Darius11 12 #1 April 28, 2006 This is a video of Congressman Ron Paul that is 44 min long but even if you listin to the first 6 min. The man is right on. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7456931596878368112&q=iran&pl=trueI'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IanHarrop 41 #2 April 28, 2006 Worth the time to listen to the whole thing "Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #3 April 28, 2006 I agree he points out so many good points. I am surprised so far your the only who has commented.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IanHarrop 41 #4 April 28, 2006 Quote I agree he points out so many good points. I am surprised so far your the only who has commented. Maybe the problem is that no one can argue with what he's saying. SC threads with lots of responses are usually ones lots of back and forth arguing... I mean discussion... "Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #5 April 28, 2006 Egad did I read that right..... he is a REpublican from Texas.....I bet he is really popular at the Republican lunches. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,439 #6 April 28, 2006 Ron Paul is an old-school Libertarian in a Republican suit. My die-hard Democratic father happily votes for him; when he was first running, he did a house-to-house campaign (might still for all I know). He spent a good half-hour talking to my dad about the state of things. Surprising the value of personal contact. I might disagree with some of his viewpoints, but they're well-thought-out, well-backed, and it's hard to argue with his consistency or caring. He's a good man. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #7 April 28, 2006 Hell after listening to him.. I think I have seen the first Republican I could vote for in a very long time.... I used to think I could vote for McCain.. but the more he snuggles up to the Religious Wrong wing of the Republican party..he becomes less and less of a viable candidate to me. At this point his moderation is going out the freakin window. Its good to see there might be SOMEONE in the Republican party that is not just your run of the mill ideaolog. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #8 April 28, 2006 QuoteEgad did I read that right..... he is a REpublican from Texas.....I bet he is really popular at the Republican lunches. I don’t really know anything about the guy but this speech and knowing he is a republican. I already have respect for him. It takes balls to stand up for the facts when all your friends are full of shit. That is leadership quality.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #9 April 28, 2006 QuoteRon Paul is an old-school Libertarian in a Republican suit I am really beginning to like the Libertarian party a lot.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penniless 0 #10 April 28, 2006 Quote I agree he points out so many good points. I am surprised so far your the only who has commented. You won't hear anything from the righties because they have too much hubris to admit they've pissed away nearly a $trillion and killed tens of thousands, all for nothing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #11 April 28, 2006 Did this get much air time or column inches over there? Is so, what was the general response? It would be nice to hear some of the warmongers counter this speach........... Nah fuck'em (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #12 April 29, 2006 QuoteYou won't hear anything from the righties because they have too much hubris to admit they've pissed away nearly a $trillion and killed tens of thousands, all for nothing. Or maybe they don't just want to walk into a trap where a bunch of you are waiting to yell at them and insult them? No real point in trying to talk about anything if you all already have preformed opinions and are just looking for targets for your anger. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #13 April 29, 2006 I'm just keeping my fingers crossed. The next President will in inaugarated on January 20, 2009. I'm just hoping we can make it through the next Two years and 9 months without the Neo-Cons starting any more wars.... Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jpjc2000 0 #14 April 29, 2006 Ron is to Re-pukes what Zell is to Dem-dummies! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
