Rand Paul on war with Iran and foreign aid.

YoungGun92

New member
I've tried to stay out of here, but every now and again I'd like you guys to see something different than the typical "Obama sucks, here's what he's doing now" posts that are oh so common here.

Worth a watch.



And yeah yah old farts, I'm gonna vote for Mittens come November.
tongue_smilie.gif
 
His comparison of Iran with North Korea is, in my opinion, very naive. North Korea isn't run by a bunch of religious fanatics who have sworn to destroy another country.

Handing a nuclear weapon to a group that would put it in a shipping container and sail it into New York Harbor would do nothing to advance the cause of North Korea. But putting a nuclear weapon in a shipping container and sailing it into New York Harbor WOULD advance the cause of the religious fanatics running Iran.

Assuming that containment would work with Iran because it has worked with North Korea shows a fundamental misunderstanding of why Iran is dangerous.
 
Originally Posted By: IversAssuming that containment would work with Iran because it has worked with North Korea shows a fundamental misunderstanding of why Iran is dangerous.



Important point there and the basis of misunderstanding for so many that still don't get it. One of the main flaws with an isolationist point of view is the assumption that if we stay out of others' business, they will do likewise to us. The muslim world is not satisfied with that and will never leave a Country like ours alone; not for minding our own business, sending aid or being "tolerant".
 
Good post younggun. I too am getting tired of paying for a never ending religious war. I say, if religious fanatics want to go at it, let them do it on their own dime. The rest of the sane world is getting tired of the games..
 
Originally Posted By: swampwalkerGood post younggun. I too am getting tired of paying for a never ending religious war. I say, if religious fanatics want to go at it, let them do it on their own dime. The rest of the sane world is getting tired of the games..



On their own dime? Like they did on 9/11?
 
9/11 happened because of our interventionist policies, not because "we mind our own business" Trying to shape the middle east into what we perceive as being right will NEVER work. Didn't work in the last crusade, won't work in this one.
 
Swampwalker, according to Bin Laden, he attacked us on 9/11 because we had troops in Saudi Arabia. Those troops were in Saudi Arabia at the request of the Saudi government to prevent Saddam Hussein from invading the Saudi oil fields.

If you think that a better policy would have been to allow Iraq to invade the Saudi oil fields, then I'm glad you aren't in charge.

I don't know how old you are, but your knowledge of the timeline seems to be a little lacking.

Iraq invaded Kuwait. In '91, we (along with a lot of other countries including the other Arabs) threw them out.

Saudi Arabia asked us to keep troops in Saudi Arabia after the 91 war so that Iraq wouldn't pose a threat to their oil fields. So we did, through both the Bush 41 and the Clinton administrations.

Bin Laden didn't like those troops on what he considered holy Muslim ground, so he attacked us on 9/11.

Then we attacked the Taliban and Al Queda in Afghanistan. 2 years later we attacked Iraq.

Afghanistan and Iraq happened AFTER 9/11.

The attack on us on 9/11 by Bin Laden was a response to our troops protecting the Saudi oil fields at the request of the Saudi government, not "interventionist" policies.
 
Last edited:
We have enough oil, coal and natural gas to conservatively last the next five hundred years. We shouldn't have been dealing with the Saudis in the first place. That's my whole point.

Why spend trillions of dollars and thousands of lives on "Iraqi Freedom" when a poll taken showed that 85% of Iraqi's were celebrating on 9-11..Explain that logic.

I think I have the timeline down, having lived at ground zero for a month and also being a liberator of the ever so grateful Iraqis.
 
Last edited:
Swampwalker, but 9/11 wasn't about the war in Iraq.

You claimed that 9/11 was due to our "interventionist policies".

So, are you saying that providing security for the Saudi oil fields was interventionism?

We've been supplying security to foreign countries for our own self-interest since WW2. 130,000 troops stationed in West Germany. 35,000 troops in South Korea. Tens of thousands of marines in Japan. 2 big naval bases in Japan. SeaLift Command ships at British owned Diego Garcia. Navy base in Holy Loche Scotland. Navy base in Rota Spain. Navy base in Naples Italy. Navy base in the Philippines. Clark Air Force Base in the Philippines. The list goes on and on.

