Results 1 to 29 of 29

Thread: Ron Paul to John McCain: 'Syria is none of our business!' (Video interview)

  1. #1

    Default Ron Paul to John McCain: 'Syria is none of our business!' (Video interview)

    "Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesn't want to hear.” -Ron Paul

    "Bathtub falls and police officers kill more Americans than terrorism, yet we've been asked to sacrifice our most sacred rights for fear of falling victim to it." -Edward Snowden



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Lone Coyote ClydeCoulter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Here, for a little while longer
    Posts
    9,903
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I love that man (Ron Paul), I want to give him a big hug.

    https://twitter.com/TheLoneCoyote/st...15978461487104
    "When a portion of wealth is transferred from the person who owns it—without his consent and without compensation, and whether by force or by fraud—to anyone who does not own it, then I say that property is violated; that an act of plunder is committed." - Bastiat : The Law

  4. #3

    Default

    Im glad Paul is on TV saying all of this, but one day I want someone to come on and say...

    " We all know this has nothing to do with humanitarian aid, strategic positioning, or stopping the next Hitler before he gets to powerful. This new war, like most all wars is about the consolidation of natural resources for well connected people in big government and big business. Now if we need to try and justify this fact away as a society that is fine but I will have no part of your 'hear no evil, see no evil' game.''
    Terminus tela viaticus!

  5. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carehn View Post
    Im glad Paul is on TV saying all of this, but one day I want someone to come on and say...

    " We all know this has nothing to do with humanitarian aid, strategic positioning, or stopping the next Hitler before he gets to powerful. This new war, like most all wars is about the consolidation of natural resources for well connected people in big government and big business. Now if we need to try and justify this fact away as a society that is fine but I will have no part of your 'hear no evil, see no evil' game.''
    I'm not an expert on Syria. Exactly what natural resources do they have that would be worth the trouble?
    Quote Originally Posted by Edward Snowden;
    So its, I would say; illustrative that the president would choose to say, "someone should face the music" when he knows the music is a show trial.

  6. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by specsaregood View Post
    I'm not an expert on Syria. Exactly what natural resources do they have that would be worth the trouble?
    Natural resources: petroleum, phosphates, chrome and manganese ores, textiles, cotton, asphalt, iron ore, rock salt, marble, gypsum.
    Terminus tela viaticus!

  7. #6

    Default

    May i ask what else would be WORTH the trouble???
    Terminus tela viaticus!

  8. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carehn View Post
    Natural resources: petroleum, phosphates, chrome and manganese ores, textiles, cotton, asphalt, iron ore, rock salt, marble, gypsum.
    And they have that in more abundance than many other places where they could take them without the hassle of a war?
    Quote Originally Posted by Edward Snowden;
    So its, I would say; illustrative that the president would choose to say, "someone should face the music" when he knows the music is a show trial.

  9. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carehn View Post
    May i ask what else would be WORTH the trouble???
    yes, you may.
    Quote Originally Posted by Edward Snowden;
    So its, I would say; illustrative that the president would choose to say, "someone should face the music" when he knows the music is a show trial.

  10. #9

    Default

    Ron says the warmongers want to get syria out of the picture so they can go after iran easier.

  11. #10

    Default

    intervention in syria, iraq, and iran is more about the idea behind "greater israel" than natural resouces. look at all the people pushing the agenda. perle, wolfowitz, etc.

  12. #11
    Member Pauls' Revere's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    California (Socialized Hell)
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alucard13mmfmj View Post
    Ron says the warmongers want to get syria out of the picture so they can go after iran easier.
    I would guess Syria has a strategic mideast locale
    - SUPPORT FREE TRADE, SMUGGLE -

    2 + 2 = 5.[/CENTER]

  13. #12
    Lone Coyote ClydeCoulter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Here, for a little while longer
    Posts
    9,903
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Yep, you are all right, it's called build a coallition, and the "lader climbers"/"politicians" do it too. Supprise, it's "get everybody" on board to the next "let's make a deal" for "your favorite gimme" sponsored by the "you know who" taxpayer and "poor loosers" who "pay for less" ("payless").
    Yes, "step right up" if you have no conscience and have a "dog in the fight" because have we "got a deal for you". Iran is supported by Syria who is supported by Russia. Now Russia is "down and out" and we planned it "just that way" to prepare these "specials especially for you". Come one and come few.
    "When a portion of wealth is transferred from the person who owns it—without his consent and without compensation, and whether by force or by fraud—to anyone who does not own it, then I say that property is violated; that an act of plunder is committed." - Bastiat : The Law