miked10270 0 #15 April 29, 2006 Quote...preformed opinions... But what did Y'All think of the speech itself? I found it well considered, with a good historical grasp and a ready understanding of human nature. Then again, Ron Paul has arrived at the same conclusions that I did. Obviously I'd feel that he's done his research, applied it well, and spoken honestly! Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #16 April 29, 2006 QuoteBut what did Y'All think of the speech itself? Honestly, I have dial up at home until my new house is done. So it will have to wait until Monday when I am at my office. Unless someone has a transcript link? I'll look at it Monday. But like most politics I am pretty sure it is a mix of bang on, and exaggeration to make the point of the speaker. My point was that a good number of folks are not stupid enough to come to a thread a try to defend something when you have posters that are well known for very strong attacks on Bush and anyone that supports him.....Or much more accurately attack anyone that does not agree with THEM. "Its good to see there might be SOMEONE in the Republican party that is not just your run of the mill ideaolog." And no one seems to care he same thing could be said about Dems, "Its good to see there might be SOMEONE in the *Democratic* party that is not just your run of the mill ideaolog." Same thing, but I am sure even me pointing that out will get me a few comparisons to the NAZI's Or if you supported the War based on a number of things...... "It would be nice to hear some of the warmongers counter this speach........... Nah fuck'em" "You won't hear anything from the righties because they have too much hubris to admit they've pissed away nearly a $trillion and killed tens of thousands, all for nothing." "I'm just hoping we can make it through the next Two years and 9 months without the Neo-Cons starting any more wars...." It seems that most already think you are stupid and are lying in wait to start a fight. I find it quite funny how some can attack one political party, and defend another when both are wrong and right at different times. Then some poster brings up some other political person and how they were jacked up...Clinton for his low morals, or maybe go way back and grab Nixon for watergate. My point is that most politics and politicians are fucked up....And I find it very funny how some blindly follow only one side...No matter what side that is, it is funny. But I'll look at the speech...And then come back here, read through the barrage of attacks on me for not agreeing with all these folks, post my opinion, then get attacked again since I might not agree 100% and lockstep to the music that that poster demands I hear. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #17 April 30, 2006 QuoteMy point is that most politics and politicians are fucked up....And I find it very funny how some blindly follow only one side...No matter what side that is, it is funny. Now you did it.....half now think you're a right wing warmonger. But at least the other half now think you're a tree hugging crybaby. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AdD 1 #18 April 30, 2006 Ron Paul is the man, BRING BACK M3!Life is ez On the dz Every jumper's dream 3 rigs and an airstream Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mailin 0 #19 April 30, 2006 Meet congress' only elected Libertarian... unfortunately he needs to hide as a republican to get elected JenArianna Frances Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites vortexring 0 #20 April 30, 2006 When the initial "war" fighting ended in Iraq the people cheered the Allied forces in the streets. But as we know, the insurgents ability to bring bombings and death to the occupying forces and innocent people quickly became the key issue. Their capability is massively supported by Iran. Why not? Iran finds itself under threat from Western forces not only in Iraq, but Afghanistan too - its literally surrounded. So perhaps tie up the Allies in Iraq - if all the trouble got sorted out in Iraq, guess who's next?? Why? Perhaps because the Government are hell bent on producing nuclear weapons? (No wonder, eh?), or because they've mentioned the intent to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth? Just to name a couple of points - I recognise the arguement that Iran have the right to defend themselves - but they dont have the right to destabilise an already unstable area. Perhaps you could counter argue thats what the U.S. are doing right now. But I wonder what the global situation would be like if Bush decided, "Ah Fcuk it! Lets call it a day and go home." Not just in the short term, i.e. Shia's and Sunni's and whoever else knocking the utter sh*t out each other, but the long term..........who/what else will fill the gap? Basically it boils down to this: Would you rather be the "Daddy" or the "Mummy?" If its the later go hug some tree's - and dont consume any petroleum based products... 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ColdDuck 0 #21 April 30, 2006 I just do not understand you people. You go on and on about this administration and its willingness to go to war. But, you never mention that Iran is enriching Uranium, defying the international community. Iran continues to support our enemies. Iran's president has stated on many occasions that Israel should be wiped off th map. There are allegations that many of the current IEDs being used in Iraq are being made in Iran. But hey, we are completely responsible. As for Mr. Paul's speech, which I can come up with many arguments against, you have to remember this in an ELECTION YEAR! "Insurance should called In case shit happens, if shit don't happen shouldn't I get my money back?