Ron Paul Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
With respect to China and the Communists, there was a HUGE cabal in Washington DC that was overtly supporting the Communists. They delayed or stopped financial aid to the anti-Mao factions. Read M. Stanton Evans’ book: “Blacklisted by History” … and it goes into all the Communist behind the scenes activity in Washington. Also read everything you can find on Venona … including “The Venona Secrets” … by Romerstein and Breindel. They were making tremendous progress in unwinding the Communist mess in Washington, when President Bill Clinton stopped the Venona decryption project.
Can’t say I disagree with Venona or the fact of Communist infiltration. Whittaker Chambers made these claims long ago in* Witness*. Although men like Chambers were demonized and marginalized at the time, I think Venona ultimately vindicated their claims. But I’m not sure how you think this relates to the current discussion.
 
Around here, this argument will get you labeled as an anti-American, anti-Semite, pro-terrorist crazy Paulista…I’m all out of names, but you get the point. Anyway, we gotta kill people that want to kill us, regardless of their motives. Our governments policies have always been innocent and to suggest otherwise you must be totally ignorant of history.
Michael Scheuer had some interesting things to say recently about Ron Paul and the developing Iranian situation. In part, he said:

Obama and any Republican candidate, except for Dr. Paul, will slavishly obey the U.S.-citizen-dominated, pro-Israel lobby that bribes and suborns them by getting into a war with Iran. Indeed, Washington, Tel Aviv, and London are already conducting a lethal, covert-action war inside Iran which is killing Iranian nuclear scientists and destroying nuclear-related facilities, as well as trying to goad Tehran into reacting with violence and thereby give the West a casus belli. Such a war would be a financial and military disaster for the United States, and would be watched with glee by Russian and Chinese leaders who — while their countries would lose some trade with Iran during a war — would applaud another U.S. self-inflicted wound that further erodes the already failing economy that is the base of American power. Moreover, if U.S. political leaders would not permit the U.S. military to defeat Afghan and Iraqi mujahedin armed with Korean War-vintage weapons, they surely will not allow the military to defeat a much better armed nation-state like Iran. Thus we would have yet another politically imposed defeat for the U.S. military. More painful for Americans will be the Iran-sponsored attacks that will occur in the United States if Washington and/or Israel launch a first strike on Iran. The only serious threat Iran poses to the United States is the result of more than 35 years of near-criminal bipartisan negligence by the U.S. executive and legislative branches in the fields of border control and domestic security. Both Iran’s military and intelligence services and their Lebanese Hizballah surrogate have created clandestine entry points along our southern border, as well as a large clandestine infrastructure in the continental United States, one which works with similar networks in Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean. Iran is too smart and fearful of U.S. military power to use this apparatus to strike first in North America, but the network clearly is meant to allow Tehran to respond violently here if Iran is attacked by America and/or Israel.

Notwithstanding the damnable lies about Dr. Paul’s foreign policy constantly proclaimed by his fellow Republican candidates, leading pro-Israel/pro-intervention U.S.-citizens and their journalist friends, and most of the media, only the gentleman from Texas speaks for the Founder’s non-interventionist vision of America’s role in world affairs and for plain common sense. In the realm of common sense, Dr. Paul beats his fellow candidates, the Obamaites, and the media hands down. Dr. Paul challenges the interventionists in both parties on their plans for spreading secular democracy — and causing wars thereby — on historical grounds that are irrefutable because they are just good commonsense. In the words of Dr. Paul’s Republican opponents, the Obamaites, and most of the media, on the other hand, Iowans ought to easily be able to hear the elitist, racist, and war-causing Wilsonian doctrine of intervening abroad to impose democracy and secular social beliefs on foreigners at the point of bayonets.

All the Republican contenders and the Obama administration are whole-hearted believers that the Arab Spring will bring the installation of secular democracy across that region. This has been and still is a nonsense that only adolescent idealists — or deliberate liars — could believe, and one that has been proven fatuous by the fact that Islamists have won every election held since the start of the Arab Spring. Neither the Obamaites nor the Republicans will admit they are wrong on this issue and they will pump billions of dollars in foreign aid into the Arab-Spring countries in a feckless, Muslim-alienating effort to build secular democracies and install the crazed feminism of Mrs. Clinton. Such aid not only will be wasted, but it surely will cause more Muslims take up arms against America. Indeed, the continuation of this bipartisan cultural/feminist war on Islam is likely to start the clash of civilizations Professor Huntington predicted.
 
Thanks for taking the time to find the links. If you or anyone else hadn’t, I certainly would have! And yes, we should take Iran as seriously as the Nazi’s. Google “Iranian Jihad” they looks identical to Nazi SS soldiers, with the addition of green headbands. (side note) Did you know there is an Egyptian Nazi party? They, Egyptian Nazi’s, believe they are the superior race… can anyone say Muslim Brotherhood affiliation? The Arab Spring will only bring more chaos, not peace 😦
 
Thanks for taking the time to find the links. If you or anyone else hadn’t, I certainly would have! And yes, we should take Iran as seriously as the Nazi’s. Google “Iranian Jihad” they looks identical to Nazi SS soldiers, with the addition of green headbands. (side note) Did you know there is an Egyptian Nazi party? They, Egyptian Nazi’s, believe they are the superior race… can anyone say Muslim Brotherhood affiliation? The Arab Spring will only bring more chaos, not peace 😦
Every country has it’s jokers who believe they are superior, black, white you name it.

Do you believe the Iranians are as advanced as Nazi Germany was, militarily speaking of course?
 
Every country has it’s jokers who believe they are superior, black, white you name it.

Do you believe the Iranians are as advanced as Nazi Germany was, militarily speaking of course?
Yes it is unfortunate that some people feel they must dominate, build themselves up as “superior” in order to rip others down. This is an absurd way to compensate for insecurities; they need to feel superior because deep down, they feel inferior. It’s sad, truly.

I believe the powers that be control Iran just as they control China, North Korea, Russia, The entire EU, UK, and North America not to mention the UN. We are living in the world’s greatest conspiracy of all time. The Elite go by many names and most would dismiss this sort of thing as a “conspiracy theory”, but it’s more real than any of us realize. It’s in our faces, on our TV and computer screens and even in the music we listen to.

It all ties into the book of Revelations: The rebirth of Israel in 1948 started the countdown. And now, you see more and more countries boarding the anti-Israel bandwagon. As we all know, the nations will attack Israel on all sides. To make a long story short and to answer your question, do I think Iran is as powerful as Nazi Germany in a military aspect? Potentially yes, because they have the support of the Elite. It seems like they are just desert people, but we must take Iran’s friendship with Russia and China very serious. One phone call from Iran could have ICBM’s shipped from Russia and/or China the next day. Also, The islamic messiah sounds too similar to the anti Christ. A massive war must take place in order for the 3 1/2 year treaty to be signed. It’s all connected for some and just mere coincidence for others. Ultimately, you and everyone reading this post will have to decide for yourselves.

Bottom line: stick with Jesus no matter what, as things are about to get crazy.
 
It actually did happen on August 19, 1953. It was orchestrated by US and United Kingdom intelligence services. The CIA called it Operation Ajax. It was authorized by President Eisenhower. It was the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh.The coup saw the transition of Mohammad-Rezā Shāh Pahlavi from a constitutional monarch to an authoritarian one who relied heavily on United States support to hold on to power until his own overthrow in February 1979.
Not exactly

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Mosaddeq

As PM he was voted in only by the Parliament.

And the Communists were exercising more power.

And every shah for the past couple of thousand years had been skating on thin ice.

The Persian government had been unstable for a very long time.
 
Operation Ajax is a historical fact. Using ad hominems like “Paulbots” is not helping your argument. Our government’s siege on the Middle East began in 1953 with Operation Ajax, when they overthrew an elected leader and instead installed a brutal dictator. The practice of installing brutal dictators from Saddam to Mubarak, to then attacking these same countries to oust these former allies, the U.S. government’s actions have been the root cause of Arab anger against the United States. Our own CIA has warned us of the consequences (“blowback”) of our unconstitutional and immoral foreign interventionism. Again, Ron Paul seems to be the only Republican candidate that understands the history of the Middle East as well as the root causes of the the conflict in that region. And he as the courage to speak that truth to to a Republican party that is is self-denial.
The root causes of the conflict in that region go back more than 5000 years.
 