We haven't had all those soldiers, marines, airmen, and sailors at those bases for the benefit of those other countries. We have had them there for our own self interest.
 
Originally Posted By: swampwalker...Didn't work in the last crusade, won't work in this one.


Tell me about the crusades......
 
Originally Posted By: C.JayOriginally Posted By: swampwalker...Didn't work in the last crusade, won't work in this one.


Tell me about the crusades......



His reference to the crusades kinda threw me. The crusades were a series of expeditions to reopen a route to Jerusalem for Christian pilgrims. They massacred their enemies wherever they went.

I'm trying to figure out how using our military strength to help an indigenous population set up democratic governments is another "crusade".

Although I disagree with the extent of "national building" we've been doing over there, to compare Iraq and Afghanistan to the Crusades is ridiculous.

Sounds more like Al Queda indoctrination to me.
 
Last edited:
Quote:if religious fanatics want to go at it, let them do it on their own dime....The problem with the Muslim Religious Fanatics is that they won't keep their conflicts within their own country's borders...

Their whole concept is that unless another individual practices religion to their specifications, they want to destroy that individual...And they use terrorist tactics to bring about compliance... I've seen it first hand in Egypt and read about it happening in other parts of the world...

They perceive the "West" as being populated by Infidels (worse than dogs) and they won't be satisfied with our presence being withdrawn from the Middle East...They desire to bring their attacks to us...
 
Originally Posted By: IversOriginally Posted By: C.JayOriginally Posted By: swampwalker...Didn't work in the last crusade, won't work in this one.


Tell me about the crusades......



The crusades were a series of expeditions to reopen a route to Jerusalem for Christian pilgrims. They massacred their enemies wherever they went.

No.
 
So we go to war with Iran, keep fighting in Afghanistan, and have the State Department and contractors keep killing folks in Iraq for a few more years.

That'll end terrorism right?
 
Originally Posted By: YoungGun92So we go to war with Iran, keep fighting in Afghanistan, and have the State Department and contractors keep killing folks in Iraq for a few more years.

That'll end terrorism right?

I didn't say that. In fact, I said just the opposite. If you read what I said you'll notice I disagree with the "nation building" to the extent we have taken it.

Swampwalker wants to blame 9/11 on our "interventionist policies", and I was pointing out that Iraq and Afghanistan happened AFTER 9/11 and had nothing to do with the attack. Bin Laden claimed the attack was due to our troops being stationed in Saudi Arabia to protect the Saudi oil fields. I don't consider stationing troops in foreign countries to protect our interests "interventionism". They weren't there to change the government, promote western standards of democracy or morals, or anything else except to prevent Saddam from sending his troops across the border to take over the Saudi oil.

But, hey, you fellas that think Iran won't be a danger to us if they get nuclear weapons, despite the fact that they have armed terrorist groups with every portable weapon they've ever acquired, have every right to your opinion.
 
Originally Posted By: IversOriginally Posted By: YoungGun92So we go to war with Iran, keep fighting in Afghanistan, and have the State Department and contractors keep killing folks in Iraq for a few more years.

That'll end terrorism right?

I didn't say that. In fact, I said just the opposite. If you read what I said you'll notice I disagree with the "nation building" to the extent we have taken it.

Swampwalker wants to blame 9/11 on our "interventionist policies", and I was pointing out that Iraq and Afghanistan happened AFTER 9/11 and had nothing to do with the attack. Bin Laden claimed the attack was due to our troops being stationed in Saudi Arabia to protect the Saudi oil fields. I don't consider stationing troops in foreign countries to protect our interests "interventionism". They weren't there to change the government, promote western standards of democracy or morals, or anything else except to prevent Saddam from sending his troops across the border to take over the Saudi oil.

But, hey, you fellas that think Iran won't be a danger to us if they get nuclear weapons, despite the fact that they have armed terrorist groups with every portable weapon they've ever acquired, have every right to your opinion.


I think you need to take a serious look at past US interventionism. Our current actions have hardly been our only ones.

The people of the Middle East have plenty of reasons to hate us other than our nice cars, clothes, and Jesus.

LINK

Here's some fun stuff we've done in the Middle East lately, courtesy of the above link. All of it is cited and appears correct.