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites likearock 2 #22 April 30, 2006 Quote Already the coordinating propaganda has galvanized the American people against Iran for the supposed threat it poses to us for the supposed threat with weapons of mass destruction that are no more present than those Saddam Hussein was alleged to have had. Well that's just blatantly false. Saddam Hussein never claimed to be pursuing even the peaceful development of nuclear energy at the time we invaded, let alone insisting on the national right to be able to enrich uranium. We don't have to guess about Iran like we did Iraq. They're telling us they want to enrich uranium. It's fairly simple to compare the WMD threats between Iran and Iraq by comparing an IAEA report on Iran with the ones issued about Iraq before the war started. Anyone who thinks Iran isn't dead set on acquiring a nuclear device has his head deeply in the sand. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites miked10270 0 #23 April 30, 2006 QuoteAnyone who thinks Iran isn't dead set on acquiring a nuclear device has his head deeply in the sand. And anyone who actually believes that this is automatically a danger to other countries... The Bush Administration is PHENOMENALLY inconsistent in it's selection of "Evil & Dangerous" countries. While denouncing Iran for developing nuclear power or weapons, it's giving nuclear assistance to Pakistan, another Muslim country & the believed hiding place of Osama Bin-Laden with a large sympathy to Al-Qaida in it's Religious "Schools". Further, Pakistan already has nuclear weapons and the means to deliver tham at intermediate range! As a cop I was always taught to "Chase the Money". Look for who gains in a crime, to see how people gain or lose, to find the perpetrator! SO... What happened to STOP Iran's recent "re-habilitation"? They were great guys at the time of the Iraq invasion. The only MAJOR policy shift in Iran since then has been their move to trade oil in Euros, and shift their reserve currency to a Euro account. ALSO... Why was it suddenly neccessary to invade Iraq when the US did? What suddenly changed after 13 years since their invasion of Kuwait? Iraq changed it's reserve currency account from Dollars to Euros, & wanted to trade it's oil in Euros less than 6 months before they were invaded! When was The Venezuelan President suddenly demonised? Wasn't it right after he took the OPEC Rotating Presidency and moved for oil to be traded in Euros and not exclusively the Dollar? One wonders what would happen to the recently re-habilitated Muammar Gaddaffi if HE were to decide to trade Libyan oil in Euros instead of Dollars? One also wonders what would happen if Norway & Britain moved to the Euro as their main currency, & also their reserve currency? Bear in mind that the only two countries in Europe who don't use the Euro are also Europe's only oil producing countries! Hmmm... So what would be the effect of a move from the US$ to the Euro? It's actually a lot more serious for America than minor stuff like Iran Nuking New York or Miami, etc... IT would be the equivalent of EVERY dollar in America suddenly being worth around 50 cents! Spending power throughout the US would be halved with 100% inflation! That inflationary cycle would take a lot of stopping and could easily trigger another depression or the 1929 scale! Now that IS a "Clear and Present Danger"! Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites likearock 2 #24 April 30, 2006 QuoteQuoteAnyone who thinks Iran isn't dead set on acquiring a nuclear device has his head deeply in the sand. And anyone who actually believes that this is automatically a danger to other countries... Where do you get "automatically"? At the very least, it seems reasonable it would be a danger to a country that Iran has publically said it would like to see extinguished, like Israel. And if the terrorists that Iran supports get their hands on nuclear material, all bets are off. If you feel comfortable letting a country go nuclear when it supports and finances suicide bombers, more power to you. My main point is that those people (like Paul) who pretend that Iran and Iraq are alike in terms of WMD are deliberately distorting the issue. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites miked10270 0 #25 April 30, 2006 QuoteMy main point is that those people (like Paul) who pretend that Iran and Iraq are alike in terms of WMD are deliberately distorting the issue. My main point is that iraq DID in fact have and deploy "Weapons of Mass Destruction" against the US! Iran is now threatening to deploy the very same weapons! But these "weapons" aren't Nuclear, Biological or Chemical. These dangers to the peace & stability of Teh USA are in fact little pieces of green printed paper! In deciding to trade oil in Euros on it's Oil Bourse, Iran is threatening to send a lot of America's "Promise(s) to Pay One Dollar" back home to roost. Can the US afford to keep all those promises? Can the US afford to keep even 1/10th of those promises? IT CAN'T! The US$ is presently grossly overvalued in terms of the amount of currency in circulation against actual worth. The