Not exactly
Do you deny that Operation Ajax was authorized by President Eisenhower? Do you deny that the purpose of this covert action was the overthrow of the democratically elected government, which was subsequently replaced with an authoritarian one that relied heavily on United States support to hold on to power until this US backed government was overthrown in February 1979? Do you realize that the founding fathers warned against this kind of meddling?
 
I graduated from college in 2010, and I support Ron Paul. I’m re-registering as republican so I can vote for him in the primaries.
 
Main reason I’m for Ron Paul is pretty much because I’m a Constitutionalist.
 
The root causes of the conflict in that region go back more than 5000 years.
The root cause of all sin and conflict go back to that region. The primary causes of more recent conflict in that region can be traced to our meddling in that region against the advice of the founding fathers and against the best traditions of conservatism. Perhaps an article by Steven LaTulippe, “America, Iran, and Operation Ajax: The Burden of the Past” will add to your knowledge of Ajax:

"Many Americans lack a global perspective of the history of American interactions with Persia. One of the most critical events in that relationship occurred over 50 years ago during the Eisenhower Administration. While Americans may know little about Operation Ajax, its memory still evokes intense anger from nearly every Iranian.

The brief version (for a more thorough history of the events surrounding Operation Ajax, I refer the reader to Sandra Mackey’s excellent book The Iranians)concerns the overthrow of Muhammad Mossadeq’s short-lived, democratic government by the CIA in 1953 and the reinstallation of the Shah to the throne of Iran.

In 1951, the control of Iran’s oil fields by a British company (the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, or AIOC) became a hot political topic. The Iranian people believed, with some justification, that the existing deal between the Iranian government and AIOC unfairly benefited the company. Muhammad Mossadeq, then a member of the Iranian parliament, took the lead in demanding a renegotiation of the pact. The masses of the Iranian people rallied to his standard and quickly made him the most revered leader in the land. The Shah, who then ruled as an authoritarian monarch, lost control of events as his previously powerless parliament (the Majlis) took on a life of its own.

While I certainly don’t condone his socialistic tendencies or his seizure of the oilfields, it is undeniable that by the time of his elevation to prime minister, Mossadeq had the backing of the overwhelming majority of the Iranian population. For the first time in its long history, Iran had a democratically elected leader.

By 1953, Mossadeq was in an increasingly difficult situation. Oil revenues had plummeted due to a boycott of Iranian oil and the economy slumped. The Soviet-backed Iranian communist party was becoming increasingly aggressive, and Washington began to worry. Iran was a vital chess piece in the Cold War and the American oil companies had their eyes on future concessions there. Mossadeq had become an “issue” for some very powerful people.

Eventually, the decision was made in Washington that Mossadeq had to go. Brigadier General Norman Schwarzkopf (father of the Gulf War commander) and CIA guru Kermit Roosevelt (grandson of Teddy) were ordered to begin a covert operation designed to remove Mossadeq and restore the Shah to absolute authority. A complex plot, codenamed Operation Ajax, was conceived and executed from the US Embassy in Tehran.

Using CIA assets in the Iranian military and various minor political parties, an uprising was staged.

Mackey describes the climax:

For nine hours, the pro-shah army, utilizing American-style military strategy and logistics, battled pro-Mossadeq demonstrators. At least 300 people died. By nightfall, the Mossadeq partisans had drawn into a tight cordon around the premier’s palace. Inside, the aged and always ailing prime minister threw a coat over his pajamas, leaped over the garden wall, and went into hiding. Forty-eight hours later he was arrested. The brief euphoric moment when the followers of Mossadeq believed that he held Iran’s destiny in his hands evaporated.

The Shah, who had fled to Rome at the first whiff of gunpowder, rode back to power on the tip of American bayonets.

In essence, the United States had engaged in a massive covert operation designed to remove a democratically elected leader from power and reinstall an authoritarian monarch (a move which makes a mockery of our currently stated desire to “spread democracy” in the Middle East).

