberty here at home!

dircha
12-10-2007, 08:15 PM
Was the 2002 War Authorization against Iraq considered a Letter of Marque?

No. The AMF was an unconstitutional delegation of the Congress's war powers to the Executive branch.

Joey Wahoo
12-10-2007, 08:15 PM
The Barbary Pirates were not a nation! The authorization to use force in Afghanistan was not against the nation of Afghanistan! It was against Bin Laden and the Taliban! DECLARE WAR IF YOU WANT TO GO TO WAR! This is why Ron Paul introduced the Letters of Marque for Osama and the Taliban! We were not meant to be an empire! We were meant to be a republic protecting liberty here at home!

Exactly right. And within days of 9/11 RP introduced legislation for the issuance of letters of marque and reprisal against OBL and his pals. Had that legislation been passed they'd be DEAD right now, instead of putting out videos taunting our hapless leaders.

ItsTime
12-10-2007, 08:15 PM
you are one smart f-in kid.


Paul has thought about it, it's called the Letters of Marque and Reprisal.

jasonoliver
12-10-2007, 08:21 PM
Absolutely not.

I don't think the war was necessarily a "war on Iraq" though. Saddam was the target. 99% of the Iraqi military laid down their weapons.

I don't necessarily see how we could have declared "War on Iraq" in the same sense that we declared "War on Japan". The War against Japan was a true War against their nation and every Man, Woman, and Child would have fought to their death under the guide of Hirohito.

I think a Letter of Marque would have been more appropriate than a War Declaration or the AMF.

Paulitician
12-10-2007, 08:27 PM
The Congress didn't declare war because the US were up against what they consider nothing more than a "horde of pirates." They were essentially stateless, so to declare a war was an unnecessary formality to them. In some of these cases, they did use the Letters of Marque so that privateers could take down those pirates' ships. Ron Paul introduced the Letters of Marque in Reprisal in 2001 for privateers to go after Osama Bin Laden and those others who attacked us in 9/11. These privateers would act on the behalf of the government and be liable to the same laws and such as our federal military if I remember right. I mention this because I don't want you to get the wrong idea about "privateers", as Ron Paul has himself said he doesn't like the way Blackwater USA is currently allowed to operate and he doesn't support privatizing the military.

Now, Ron Paul is so "anal" about the subject of declaring war because it is the rule of law and it has to do with commitment and responsibility to him. I would go into this deeper but I am pressed for time. But also understand that we were attacked and our national security threatened by the pirates, whereas Iraq did not pose a threat to us, and is an actual state.

Benaiah
12-10-2007, 08:28 PM
Thomas Jefferson sent the Marines to Tripoli without a declaration of War from Congress. I wonder what Ron Paul thinks about this.

Paul follows the Constitution. So I'm sure that if Jefferson or any other Founder went against the Constitution, he would disagree with them.

jasonoliver
12-10-2007, 08:31 PM
Paul follows the Constitution. So I'm sure that if Jefferson or any other Founder went against the Constitution, he would disagree with them.

So that makes Ron Paul more of a Constitutionalist than Thomas Jefferson :D

chrismatthews
12-10-2007, 08:44 PM
the barbary pirates were also holding 15 or so marines hostage at the time.