1983: CIA helps murder Gen. Ahmed Dlimi, a prominent Moroccan Army commander who seeks to overthrow the pro-U.S. Moroccan monarchy.

Spring 1983: The U.S. provides the Islamic Republic of Iran with a list of Soviet agents.

1984: U.S. shoots down two Iranian jets over Persian Gulf.

1985-1986: The U.S. secretly ships weapons to Iran, including 1,000 TOW anti-tank missiles, Hawk missile parts, and Hawk radars. The weapons are exchanged for U.S. hostages in Lebanon, and in hopes of increased U.S. leverage in Iran. The secret plot collapses when it is publicly revealed on November 3, 1986, by the Lebanese magazine, Al-Shiraa. (The Chronology)

1985: U.S. attempts to assassinate Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, a Lebanese Shiite leader. 80 people are killed in the unsuccessful attempt. (Blum)

1986: When a bomb goes off in a Berlin nightclub and kills two Americans, the U.S. blames Libya's Qaddafi. U.S. bombers strike Libyan military facilities, residential areas of Tripoli and Benghazi, and Qaddafi's house, killing 101 people, including Qaddafi's adopted daughter.

1987: The U.S. Navy is dispatched to the Persian Gulf to prevent Iran from cutting off Iraq's oil shipments. During these patrols, a U.S. ship shoots down an Iranian civilian airliner, killing all 290 onboard.

1988: The Iraqi regime launches mass poison-gas attacks on Kurds, killing thousands and bulldozing many villages. The U.S. responds by increasing its support for the Iraqi regime.

July 1988: A cease-fire ends the Iran-Iraq war with neither side victorious. Over 1 million Iranians and Iraqis are killed during the 8-year war.

1989: The last Soviet troops leave Afghanistan. The war, fueled by U.S.-Soviet rivalry, has torn Afghanistan apart, killing more than one million Afghans and forcing one-third of the population to flee into refugee camps. More than 15,000 Soviet soldiers die in the war.

July 1990: April Glaspie, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, meets with Saddam Hussein, who threatens military action against Kuwait for overproducing its oil quota, slant drilling for oil in Iraqi territory, and encroaching on Iraqi territory--seriously harming war weakened Iraq. Glaspie replies, "We have no opinion on the Arab- Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait."

August 1990: Iraq invades Kuwait. The U.S. seizes the moment to assert its hegemony in the post-Soviet world and strengthen its grip on the Persian Gulf: the U.S. condemns Iraq, rejects a diplomatic settlement, imposes sanctions, and prepares for an all-out military assault on Iraq.

January 16, 1991: After a 6-month military buildup, the U.S.-led coalition launches "Operation Desert Storm." For the next 42 days, U.S. and allied planes pound Iraq, dropping 88,000 tons of bombs, systematically targeting and largely destroying its electrical and water systems. On February 22, 1991, the U.S. coalition begins its 100-hour ground war. Heavily armed U.S. units drive deep into southern Iraq. Overall, 100,000 to 200,000 Iraqis are killed during the war.

Spring 1991: Shi'ites in the south and Kurds in the north rise up against Hussein's regime in Iraq. The U.S., after encouraging these uprisings during the war, now fears turmoil and instability in the region and refuses to support the rebels. The U.S. denies the rebels access to captured Iraqi weapons and allows Iraqi helicopters to attack them.

1991: Iraq withdraws from Kuwait and agrees to a UN-brokered cease-fire, but the U.S. and Britain insist that devastating sanctions be maintained. The U.S. declares large parts of north and south Iraq "no-fly" zones for Iraqi aircraft.

1991-present: U.S. military deployments continue after the war, with 17,000 to 24,000 U.S. troops in the Persian Gulf region at any given time. (CSM)

1992: U.S. Marines land near Mogadishu, Somalia, supposedly to ensure humanitarian relief and "restore order." But the U.S. also plans to remove the dominant warlord, Mohammed Aidid, and install a more pro-U.S. regime. In June 1983, after numerous gun battles with Aidid forces, U.S. helicopters strafe Aidid supporters, killing scores. In October, when U.S. forces attempt to kidnap two Aidid lieutenants, a fierce gunbattle breaks out. Five U.S. helicopters are shot down, 18 U.S. soldiers killed and 73 wounded, while 500 to 1000 Somalians are killed and many more injured.