This affair had several disastrous ramifications for the future of American-Iranian relations. First, the Shah, from that point forward, was viewed as a creature of America. Consequently, America became an accessory to his every oppressive act during the subsequent 26 years of his rule. Second, the American embassy in Tehran was permanently marked as a “nest of spies” in the eyes of the Iranian populace. And third, Iranian democracy was strangled in its crib.

The next time the populace rose to overthrow the Shah (in the 1970s), they viewed America as their enemy and were cheering a leader who was significantly less democratic than Mossadeq. When rumors began circulating that the Americans were going to bring the Shah back via yet another covert operation, the Iranian mobs responded by seizing the US embassy in Tehran and holding its workers hostage.

If Mossadeq’s regime had been permitted to continue, it is entirely possible that Iran could have evolved into an authentic democracy. American interventionism destroyed that opportunity and set the stage for many of the tragedies currently haunting the Middle East.

If America is ever to have even remotely cordial relations with Iran, we must accept responsibility for the terrible effects of Operation Ajax and admit that we had no right to intervene in a controversy that was wholly the business of the Iranian people. That exploit was unworthy of the Land of Washington and Jefferson.

While the American public often quickly forgets the interventions and mischievous actions of its government, our overseas victims seldom do. The current climate of international terrorism should prompt the American people to take a more active interest, since these transgressions often come back to haunt us in the most unexpected ways."
 
Actually, it’s progressives and “Hope and Changers” who are having the most difficulty with Obama in my neck of the woods. My mother, who is not a stoner but voted for Obama in part because she opposed Bush’s foreign and domestic policies, is voting for Ron Paul in the primaries and general election if he makes it that far.

Peace and God bless!
Anti-war people and civil liberty types are infuriated with Obama at the moment. Read sites like anti-war.com and you see Obama as portrayed as being even worse than Bush. Pretty interesting.
 
Ron Paul is a fool. Honestly! Let him go the way of Herman Cain and leave the race.
 
Ron Paul is a fool. Honestly! Let him go the way of Herman Cain and leave the race.
Are you kidding? This little ad hominem and comparing him with Herman Cain? Cain left over moral issues. Dr. Paul is both educated and moral.
 
Ron Paul is a fool. Honestly! Let him go the way of Herman Cain and leave the race.
“Ron Paul is a fool.” Translation: “Ron Paul is correct and challenges too many illegitimate domestic and foreign special interests.”
 
Main reason I’m for Ron Paul is pretty much because I’m a Constitutionalist.
Same here. Also, I think America will not survive long unless drastic changes are made in the national debt. Politicians seem to equate printing money with having money. Bush and Obama have combined to rob our children for their spending. Neither party will end abortion (or haven’t yet). I just think our days are numbered if we do not face economic reality and soon.

I wish more Congressmen were able to say “no”, even if it sells their own district short. They might be surprised how many real Americans care more for their country than their own local economy.
 
In 1951, the control of Iran’s oil fields by a British company (the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, or AIOC) became a hot political topic.

Isn’t it interesting that the little word “oil” always seems to surface as a motivating factor for U.S. intervention. I also suspect that things don’t sit to well with Iran,by how the U.S. supported Iraq in the Iraqi-Iranin war after the disposal of the Shah. I’m a certainly not fan of neither Iraq or Iran, but one can see how the sentiments of those countries might run concerning the historical U.S. policy toward them. When folks quote Ron Paul’s policy in the middle east they fail to see he probably has a better overall “big picture” of the issues that the other candidates.
 
Same here. Also, I think America will not survive long unless drastic changes are made in the national debt. Politicians seem to equate printing money with having money. Bush and Obama have combined to rob our children for their spending. Neither party will end abortion (or haven’t yet). I just think our days are numbered if we do not face economic reality and soon.

I wish more Congressmen were able to say “no”, even if it sells their own district short. They might be surprised how many real Americans care more for their country than their own local economy.
I am a homeschooling (although I prefer the term home educating 🙂 ) father, and I support Congressman Paul for President. I don’t agree with him on everything, but I find him to be a far better option than any other candidate. It’s also important to note, that because he understand’s what the proper role of the President is, our areas of disagreement are of less concern to me than it would be with other candidates who don’t appreciate the boundaries of what the office is and isn’t supposed to do.

Pax
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top