Forgot your password?
Type your email address below and click the sign up button to create an account.
Writein, I gave you the dang answer if would have read the comments its called " entitlements", which has gone from "need to greed"...
Correction: I mean Mohammad Mosaddegh and not Mohaamad Reza Pahlavi.
It also seems that a certain poster skipped over a few details of history concerning Iran and its people. I am sure Operation Ajax a plan created by Sec of State Dulles and his brother who was head of the CIA to overthrow the democratically elected leader of Iran, Mohaamad Reza Pahlavi.
It is my wish and hope that President Obama would meet with the current Iranian leader and hammer out a deal for true and honest peace instead of being hamstring by warmongers and neo-cons like Senator Lindsey Graham , Senator John McCain, Rev. John Hagee, and the conservative parts of the Pro-Israeli lobby.
Yes I am the history guy, but that isn’t the issue. I asked you a question and I would like for you to answer them. Social Justice to me is anti-feudalism, anti-autocrats, and anti- oligarchy.
itisi said: "Now Iran, if them good ole boys happen to get a few nukes, and they have some type of camel race and get all drunked up, and go push that little "RED BUTTON", well you have about 35 minutes to get in a shelter and hope that sucker doesn't hit in your back yard. Nuff said on Iran..."
I'd take that risk if we'd attempt to repair our relations with them. But that's what this is about, isn't it? We want to continue destabilizing the Middle East without severe consequences.
Writein, stop the banter bs, you're the history guy...
Can you please give us the meaning of social justice?
BSS,I'm not trying to burst your bubble on Mr. Paul... I just don't agree with a lot of what he says. Now Iran, if them good ole boys happen to get a few nukes, and they have some type of camel race and get all drunked up, and go push that little "RED BUTTON", well you have about 35 minutes to get in a shelter and hope that sucker doesn't hit in your back yard. Nuff said on Iran...
DaleZuck,yes, I have met Mr. Paul a number of years ago. He did not impress me then and that observation has not changed for my self. I'm a conservative. I will not bet on a long shot for any reason other than Mr. Paul happens to get the nod, Obama will beat R. Paul hands down. I will grant you anything is better than Obama, but we have too be realistic here Mr. Paul will not get the full support of the Republican Party. I do agree we have to get this country back on track and get away from Obama's social justice/socialism, you cannot build success on socialism or through social justice. Our kidds and grand kidds will never see the light of day under Obama, they will be constrained to entitlements, with no bridge to success.
1953, or better yet 1943, should be the starting point about our problems with Iran.
"An indirect result of football coaches teaching history classes, perhaps?"
I prefer to examine the root causes of problems, and you have to look at the whole history of our intervention in Iran to understand this problem. Using 1979-80 as our starting point gives us a stunted worldview. You're "remembering" exactly as much as our masters want you to have in mind. It's interesting that you want to annihilate Iran for the hostage ordeal, but you won't allow them any indignation over the coup that thrust their entire country into a dark age 25 years earlier. It's important to consider the whole past because we're about to repeat it in spades.
Cognitive dissonance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitiv...
It's funny that average near-sighted Americans seem to accept the official war cries and saber rattling at face value and never really think to ask questions for themselves. An indirect result of football coaches teaching history classes, perhaps? I wonder in what year the "US-Iran Relations" section of our history books start. At what time does 'American Idol' start?
Did the US fund/support Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, or does your timeline start after that?
Ron Paul having "no desire to become President" is true, and he's said so, but it's not stopping him from trying. It's an unenviable task for someone with his goals. Why would anyone with intentions of derailing the DC gravy train want to wake up every morning wondering if it would be his last day on the planet? He would be enemy #1. I want someone with the right principles who's reluctant to hold the office. I don't want a power hungry puppet with the wrong principles. (Your statement about money is unfounded.)
Yes, I've watched the debates, and I see a guy sticking his ground in the face of ever-decreasing ridicule. I also watched the 2007-08 debates in which his ideas on the economy and the Fed were laughed at. Hmm, I wonder what we'll NOT be laughing at in 4 more years. Insolvency? Mega/Hyperinflation & worthless 401k accounts? Full-blown border war caused by prohibition? Retaliation for the obscene amount of innocent life lost unjustly in Iraq? Time will tell, but I don't expect anyone's rear-view mirrors to be working then either.
The only thing- well two things- I agree with Dr Paul is Iran and the Federal Reserve.
Have you ever met Dr Paul? I have visited with him a few times. His story never changes. His votes never change. The questions I have asked of him in his Victoria office, at the Victoria College, at a fellow supporter's were answered the same way 12/5 and 3 years ago then as he talks about them today. The funny thing is, the same problems caused by "Republican leaders then" are still with us today. So my question to you, itisi, which Republican is better suited to fix what they created and refuse to discuss today? Romney? No, national leadership experience, and just another John McCain. Newt? He is the one who created the Contract on America and then left us out to dry. Perry? Do not make me laugh. At age 55, I have seen it all, election after election, year after year. The Establishment Democrat and Republicans are not for "us", you and I. I have not yet figured out who they are really for. Or rather, I will not mention who I figure they are for on this public site.
Answering your post, I am confident Dr Paul is not in it "for the money". I also am convinced the time for his nomination and election and Presidency has arrived. We are in so much debt, if you want a country for your kids to inherit, you need to pray that someone out of the " Republican mainstream" is elected who will finally refloat the USS America. We are sinking fast.
BSS, the only thing I agree w/Ron Paul on is, where is the gold, and audit the Fed...Iran, you have to go all the way back to 1980, the US should have turned that rock into a golf course after that coward released the US hostages. That little pit whole of a country is a major threat to the US, and rest of the world. Ron Paul has no desire of becoming the president, its all about money. He is a protest candidate, have you not listen to the debates?
What sounds better? Age 76 or 9% national unemployment?
What sounds better? $1 Trillion removed from Federal Government Debt or adding another $1 Trillion + to yours and mine debt owed to China and our other economic and military enemies?
What sounds better? Electing a principled President or nominating another Republican Establishment Hack who will continue the standard policy of driving our country to the edge of bankruptcy and push our soldiers into more endless, treasury depleting wars?
I know Rick Perry: TTC and following who he places on various State Committees. I know Newt : three wives and millions earned lobbying for anti-grassroot Republican ideals. I do know the kind of Republicans these are. They ain't your Daddy's kind of Republican.
Can you elaborate on your "protest candidate" statement and how that relates to his voting record? Do you think his voting record is inconsistent with his Constitutional oath of office?
Can you view this blog (www.goo.gl/1kWFx) and do some independent research into the history of our lengthy intervention in Iranian affairs, then come back and tell me you feel the same. Should we be allowed to perpetually destabilize the Middle East and expect no repercussions or push-back? When you say "get caught up on foreign policy", do you mean "get in lockstep with our current foreign policy", with which you don't seem to have any issues?
What do you see as the endgame in the Middle East? Do you see us defeating "terrorism" (a tactic), and when? Do you think America is immune to insolvency?
BSS,I know you're a Ron Paul supporter, but he is away off target on alot of issues... R. Paul is a protest candidate, the reason I say that is because of his voting record in the House. His thoughts on Iran are completely off the mark with his comments, and he stands by those remarks. He needs to get caught up on foreign policy.