Foreign Occupation Leads to More Terror Ron Paul

Godfather.

I rest my fucking case Toni, your question to me is exactly what I'm talking about you and the rest of the conspiracy theorest on the train only dig deep enough to find fault with America ...cause that's all you want to find.
and no don't ask me to dig deeper for you you're the ones that keep talking shit about America do your own fucking home work.

Godfather.

unsung

Ron Paul never said that we are to blame for being attacked. He stated what he did because if the shoe were on the other foot we'd do the same.

Once again I ask, if China were to invade us and build a base in all 50 states, how would you react? Godfather you completely ignored every question that I asked you.

polaris_x

unsung wrote:

Ron Paul never said that we are to blame for being attacked. He stated what he did because if the shoe were on the other foot we'd do the same.

Once again I ask, if China were to invade us and build a base in all 50 states, how would you react? Godfather you completely ignored every question that I asked you.

uhhh ... i think blame is the wrong word ... but he says that US occupation in the middle east led to the 9-11 attacks ...

Godfather.

unsung wrote:

Ron Paul never said that we are to blame for being attacked. He stated what he did because if the shoe were on the other foot we'd do the same.

Once again I ask, if China were to invade us and build a base in all 50 states, how would you react? Godfather you completely ignored every question that I asked you.

because your question is bated..but have you ever seen a movie called Red Dawn
Americans on the home front wouldn't let that happen and you know why ? WE HAVE GUN'S !!!
and the balls to use them if any country tried to invade us....all though I have a feeling most of the people on the train would lay down and die because the think they have it coming to them as Americans,talk about sheep :?

Godfather.

unsung

If his foreign policy is so bad then why does he receive more donations from military people than all other candidates combined?

brandon10

unsung wrote:

Ron Paul never said that we are to blame for being attacked. He stated what he did because if the shoe were on the other foot we'd do the same.

Once again I ask, if China were to invade us and build a base in all 50 states, how would you react? Godfather you completely ignored every question that I asked you.

I don't know why you even bother. It is clear from every post that he is unable to use logic or think critically when addressing this situation.

I watched the entire debate last night and watched the hour long after show. I found it astonishing that CNN didn't dare go near this debate (Ron Paul vs. Rick Santorum ). It is fucking pathetic.

Jason P

fuck wrote:

I would probably consider your point more if it were not already completely destroyed by Robert Pape in his book, Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism.

From wikipedia:
"Pape's Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism (2005) contradicts many widely held beliefs about suicide terrorism. Based on an analysis of every known case of suicide terrorism from 1980 to 2003 (315 attacks as part of 18 campaigns), he concludes that there is "little connection between suicide terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism, or any one of the world’s religions... . Rather, what nearly all suicide terrorist attacks have in common is a specific secular and strategic goal: to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from territory that the terrorists consider to be their homeland" (p. 4). "The taproot of suicide terrorism is nationalism," he argues; it is "an extreme strategy for national liberation" (pp. 79–80). Pape's work examines groups as diverse as the Al-Qaeda to the Sri Lankan Tamil Tigers. Pape also notably provides further evidence to a growing body of literature that finds that the majority of suicide terrorists do not come from impoverished or uneducated background, but rather have middle class origins and a significant level of education."

I wouldn't discount the author's work, but suicide attacks have become more prevalent since 2003. Was there a region examined in his study that saw daily attacks or were they isolated events?

Suicide attacks in Afghan alone thru 2008:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Afghanistan_suicide_bomb_attacks_incl_non-detonated_2002-2008_UNAMA_red.png

If Taliban tactics didn't change somewhere in 2005, then I would be interested to see what caused the influx.

It also appears that most of the attacks are not on U.S. troops, but civilians. How are you compelling modern democracies to withdraw military forces from territory when you blow up a hospital or mosque? Do the Pakistani people blame the U.S. when the Taliban shoot up a school bus with children on it as happened today? (http://news.yahoo.com/gunmen-attack-school-bus-pakistan-3-dead-090044650.html) Are the Sunni's and Shite's murdering each other to protest U.S. diplomacy?

Perhaps once the terror attacks were used for nationalism, but my opinion now links them to ideology.

Jason P

polaris_x wrote:

Jason P wrote:

That final statement applies to both ends of the looking-glass.

well ... yes and no ... what came first? ...

did americans become targets of terrorist acts before they started doing shady things overseas? ... i don't think so ...

I'll try not to start a chicken-and-the-egg argument, as no time machine exists to change the past.

I accept that American policy had an impact on the initial terror attacks, whether warranted or not. I also accept that terror attacks have gone well beyond a fight against foreign policy and are now being used be terror groups to kill all that oppose their ideology.

If a majority of suicide attacks were isolated to Iraq and Afghanistan, I may be inclined to think otherwise. Or if country that has seen a high spike in violence had a lot of it associated with suicide attacks, such as Mexico, it may cause me to think otherwise.

polaris_x

Jason P wrote:

I'll try not to start a chicken-and-the-egg argument, as no time machine exists to change the past.

I accept that American policy had an impact on the initial terror attacks, whether warranted or not. I also accept that terror attacks have gone well beyond a fight against foreign policy and are now being used be terror groups to kill all that oppose their ideology.

If a majority of suicide attacks were isolated to Iraq and Afghanistan, I may be inclined to think otherwise. Or if country that has seen a high spike in violence had a lot of it associated with suicide attacks, such as Mexico, it may cause me to think otherwise.

i would just like to say that i in no way feel any attack is warranted ... all i'm trying to get across is ... everyone is so hell bent on fighting terrorism but no one seems to care why it exists ...

there is no chicken-egg argument here really ... there is no 9-11 if US foreign policy wasn't based on ecomomic imperialism ...

keeponrockin

Godfather. wrote:

unsung wrote:

Ron Paul never said that we are to blame for being attacked. He stated what he did because if the shoe were on the other foot we'd do the same.

Once again I ask, if China were to invade us and build a base in all 50 states, how would you react? Godfather you completely ignored every question that I asked you.

because your question is bated..but have you ever seen a movie called Red Dawn
Americans on the home front wouldn't let that happen and you know why ? WE HAVE GUN'S !!!
and the balls to use them if any country tried to invade us....all though I have a feeling most of the people on the train would lay down and die because the think they have it coming to them as Americans,talk about sheep :?

Godfather.

How do you feel about the insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Godfather.

keeponrockin wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

unsung wrote:

Ron Paul never said that we are to blame for being attacked. He stated what he did because if the shoe were on the other foot we'd do the same.

Once again I ask, if China were to invade us and build a base in all 50 states, how would you react? Godfather you completely ignored every question that I asked you.

because your question is bated..but have you ever seen a movie called Red Dawn
Americans on the home front wouldn't let that happen and you know why ? WE HAVE GUN'S !!!
and the balls to use them if any country tried to invade us....all though I have a feeling most of the people on the train would lay down and die because the think they have it coming to them as Americans,talk about sheep :?

Godfather.

How do you feel about the insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan?

how do you feel about the sleeper cells in America and other parts of the world ?

Godfather.

unsung

Do you think there would be sleeper cells in the US if there were no troops anywhere but the US?

Godfather.

unsung wrote:

Do you think there would be sleeper cells in the US if there were no troops anywhere but the US?

all these countries you talk about ASK the US for help in some form or another...me personally I'd tell them to piss up a rope and let them continue to kill each other,do you think the US just had an idea to send troops to a country and start blasting for the hell of it ? this is what I mean when I say all you people do is dig enough to call faul on the US ..you not so much if any at I all for the most part but the rest of these screaming ...train people just keep finding something to blame on the US and on this week of 9/11 I have just read enough of the whinnie ass pusssy bullshit and called on it. and please don't try and bate me with questions like this because you know as well as I do that there are answers on both ends of the questions of why.

but anyway yes I do think there would be sleepers here troops over seas or not.


Godfather.

unsung

Godfather. wrote:

do you think the US just had an idea to send troops to a country and start blasting for the hell of it ?


Godfather.

Yeah. We did that in Iraq. We also did that in Libya. Neither attacked us.

Godfather.

unsung wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

do you think the US just had an idea to send troops to a country and start blasting for the hell of it ?


Godfather.

Yeah. We did that in Iraq. We also did that in Libya. Neither attacked us.

yea ....o.k..


Godfather.

polaris_x

maybe we should all read zinn's a people's history of the united states?

Godfather.

polaris_x wrote:

maybe we should all read zinn's a people's history of the united states?

I've read a zinn's book titled motorcycle repair ..or something like that but it was back in the late 80's I can't remember a thing.

Godfather.

brandon10

Godfather. wrote:

unsung wrote:

Do you think there would be sleeper cells in the US if there were no troops anywhere but the US?

all these countries you talk about ASK the US for help in some form or another...me personally I'd tell them to piss up a rope and let them continue to kill each other,do you think the US just had an idea to send troops to a country and start blasting for the hell of it ? this is what I mean when I say all you people do is dig enough to call faul on the US ..you not so much if any at I all for the most part but the rest of these screaming ...train people just keep finding something to blame on the US and on this week of 9/11 I have just read enough of the whinnie ass pusssy bullshit and called on it. and please don't try and bate me with questions like this because you know as well as I do that there are answers on both ends of the questions of why.

but anyway yes I do think there would be sleepers here troops over seas or not.


Godfather.

NONE of these countries ask for your fucking help. If you keep sticking your nose in someones ass...eventually they are going to fart. How's the smell?

gimmesometruth27

unsung wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

do you think the US just had an idea to send troops to a country and start blasting for the hell of it ?


Godfather.

Yeah. We did that in Iraq. We also did that in Libya. Neither attacked us.

don't forget the false gulf of tonken incident that made us escalate in vietnam..

VINNY GOOMBA

Godfather,

You need to make a separation between "America" (as in the good people of America) from the assholes that are in charge of the land mass that we call the United States. You are taking criticism of foreign interventionism by the military industrial complex as something personal. It isn't. It's not a dig on you and your family, your neighbors and friends, nor the people you don't even know. It is a very warranted criticism of people and corporations who revel at the very prospect at profitting off of war. War is a VERY profitable enterprise for lots of people - weapons are manufactured, armor, planes, tanks, food supplies, medical care, re-building the infrastructure of ENTIRE nations, oil pipelines, and competition for who gets to provide these types of services are MINIMALIZED, if competition exists at all. Imagine being able to have the opportunity to bid on guaranteed work with no viable competition bidding against you? That's what is called a "no-bid contract," and they are constantly abused. It's a cash cow, and it runs rampant overseas, away from the public eye during and after wars, and are a complete drain on the American citizenry. Because of all of this, do you not think it is not only possible, but likely that certain companies are more than anxious for our country to always maintain an overseas presence and always be at war? The best way to ramp up support for war is to falsely dress it up as patriotism. But just because it's wrapped in a flag, does that make it "American?" or patriotic? Not in my eyes. It's almost similar to how the KKK brandishes a cross for their symbol, but they are anything but truly "Christian."

Do some countries ask for our help? Sure. Do some of them have some serious issues with horrible dictators? Absolutely. But, as an American who is particularly proud of his country, you should understand that the United States has no business policing the world, and has no authority Constitutional or otherwise to do so.