Here it is
- Thread starter Cancel7
- Start date
C
Cancel5
Guest
There standing army is a terrorist organization...
The Europeans think it is in the water...or the kool-aide for all of us now!
They aren't even reporting it on the news much!
Epicurus
Reasonable
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1901940/posts
Congress Denounces Iran's Ahmadinejad
[Ron Paul moves to the left of Kucinich; votes nay]
Posted on 09/25/2007 11:12:13 AM
WASHINGTON (AP) - Congress signaled its disapproval of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with a vote Tuesday to tighten sanctions against his government and a call to designate his army a terrorist group.
The swift rebuke was a rare display of bipartisan cooperation in a Congress bitterly divided on the Iraq war. It reflected lawmakers' long-standing nervousness about Tehran's intentions in the region, particularly toward Israel—a sentiment fueled by the pro-Israeli lobby whose influence reaches across party lines in Congress.
Epicurus
Reasonable
http://dissidentnews.wordpress.com/...-iran-inevitable-us-policies-must-be-changed/
Ron Paul Warns War With Iran Inevitable - U.S. Policies Must Be Changed
Republican says U.S. policies must be changed to avoid conflict
By Bob Unruh
Presidential candidate Ron Paul says unless U.S. policies are changed, a conflict with Iran is “about as inevitable as you can expect.”
Paul, a Texas Republican congressman who espouses libertarian ideals, told WND in an exclusive question-and-answer session that people need to understand that such a conflict would be just one more result of a long history of U.S. intervention in actions in the Middle East.
“I think if our policies don’t change it’s about as inevitable as you can expect because we’re unwilling to talk to them and every week we’re passing more sanctions and rules and intimidations and accusations and provocations,” he said.
“We’re surrounding Iran and there’s very, very little understanding of that history, the American people don’t know how we have been involved since 1953 in interfering with their government and it has hurt us,” Paul said. “We’re failing in Iraq and our government would like to have a distraction from that so they are blaming the Iranians.”
He said that’s why “the war propaganda is building.”
“I don’t think we’ll have an old-fashioned invasion but, you know, when you put blockades around a country and people suffer from it and you try to starve people and humiliate them and take away their source of energy those are acts of war.
“Then if you start bombing them, others are going to come in. By that time maybe the Chinese will find out it’s in their interests to defend the Iranians, and who knows what kind of financial attacks they can place against us, against the dollar. Yes, I think our policies if not changed will end up with a war against Iran,” Paul said.
Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., has gone so far as to say the Iranian government already has declared war against the United States, “by its actions.” He said the U.S. has a responsibility to stop attacks against its soldiers, and he includes “the possibility of using military force against the terrorist infrastructure inside Iran.”
His comments had been prompted by confirmation from the military of the funding, training and arming of militia extremists in Iraq “by Iranian Revolutionary Guard … operatives.”
Lieberman has said in the past that the U.S. should be ready to pursue a military resolution with Iran if it continues helping those who are battling U.S. forces in Iraq.
However, Iranian officials have denied being involved in Iraq violence.
Paul, who is known for his work toward limited constitutional government, free markets, low taxes and a return to sound monetary policies, notes in his biographic sketch on his campaign website that he “never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution.”
Ron Paul Warns War With Iran Inevitable - U.S. Policies Must Be Changed
Republican says U.S. policies must be changed to avoid conflict
By Bob Unruh
Presidential candidate Ron Paul says unless U.S. policies are changed, a conflict with Iran is “about as inevitable as you can expect.”
Paul, a Texas Republican congressman who espouses libertarian ideals, told WND in an exclusive question-and-answer session that people need to understand that such a conflict would be just one more result of a long history of U.S. intervention in actions in the Middle East.
“I think if our policies don’t change it’s about as inevitable as you can expect because we’re unwilling to talk to them and every week we’re passing more sanctions and rules and intimidations and accusations and provocations,” he said.
“We’re surrounding Iran and there’s very, very little understanding of that history, the American people don’t know how we have been involved since 1953 in interfering with their government and it has hurt us,” Paul said. “We’re failing in Iraq and our government would like to have a distraction from that so they are blaming the Iranians.”
He said that’s why “the war propaganda is building.”
“I don’t think we’ll have an old-fashioned invasion but, you know, when you put blockades around a country and people suffer from it and you try to starve people and humiliate them and take away their source of energy those are acts of war.
“Then if you start bombing them, others are going to come in. By that time maybe the Chinese will find out it’s in their interests to defend the Iranians, and who knows what kind of financial attacks they can place against us, against the dollar. Yes, I think our policies if not changed will end up with a war against Iran,” Paul said.
Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., has gone so far as to say the Iranian government already has declared war against the United States, “by its actions.” He said the U.S. has a responsibility to stop attacks against its soldiers, and he includes “the possibility of using military force against the terrorist infrastructure inside Iran.”
His comments had been prompted by confirmation from the military of the funding, training and arming of militia extremists in Iraq “by Iranian Revolutionary Guard … operatives.”
Lieberman has said in the past that the U.S. should be ready to pursue a military resolution with Iran if it continues helping those who are battling U.S. forces in Iraq.
However, Iranian officials have denied being involved in Iraq violence.
Paul, who is known for his work toward limited constitutional government, free markets, low taxes and a return to sound monetary policies, notes in his biographic sketch on his campaign website that he “never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution.”
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
So, what does it do? Does it say anything should be enforced, or is it just some kind of self-congratulatory pat on the back for America? i.e. "This resolution is a resolution calling for the calling of America really great and that Iran is really bad. The senate is also really good, and Hillary Clinton is nice looking and not so shrill. The Revolutionary Guard are terrorists. That's all."
Since Bush is Authorized by the War Powers Act to fight Terror using all means necessary, including military might, you may want to rethink what an official declaration of the Republican Guard as a "terror" organization might mean.
Epicurus
Reasonable
Lol you're so disingenious. How would a Democrat be better.
As CIC he would be very effective indeed in removing the military from Iraq, he would just order withdrawal plans and enact them regardless of any specific vote giving him power to fight "terror".
uscitizen
Villified User
Did I say they would be any better ? I am also considering aspects aside from the war.
uscitizen
Villified User
So the president can refuse to fight if congress says to fight ?
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
He'd just invade them if he wanted to anyway.
But it's stupid to call the Republican Guard a terror organization. Honestly, these fuckups are starting to just use the "terrorist" denotation as a kind of newspeak. Any foreign country disagrees with you, and you label a part of it a "terrorist" organization, and suddenly any voice of reason that says this is retarded is Anti-American (in accordance the Patriot act, which is officially the most self-congratulatory name ever given to a law).
It's stupid because it denigrates the word. Al-Quaeda is a terrorist organization. The Iran special forces is not.
Yes. He has sole discretion in Foreign Affairs per the second section of the Constitution.
True. Both of those are in the Constitution. But that does not change the fact that he has sole discretion in Foreign Affairs and could indeed simply order the withdrawal of troops from Iraq. Shoot, he could order the withdrawal from Germany if they were not a Treaty and thus the "Supreme Law of the Land".
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
I don't think it is a liberal mindset. It is more of a mix. Liberals don't want these undeclared wars because in general they are opposed to war. Conservatives don't want these undeclared wars because they end up being these political nightmares like Iraq. With the WPA, you end up with a bunch of arm chair CIC's running around telling the President how to run the war and then taking no responsibility for their part in starting it. If you are going to war, declare it and fight it to win.