  14. #13

    Default

    How can we send our young men off to kill in the name of corporate interests? It's all about cornering the market on mid-eastern oil by inserting our influence throughout the region. If we aren't buying them off we are knocking them off. It's a disgrace.
    “The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened”.
    - Josef Stalin

  15. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by umichmed View Post
    intervention in syria, iraq, and iran is more about the idea behind "greater israel" than natural resouces. look at all the people pushing the agenda. perle, wolfowitz, etc.
    Exactly. It's all part of the neocon agenda, which itself is about using the US military to serve Israel first and foremost.

    For all the money the US is spending on these wars, we could probably just buy all the natural resources we could ever need.
    "Man lives freely only by his readiness to die." -- Mohandas K. Gandhi

    "Generally speaking, the way of the warrior is resolute acceptance of death." -- Miyamoto Musashi

  16. #15

    Default

    I actually think the neocons want military power because it is THEIR power center. They don't care much what the excuse for it is, Israel works as well as any other, so they are an ally to those who want military there for that reason, but I think they simply want power for power's sake.
    "Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesn't want to hear.” -Ron Paul

    "Bathtub falls and police officers kill more Americans than terrorism, yet we've been asked to sacrifice our most sacred rights for fear of falling victim to it." -Edward Snowden

  17. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sailingaway View Post
    I actually think the neocons want military power because it is THEIR power center. They don't care much what the excuse for it is, Israel works as well as any other, so they are an ally to those who want military there for that reason, but I think they simply want power for power's sake.
    Ya, they have to serve their masters (defense contractors). They have to diminish their stock pile of weapons on someone so that they can replenish the weapons with our "endless" fiat currency system.
    “The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened”.
    - Josef Stalin

  18. #17
    Member John F Kennedy III's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Merced, CA (FEMA Region IX)
    Posts
    11,168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carehn View Post
    May i ask what else would be WORTH the trouble???
    To the people doing it? One world government.
    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    There would be riots in the streets, if boobus gave one shit about his honor.
    UN Agenda 21 Explained

    The Single Most Important Documentary I've Ever Found

    Robert Downey Jr will learn you how to pimp. If you ever need to know.

    How the GOP stole the nomination

  19. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by specsaregood View Post
    I'm not an expert on Syria. Exactly what natural resources do they have that would be worth the trouble?
    Quote Originally Posted by Carehn View Post
    Natural resources: petroleum, phosphates, chrome and manganese ores, textiles, cotton, asphalt, iron ore, rock salt, marble, gypsum.
    As I've said before, there is absolutely no way by the amounts we spend, that invading anywhere, ever comes out as a net positive for us collectively, as a nation, or a market.

    We'd be better off buying the assorted needed crap the ground under Syria has somewhere else while they have their little war, at a resulting slightly higher price, than spending multiple billions or trillions, bombing and occupying them. They're going to sell that stuff to us and everyone esle when it's over, anyway. We'll just end up bomb out the place worse, they'll have to rebuild that much more, and the only people who're going to get rich are a few contractors that fund the whole ordeal and their political connections, and maybe a couple of their employees at the expense of the people in general.

    Quick look at wikipedia has it stating that Syria's total GDP is 64.7 billion. Tell me, that we wouldn't spend if not double or triple or 10 times that much, invading the place. There's no way a tenth of that number there a year is somehow making itself back to the U.S.
    How long is that net benefit back to us due to a war suppose to take, 50 years?

    Our wars are waged so that a very few can get very rich, because they convince very many that a very few electricity-cleanwater-challenged anger-prone Muslims somewhere we usually kicked dirt on first, are a threat to us comparable to the Soviet Union or a modernized mass industry supported army.

    I say that because it needs to be center when discussing natural resources as pertains to justifying war, if even an economic argument. It's not a valid point; we lose in spades.

    We will never in our own lifetimes, see a real net benefit of invading Iraq. We instead should of just bought the oil resources from Saddam, and lett Iraqis and their neighbors oust him themselves if they wanted to.
    Did some particular handful of oil companies and investors benefit? Yes. They get rich. Us no. We get debt.
    We still got to buy the oil from there, too.

  20. #19

    Default

    This is more of our injecting ourselves into the Sunni/Shia conflict. We do this to placate the (Sunni) Saudis, who in turn maintain the USD as OPEC's official trading currency, which is the linchpin for our maintaining world reserve currency status. Most of the oil in the ME is located under Shia populated lands, even in Saudi Arabia. The Shia have been treated as second class people in Sunni controlled countries so there is a great deal of resentment. This is a modern wrinkle added to the older cultural divide.

    Ron Paul's position is correct, as is his fiscal policy. If we stopped our spending beyond our means, we would have no need to get embroiled in these conflicts. We are, in effect, allying ourselves with the Sunnis against the Shia, which will only breed more enemies for us in the long run. This is another example of our fiscal policy being directly reflected in our foreign policy. Until we commit to balancing our budget, the status quo of our foreign policy will remain.

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

    Why is everyone picking on Syria?

    The question is a semi-serious one. After all, look at the list of the 18 Arab League countries that voted to suspend Damascus’s membership in their club and to impose sanctions on the country unless Syrian President Bashar al-Assad stops the violence against protesters and agrees to admit an Arab League monitoring group.

    The list includes such countries as Sudan, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, not exactly bastions of democracy themselves. Indeed, when pro-democracy protesters took to the streets of Bahrain earlier this year, Saudi Arabia couldn’t wait to send in troops to put down the uprising.

    Yet here are these Arab countries ostracizing Syria – one of the “original six” that founded the League in the first place in 1945 – and threatening sanctions unless Mr. al-Assad ceases the violent suppression of his country’s uprising.

    What’s the difference?

    Well, for one thing, all those who voted against Syria are states with Sunni Muslim leaderships, while Syria is ruled by members of the minority Alawi sect, a spinoff from Shiism. Lest anyone think the League members were concerned about Syria’s “minority” government, it’s worth noting that the rulers of Bahrain are a Sunni minority, lording it over a Shia majority.

    It’s also worth noting that one of the two states to support Syria in voting against the Arab League decision to suspend Damascus is Lebanon, whose government is effectively controlled by the Shia Hezbollah movement, and the only country to abstain from voting against Syria was Iraq, another country with a Shia majority and a Shia-dominated government.

    Anyway you look at it, the Sunni regimes are clearly lined up against the Shiites.

    Another feature that distinguishes Syria and irritates its Arab opponents is that the Alawi regime in Damascus has close links with Shia regime in Tehran. Non-Arab Iran is the state most in competition with Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey for supremacy in the region. Turkey, another Sunni-run state, has sided with the Arab League four-square against the non-Sunni regime in Syria.

    http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/wo...service=mobile

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

    An estimated 120 million Shiites live in pockets scattered across the globe. But the bulk of them reside in the Middle East. Shiites make up strong majorities in Iran (90 percent), Bahrain (75 percent), and Iraq (close to 60 percent); Lebanon, too, is primarily Shiite. Small but potentially powerful Shiite are found throughout the Gulf States, as well as in Pakistan (17 percent), Saudi Arabia (15 percent), and India (around 2 percent). Many of the Persian-Gulf-based Shiites, particularly those in eastern Saudi Arabia and southern Iraq, inhabit lands rich in oil, which has created tension between the Shiites and their Sunni neighbors. "There's a tremendous amount of resentment," says CFR Douglas Dillon Fellow Steven Cook, who says the Saudis consider their Shiite minorities "at best as heterodox, at worst apostates."

    http://www.cfr.org/religion-and-poli...mideast/p10903
    "The principle for which we contend is bound to reassert itself, though it may be at another time and in another form"..... Jefferson Davis

    "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle".
    .....Edmund Burke

    "A corrupt electoral process can only lead to corrupt Government."
    ......jay_dub

  21. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jay_dub View Post
    This is more of our injecting ourselves into the Sunni/Shia conflict. We do this to placate the (Sunni) Saudis, who in turn maintain the USD as OPEC's official trading currency, which is the linchpin for our maintaining world reserve currency status. Most of the oil in the ME is located under Shia populated lands, even in Saudi Arabia. The Shia have been treated as second class people in Sunni controlled countries so there is a great deal of resentment. This is a modern wrinkle added to the older cultural divide.

    Ron Paul's position is correct, as is his fiscal policy. If we stopped our spending beyond our means, we would have no need to get embroiled in these conflicts. We are, in effect, allying ourselves with the Sunnis against the Shia, which will only breed more enemies for us in the long run. This is another example of our fiscal policy being directly reflected in our foreign policy. Until we commit to balancing our budget, the status quo of our foreign policy will remain.

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

    Why is everyone picking on Syria?

    The question is a semi-serious one. After all, look at the list of the 18 Arab League countries that voted to suspend Damascus’s membership in their club and to impose sanctions on the country unless Syrian President Bashar al-Assad stops the violence against protesters and agrees to admit an Arab League monitoring group.

    The list includes such countries as Sudan, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, not exactly bastions of democracy themselves. Indeed, when pro-democracy protesters took to the streets of Bahrain earlier this year, Saudi Arabia couldn’t wait to send in troops to put down the uprising.

    Yet here are these Arab countries ostracizing Syria – one of the “original six” that founded the League in the first place in 1945 – and threatening sanctions unless Mr. al-Assad ceases the violent suppression of his country’s uprising.

    What’s the difference?

    Well, for one thing, all those who voted against Syria are states with Sunni Muslim leaderships, while Syria is ruled by members of the minority Alawi sect, a spinoff from Shiism. Lest anyone think the League members were concerned about Syria’s “minority” government, it’s worth noting that the rulers of Bahrain are a Sunni minority, lording it over a Shia majority.

    It’s also worth noting that one of the two states to support Syria in voting against the Arab League decision to suspend Damascus is Lebanon, whose government is effectively controlled by the Shia Hezbollah movement, and the only country to abstain from voting against Syria was Iraq, another country with a Shia majority and a Shia-dominated government.

    Anyway you look at it, the Sunni regimes are clearly lined up against the Shiites.

    Another feature that distinguishes Syria and irritates its Arab opponents is that the Alawi regime in Damascus has close links with Shia regime in Tehran. Non-Arab Iran is the state most in competition with Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey for supremacy in the region. Turkey, another Sunni-run state, has sided with the Arab League four-square against the non-Sunni regime in Syria.

    http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/wo...service=mobile

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

    An estimated 120 million Shiites live in pockets scattered across the globe. But the bulk of them reside in the Middle East. Shiites make up strong majorities in Iran (90 percent), Bahrain (75 percent), and Iraq (close to 60 percent); Lebanon, too, is primarily Shiite. Small but potentially powerful Shiite are found throughout the Gulf States, as well as in Pakistan (17 percent), Saudi Arabia (15 percent), and India (around 2 percent). Many of the Persian-Gulf-based Shiites, particularly those in eastern Saudi Arabia and southern Iraq, inhabit lands rich in oil, which has created tension between the Shiites and their Sunni neighbors. "There's a tremendous amount of resentment," says CFR Douglas Dillon Fellow Steven Cook, who says the Saudis consider their Shiite minorities "at best as heterodox, at worst apostates."

    http://www.cfr.org/religion-and-poli...mideast/p10903
    post of the day!

    This is well beyond sticking our noses in the affairs of other nations...this is taking sides in a HOLY WAR.
    If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.

  22. #21
    Lone Coyote ClydeCoulter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Here, for a little while longer
    Posts
    9,903
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liveandletlive View Post
    post of the day!

    This is well beyond sticking our noses in the affairs of other nations...this is taking sides in a HOLY WAR.
    This is inciting war for the benefit of a few, paid for by many, using differences and encouraging those differences, just like black/white or any other way to get people to go at each others throat.
    "When a portion of wealth is transferred from the person who owns it—without his consent and without compensation, and whether by force or by fraud—to anyone who does not own it, then I say that property is violated; that an act of plunder is committed." - Bastiat : The Law

  23. #22

    Default

    1:05
    You might actually find yourself more allied with this administration, who really has chosen -- though they have spoken of intervention -- not to actually do anything.
    B.S.


    C.I.A. Said to Aid in Steering Arms to Syrian Opposition
    By ERIC SCHMITT
    Published: June 21, 2012

    WASHINGTON — A small number of C.I.A. officers are operating secretly in southern Turkey, helping allies decide which Syrian opposition fighters across the border will receive arms to fight the Syrian government, according to American officials and Arab intelligence officers.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/21/wo...pagewanted=all

  24. #23

    Default

    What I would really, really love to see is Ron Paul whack a AGM (preferably a Maverick) straight across McCain’s swollen-fat head. Now, that would be the best!

    Quote Originally Posted by Winston Churchill
    The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.
    Sic Semper Tyrannis ~ Consilio et Animis

  25. #24

    Default

    From my perspective it looks like a game of chess for the US to control the world's economy and not let it slip to Russia and China.

  26. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TIMB0B View Post
    From my perspective it looks like a game of chess for the US to control the world's economy and not let it slip to Russia and China.
    Well, if there were true the U.S. Government would have never ceded any cooperation to the UN. Although, perhaps the USA is being used by the UN as a perpetual tool of international intimation to bring about such desired results?

    Quote Originally Posted by Winston Churchill
    The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.
    Sic Semper Tyrannis ~ Consilio et Animis

  27. #26
    Moderatorus Emeritus Cowlesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    North America
    Posts
    17,017

    Default

    They don't want to smack Syria for resources, they want to smack Syria because it is an ally of Iran's, so they consider it basically an Iranian forward operating base near Israel.

    If the U.S./NATO/Israel get a chance to attack Syria, they can neuter the air force and any big rockets/missiles, which, they believe would make Israel marginally safer and Iran a lot weaker. If, after removing Assad from power, a vicious Sunni group takes control and kills a bunch of minorities like the Christians, well, that's just collateral damage. They're just people afterall.
    "Your mother's dead, before long I'll be dead, and you...and your brother and your sister and all of her children, all of us dead, all of us..rotting in the ground. It's the family name that lives on. It's all that lives on. Not your personal glory, not your honor, but family." - Tywin Lannister


  28. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carehn View Post
    Natural resources: petroleum, phosphates, chrome and manganese ores, textiles, cotton, asphalt, iron ore, rock salt, marble, gypsum.
    Syria has an estimated 25 tones of gold reserves.

    hxxp://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/18/us-syria-gold-idUSBRE83H0RZ20120418

  29. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cowlesy View Post
    They don't want to smack Syria for resources, they want to smack Syria because it is an ally of Iran's, so they consider it basically an Iranian forward operating base near Israel.

    If the U.S./NATO/Israel get a chance to attack Syria, they can neuter the air force and any big rockets/missiles, which, they believe would make Israel marginally safer and Iran a lot weaker. If, after removing Assad from power, a vicious Sunni group takes control and kills a bunch of minorities like the Christians, well, that's just collateral damage. They're just people afterall.
    Israel is quite capable of defending itself. Besides, everyone KNOWS that to attack Israel would be much the same as attacking the US. IMO, Israel is a moral smokescreen we use to justify our meddling in the ME. That, and the so-called 'GWOT'.

    The Sunni/Shia rift is much bigger in the minds of the Mideast countries than Israel is and that is the conflict we are inserting ourselves into.
    "The principle for which we contend is bound to reassert itself, though it may be at another time and in another form"..... Jefferson Davis

    "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle".
    .....Edmund Burke

    "A corrupt electoral process can only lead to corrupt Government."
    ......jay_dub

  30. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liveandletlive View Post
    post of the day!

    This is well beyond sticking our noses in the affairs of other nations...this is taking sides in a HOLY WAR.
    Oh, that should turn out well.
    "Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesn't want to hear.” -Ron Paul

    "Bathtub falls and police officers kill more Americans than terrorism, yet we've been asked to sacrifice our most sacred rights for fear of falling victim to it." -Edward Snowden





« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •