Wait a second, let me back up. I just made it sound like Ron Paul actually had a serious chance in the form of a serious campiagn. What I meant was, whatever this thing he's been attempting is, for all intents and purposes it ended last night around 9:00 during the CNN-Tea Party debate. Ron Paul effectively blamed 9/11 on America. Nice timing, Ron, what with the debate being a day after the 10th anniversay and everything.
First of all, let's clear some (minor) things up: 1) Osama bin Laden is dead. Thanks for noticing. 2) We've been in Iraq since 2003. Not sure where you're getting this idea that we've been bombing "Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis for 10 years." Get your timeline straight.
How does this kook keep getting elected? I mean, I love Texas, but Jesus Christ. What's going on in his district? Can we go ahead and agree that the rest of the country should have veto power over two representatives that come out of each state? I'd eliminate Ron Paul and Sheila Jackson Lee from Texas immediately. Then, I'd get rid of Maxine Waters and Nancy Pelosi from California, and start working my way through the rest of the country. Hank Johnson of Georgia's 4th District (the one who feared Guam might capsize) would be on my list, too. Here's his clip, although off-topic. It's a real gem:
The bottom line is, we can't have a serious candidate for president who insinuates the worst terrorist attack in our nation's history was deserved. Nearly 3,000 innocent lives were lost that day. Since then, more than 6,000 lives have been given in wars fought to root out terrorism and defend our interests. I don't care how good his economic policies are, Ron Paul is a douche bag.
And he doesn't know shit about jihad. I wish he would consider a few things:
1. The jihad that Al Qaeda and its counterparts has commenced against us has little to do with Palestine. 9/11 was planned before September 2000, when the second intifada began. It was planned during a period of relative optimism regarding Israeli-Palestinian relations.
2. Ron Paul says another of the reasons for 9/11 is our presence in Saudi Arabia. Bin Laden was already a committed jihadist before Desert Storm.
3. Al Qaeda's brand of jihad has always been global in nature. Paul criticized the U.S. for its presence in the Middle East, but Al Qaeda's preferred battlegrounds have been Chechnya, Bosnia, Afghanistan, and Kasmir.
4. Finally, if our presence in Iraq/Afghanistan and the Palestinian conflict are the root of radicalization and therefore terrorism, then why are terrorists not Afghans, Iraqis, and Palestinians? Most terrorists are from the Arabian peninsula, North Africa, Pakistan, or Egypt. Still others are converts to Islam.
The only thing worse than electing a president with no leadership experience (2008) would be to elect one with a badly skewed understanding of foreign policy, especially at such a critical time. There's a difference between saying America has an aggressive foreign policy that he would scale back if he were elected and pointed to 9/11 and basically saying we deserved it. I hope the people of Texas' 14th District wise up soon.