March 1992: U.S. Defense Department drafts new, post-Soviet "Defense Planning Guidance" paper stating, "In the Middle East and Southwest Asia, our overall objective is to remain the predominant outside power in the region and preserve U.S. and Western access to the region's oil."

1993: U.S. brokers a "peace" agreement between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization at Oslo, Norway. The agreement strengthens Israel and U.S. domination, while leaving Palestinians a small part of their historic homeland, broken up into isolated pieces surrounded by Israel. No provisions are made for the return of the four million Palestinian refugees living outside of Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza.

1993: U.S. launches missile attack on Iraq, claiming self-defense against an alleged assassination attempt on former president Bush two months earlier.

1995: The U.S. imposes oil and trade sanctions against Iran, reinforcing sanctions in effect since 1979, for alleged sponsorship of 'terrorism', seeking to acquire nuclear arms and hostility to the Middle East process. (BBC, CSM)

1995: With U.S. backing, Turkey launches a major military offensive, involving some 35,000 Turkish troops, against the Kurds in northern Iraq.

1998: Congress passes the "Iraq Liberation Act," giving nearly $100 million to groups attempting to overthrow the Hussein regime.

August 1998: Claiming retaliation for attacks on U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, President Clinton sends 75 cruise missiles pounding into rural Afghanistan --supposedly targeting Osama Bin Laden. The U.S. also destroys a factory producing half of Sudan's pharmaceutical supply, claiming the factory is involved in chemical warfare. The U.S. later acknowledges there is no evidence for the chemical warfare charge.

December 16-19, 1998: The U.S. and Britain launch "Operation Desert Fox," a bombing campaign supposedly aimed at destroying Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs. For most of the next year, U.S. and British planes strike Iraq every day with missiles. (BBC)

October 1999: The U.S. Department of Defense shifts command of its forces in Central Asia from the Pacific Command to the Central Command, underlining the heightened importance of the region, which includes vast oil reserves in and around the Caspian Sea.

January 2001: Tenth anniversary of the U.S. war on Iraq: sanctions are still in place and the UN estimates that 4,500 children are dying per month from disease and malnutrition as a result. The U.S. planes, which have flown over 280,000 sorties in Iraq over the past decade, continue to attack from the air. In the past two years, over 300 Iraqis have been killed in these bombings.

October 2001: U.S. begins bombing Afghanistan, as the first act of war in "Operation Enduring Freedom"--the U.S. "war against global terrorism."

Cheers!
 
Last edited:
YoungGuns, I didn't say that the US hasn't intervened in the past. Read back over what I have said on this thread.

I said that according to Bin Laden, we were attacked on 9/11 because US troops were stationed on Saudi soil to prevent Iraq from invading the Saudi oil fields, and in my opinion that doesn't qualify as "interventionism" any more than troops stationed in West Germany to repel a Soviet invasion did.

Now, what are your views on Rand Paul's claim that if Iran builds a nuclear weapon they can be contained?
 
Let 'em build it. If they launch it, they won't be a problem the next day. Their capitol and bases will be a craters.

In the words of Teddy Roosevelt: "Speak softly and carry a big stick."

Israel is strong. IF they are attacked, we should back them. We're not their bodyguard, we're their ally.

You don't call the fire department and have them spray your house down because it COULD catch on fire. War should be the same way, otherwise it's a waste of time, money, and lives.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: YoungGun92Let 'em build it. If they launch it, they won't be a problem the next day. Their capitol and bases will be a craters.

In the words of Teddy Roosevelt: "Speak softly and carry a big stick."

Israel is strong. IF they are attacked, we should back them. We're not their bodyguard, we're their ally.

You don't call the fire department and have them spray your house down because it COULD catch on fire. War should be the same way, otherwise it's a waste of time, money, and lives.

Really? And if a nuclear warhead explodes in New York Harbor with no way to trace it back to Iran, what then? You think we'd nuke Iran without absolute proof that they did it?

You seem to think that a missile that can be tracked by satellite is the only way to deliver a nuclear warhead.
 
Back
Top