Only someone like you would exploit this for scoring some sort of stupid political point.
What exactly do you want Paul to do? Invade Pakistan?
He might very well say that this is why the Bush administration should have gone after and killed bin Laden back in 2001 when there was a good chance of doing it instead of planning the Iraq invasion. An Army ranger battalion that was requested for Tora Bora was turned down because of this.
|
|
I have made this challange to you. YOU ARE A LIBERAL, with slightly differnt agenda.
You desire to impose your agenda on the country.
You employ liberal tatics to impose your agenda.
You take a terrible tradgity and twist it for your political agenda. |
|
Ryan01,
Why do you suppose that Bhutto was assassinated ? |
|
|
Why did Al Qaeda wish knock off Bhutto? Why was she such a threat? |
|
1 She was a woman in power
2 She valued a non religious form a government
3 She was not a Muslim
Now for a question? Do you think this justifies us going to war with all countries that terrorist cells?
|
|
What does this have to do with Paul? Nothing. You simply wanted to take a cheap shot at him.
Your question was answered above.
The Bush administration had a chance to kill bin Laden and they blew it. No one that I know who supports Paul disputes that bin Laden is a religious fanatic which is why he should have been taken out back in 2001. |
|
|
if the Islamicist savages wish to eat their own why is that our problem? Sorry she was murdered but she wasn't the first and given the sorry history of that armpit of the world she certainly will not be the last, not by a long shot. Our biggest concern should be the paki nukes and how to seize or destroy htme in place if needed. Perhaps India will save us the trouble, we can only hope. |
|
Ryan01,
Why do you suppose that Bhutto was assassinated ? |
|
Why the Dems stay quiet is understandable. They think we (USA) are the bad guys.
As far as Ron Paul is concerned, he does not, and will never understand the dangers we face when we ignore what happens in other parts of the world. He is either a coward, or just stupid.
In these times of uncertainty, I want a strong leader like Fred Thompson. |
|
|
You're not too bright, are you? The answer I gave Kevin applies to you as well. If you have a point to make go on and make it. |
|
Ryan01,
You continue to avoid answering my question---why do you suppose that Bhutto was assassinated ? |
|
He won't answer because he doesn't have one (other than to call names and deflect the attention away from Pauly).
An answer to why Ron (I'll NEVER win the GOP nomination, EVER) Paul still hasn't addressed the assassination of Bhutto (now, even Hillary has has made a statement) is what Kevin was looking for, not a dissertation about how GWB let bin Laden go (and if you really believe that, there's some swampland for sale...)
Anything from Ron Paul?
*crickets chirping*
|
|
Because standard responses to events such as these are so insipid.
"I am shocked (jowls trembling with indignation) and saddened (heavy sigh) blah, blah, blah . . . by this horrific tragedy (pause, as though fumbling for words) blah, blah blah . . . yet we must stand firm (cue The Battle Hymn of the Republic, albeit softly) blah, blah, blah . . .for the sake of goodness and children (eagle spreads her wings as speaker looks with resolute hope to the sky and toward the future) blah blah blah . . ."
Ron Paul understands the difference between maintainting the flexibility necessary to fight a flagless band of throwbacks and bogging ourselves down in the tarpits of nation building; for this the neocons will never forgive him. Plus he doesn't want to give the property of U.S. citizens to foreign governments, a policy that I as a productive U.S. citizen secretly (and no doubt anti-Semitically)support.
But godspeed to the peaceful people of Pakistan in handling this internal matter. |
|
|
|
I've answered it above when I wrote that bin Laden was a religious extremist, assuming that al-Qaida were actually behind this and not just taking credit for the assassination. Having noted this the Bush administration is partially respnsible for not going after bin Ladin more aggressively when they had the chance.
I know you don't like the answer and it isn't the one you want. Going into Iraq had nothing to do with bin Laden. Killing him in Afghanistan did. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that going into Iraq was the worst thing for the simian in the White House to do. Iraq, for all its flaws, was a secular nation. Now it isn't.
You have to face the truth. Despite what Rush and Bill Kristol claim this isn't WW II and al-Qaida isn't the Wehrmacht. The GWOT is an exercise to strip US citizens of their rights than anything else and to invade/bomb other nations.
The Bush administration doesn't take it seriously, otherwise they would have sealed off the border in this country.
Don't like my answer? Tough, you'll get over it. I already have. |
|
Ryan01,
I realize you're angry at neoconservatives, but why did someone shoot Bhutto, and then blow himself up ?
Why do you suppose that person felt compelled to do that ? |
|
|
I can answer that. They were afraid that Ron Paul might get elected. |
|
The person that did it probably thought she was a US puppet.
As a note aside this is what she wanted to tell Bush if she hadn't been killed:
"She would tell him, she replies, that propping up Musharraf’s government, which is infested with radical Islamists, is only hastening disaster. “I would say, ‘Your policy of supporting dictatorship is breaking up my country.’ I now think al-Qaeda can be marching on Islamabad in two to four years.”
http://www.parade.com/benazir_bhutto_interview.html
This goes back to my original point. al-Qaida needed to be destroyed in Afghanistan when Bush had a chance. Iraq was a side show that caused the US to lose strategic focus. Trying to clean up the mess in Pakistan is going to be a lot more difficult, if indeed it can be done. |
|
Ryan01 wrote,
"The person that did it probably thought she was a US puppet."
---------------
OK, but why on earth would that compel someone to blow themself up ? |
|
This is Bhutto, not Ron Paul:
She would tell him, she replies, that propping up Musharraf’s government, which is infested with radical Islamists, is only hastening disaster. “I would say, ‘Your policy of supporting dictatorship is breaking up my country.’ I now think al-Qaeda can be marching on Islamabad in two to four years.”
http://www.parade.com/benazir_bhutto_interview.html |
|