Germany? Italy? France? Japan? So your argument is that suicide bombers are afraid of Russian cops and the Chinese government. Excellent. You still didn't respond to my last two questions. Which two countries are the biggest targets of Islamic violence? And are they allies?
Answers: 1) Do you think an whole country is going to be dictated to by an islamist? 2) Do you think SA are going to be dictated to by an islamist? 3) Do you think the USA rules islam which is the most oppressive regime in the ME
Just like most liberals don't know that Hillary is a centrist. That they don't know that she is pro-war. That she has a questionable and unprincipled Senate voting record.
I don't believe he really knows. He was too young to remember Beslan, or the embassy bombings. I often wonder what tricks the mind into believing that if you leave a bully alone, he will leave you alone. This is what would be frightening about Ron Paul, if he were a second tier candidate that had a chance. The notion that inaction is the best course of action always, and laying down to die is best approach is alarmingly naive. It's almost as if "they" miss being targeted, or believe that "we" deserve it because "we've" been naughty for fighting back. It's really sad.
He's now even (maybe even surpassed) McCain when it comes to funding. A NH primary win or strong finish might supercharge his campaing funding even more.
Its interesting the level of grassroots support Ron Paul is getting. He has raised over 5 million this quarter and his campaign is only picking up steam. It is unfortunate that the mainstream media completely ignores him.
I don't think the MSM is ignoring him any longer. ABC World News fly a crew out to NH on short notice to interview him. CNN's Wolf Blitzer just had him on in the last day or so, as well as Fox News. His internet campaign specialist (a brilliant young lady) was the focus of a piece in Time magazine. We'll have to see what happens from here on out, once Paul goes from being the underdog to a heavily criticized candidate, his supporters will have to adjust their tolerance level from worrying about coverage, to worrying about too much negative coverage.
When your business is murdering people of all races and religions from around the world, you need to have your business messed with. It's all about control. The Muslims won't be happy until they control the world and they'll murder anyone and their family who gets in the way. If the Muslims really were just against America Ron Paul wouldn't be a fool.
On the contrary, America is not the world's policeman. We're a sovereign nation, not a global taskforce. The Muslims, or some Muslims? This reads a lot like fear mongering. How is the broadband internet at the White House? Were the Muslims against the British when they had an imperial presence in the Middle East? Against the French? Where are the Al Quaida attacks in Japan, India, Mexico, Canada and Italy? There are three kinds of people holding us back with this war. People who hate Muslims. People who endorse Woodrow Wilson's foreign policy. People who live in fear, and have forgotten the words of FDR. "The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself." Amazing how these words ring so true today. The war, the Patriot Act etc, are all sold on the notion that we should be afraid, and big government will protect us. We should give up our privacy, but they should be allowed complete secrecy. In the words of another American Patriot and folk hero, "When we sacrifice liberty for security, we lose both."
When we sacrifice security with nothing, we lose everything. America has always been there for other countries. Apparently ron paul and his supporters have no grasp of the concept of allies and would rather America curl up into a ball and say "please don't hit me."
Yeah, that's another way of saying what I said. Oh really? When did we enter WWII? Wasn't it well after France and Britain were attacked? There was no public support for the war until Pearl Harbor, which happened a year later, and even then we only declared war on Japan, not on Germany. We didn't declare war on Germany until they declared war on us.
Not even close to what you said. It does, from my observation, represent what you believe though. You believe WWII was the only time in history where America may, or may not have, assisted allies? I hope Kuwait doesn't hear about this.
Ah yes, Kuwait. Easily one of our most important military, cultural and economic allies. Not small fish like Britain or France.
Speaking of Kuwait, was always my understanding Iraq a so called ally of ours 'at least at one time' asked and was granted what some might view as permission to invade Kuwait before they did.
Ah shoot, Kuwait don't count. We didn't declare war, we went in under UN Resolutions again. You'll have to find me another one. Iraq is a member of the UN and if we're supporting Kuwait via the UN, then we would also be attacking our allies. Isn't it ironic that our biggest and oldest enemy of the last century was the USSR and we never went to or declared war upon the Soviets? And we won. There might be something to this Ron Paul guy after all. Ronald Reagan sure thought so. "Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a strong national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country." - President Reagan
Looks like that Reagan quote/myth is just getting started. http://www.google.com/search?source...+strong+national+defense."&btnG=Google+Search