only thing that's keeping the US$ at it's present value is the fact that so much is kept by other countries as "Reserve Currency", mainly (even solely) because it is the convertible currency for oil. Were other countries to move to another currency (say; The Euro), then the value (buying power) of the US$ would collapse to absorb the excess "flat Dollars" that the treasury has printed. IF that does happen, then obviously those countries who get in first - before the value of the US$ starts to slide - will get the best deal. It's a fact that successive countries have been labelled as "EVIL" for a wide variety of reasons when they try to use The Euro as their Reserve (or Convertible) Currency. It's the only thing that Iraq, Iran, North Korea & Venezuela have (had prior to invasion) in common! So... These American Aggressions are not about freedom & democracy. They're not even simply about "The Oil". They're about what currency oil is traded in. Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 1 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
rehmwa 2 #17 April 30, 2006 QuoteMy point is that most politics and politicians are fucked up....And I find it very funny how some blindly follow only one side...No matter what side that is, it is funny. Now you did it.....half now think you're a right wing warmonger. But at least the other half now think you're a tree hugging crybaby. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AdD 1 #18 April 30, 2006 Ron Paul is the man, BRING BACK M3!Life is ez On the dz Every jumper's dream 3 rigs and an airstream Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mailin 0 #19 April 30, 2006 Meet congress' only elected Libertarian... unfortunately he needs to hide as a republican to get elected JenArianna Frances Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vortexring 0 #20 April 30, 2006 When the initial "war" fighting ended in Iraq the people cheered the Allied forces in the streets. But as we know, the insurgents ability to bring bombings and death to the occupying forces and innocent people quickly became the key issue. Their capability is massively supported by Iran. Why not? Iran finds itself under threat from Western forces not only in Iraq, but Afghanistan too - its literally surrounded. So perhaps tie up the Allies in Iraq - if all the trouble got sorted out in Iraq, guess who's next?? Why? Perhaps because the Government are hell bent on producing nuclear weapons? (No wonder, eh?), or because they've mentioned the intent to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth? Just to name a couple of points - I recognise the arguement that Iran have the right to defend themselves - but they dont have the right to destabilise an already unstable area. Perhaps you could counter argue thats what the U.S. are doing right now. But I wonder what the global situation would be like if Bush decided, "Ah Fcuk it! Lets call it a day and go home." Not just in the short term, i.e. Shia's and Sunni's and whoever else knocking the utter sh*t out each other, but the long term..........who/what else will fill the gap? Basically it boils down to this: Would you rather be the "Daddy" or the "Mummy?" If its the later go hug some tree's - and dont consume any petroleum based products... 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ColdDuck 0 #21 April 30, 2006 I just do not understand you people. You go on and on about this administration and its willingness to go to war. But, you never mention that Iran is enriching Uranium, defying the international community. Iran continues to support our enemies. Iran's president has stated on many occasions that Israel should be wiped off th map. There are allegations that many of the current IEDs being used in Iraq are being made in Iran. But hey, we are completely responsible. As for Mr. Paul's speech, which I can come up with many arguments against, you have to remember this in an ELECTION YEAR! "Insurance should called In case shit happens, if shit don't happen shouldn't I get my money back?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 2 #22 April 30, 2006 Quote Already the coordinating propaganda has galvanized the American people against Iran for the supposed threat it poses to us for the supposed threat with weapons of mass destruction that are no more present than those Saddam Hussein was alleged to have had. Well that's just blatantly false. Saddam Hussein never claimed to be pursuing even the peaceful development of nuclear energy at the time we invaded, let alone insisting on the national right to be able to enrich uranium. We don't have to guess about Iran like we did Iraq. They're telling us they want to enrich uranium. It's fairly simple to compare the WMD threats between Iran and Iraq by comparing an IAEA report on Iran with the ones issued about Iraq before the war started. Anyone who thinks Iran isn't dead set on acquiring a nuclear device has his head deeply in the sand. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
miked10270 0 #23 April 30, 2006 QuoteAnyone who thinks Iran isn't dead set on acquiring a nuclear device has his head deeply in the sand. And anyone who actually believes that this is automatically a danger to other countries... The Bush Administration is PHENOMENALLY inconsistent in it's selection of "Evil & Dangerous" countries. While denouncing Iran for developing nuclear power or weapons, it's giving nuclear assistance to Pakistan, another Muslim country & the believed hiding place of Osama Bin-Laden with a large sympathy to Al-Qaida in it's Religious "Schools". Further, Pakistan already has nuclear weapons and the means to deliver tham at intermediate range! As a cop I was always taught to "Chase the Money". Look for who gains in a crime, to see how people gain or lose, to find the perpetrator! SO... What happened to STOP Iran's recent "re-habilitation"? They were great guys at the time of the Iraq invasion. The only MAJOR policy shift in Iran since then has been their move to trade oil in Euros, and shift their reserve currency to a Euro account. ALSO... Why was it suddenly neccessary to invade Iraq when the US did? What suddenly changed after 13 years since their invasion of Kuwait? Iraq changed it's reserve currency account from Dollars to Euros, & wanted to trade it's oil in Euros less than 6 months before they were invaded! When was The Venezuelan President suddenly demonised? Wasn't it right after he took the OPEC Rotating Presidency and moved for oil to be traded in Euros and not exclusively the Dollar? One wonders what would happen to the recently re-habilitated Muammar Gaddaffi if HE were to decide to trade Libyan oil in Euros instead of Dollars? One also wonders what would happen if Norway & Britain moved to the Euro as their main currency, & also their reserve currency? Bear in mind that the only two countries in Europe who don't use the Euro are also Europe's only oil producing countries! Hmmm... So what would be the effect of a move from the US$ to the Euro? It's actually a lot more serious for America than minor stuff like Iran Nuking New York or Miami, etc... IT would be the equivalent of EVERY dollar in America suddenly being worth around 50 cents! Spending power throughout the US would be halved with 100% inflation! That inflationary cycle would take a lot of stopping and could easily trigger another depression or the 1929 scale! Now that IS a "Clear and Present Danger"! Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 2 #24 April 30, 2006 QuoteQuoteAnyone who thinks Iran isn't dead set on acquiring a nuclear device has his head deeply in the sand. And anyone who actually believes that this is automatically a danger to other countries... Where do you get "automatically"? At the very least, it seems reasonable it would be a danger to a country that Iran has publically said it would like to see extinguished, like Israel. And if the terrorists that Iran supports get their hands on nuclear material, all bets are off. If you feel comfortable letting a country go nuclear when it supports and finances suicide bombers, more power to you. My main point is that those people (like Paul) who pretend that Iran and Iraq are alike in terms of WMD are deliberately distorting the issue. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
miked10270 0 #25 April 30, 2006 QuoteMy main point is that those people (like Paul) who pretend that Iran and Iraq are alike in terms of WMD are deliberately distorting the issue. My main point is that iraq DID in fact have and deploy "Weapons of Mass Destruction" against the US! Iran is now threatening to deploy the very same weapons! But these "weapons" aren't Nuclear, Biological or Chemical. These dangers to the peace & stability of Teh USA are in fact little pieces of green printed paper! In deciding to trade oil in Euros on it's Oil Bourse, Iran is threatening to send a lot of America's "Promise(s) to Pay One Dollar" back home to roost. Can the US afford to keep all those promises? Can the US afford to keep even 1/10th of those promises? IT CAN'T! The US$ is presently grossly overvalued in terms of the amount of currency in circulation against actual worth. The only thing that's keeping the US$ at it's present value is the fact that so much is kept by other countries as "Reserve Currency", mainly (even solely) because it is the convertible currency for oil. Were other countries to move to another currency (say; The Euro), then the value (buying power) of the US$ would collapse to absorb the excess "flat Dollars" that the treasury has printed. IF that does happen, then obviously those countries who get in first - before the value of the US$ starts to slide - will get the best deal. It's a fact that successive countries have been labelled as "EVIL" for a wide variety of reasons when they try to use The Euro as their Reserve (or Convertible) Currency. It's the only thing that Iraq, Iran, North Korea & Venezuela have (had prior to invasion) in common! So... These American Aggressions are not about freedom & democracy. They're not even simply about "The Oil". They're about what currency oil is traded in. Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites