Ron Paul's Take on Gaza

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

I agree, but he is not saying the US is a combatant, per se. He is saying we are viewed that way by the Muslim world because we take sides with Israel almost invariably.
[/quote]

My interests are in reality, not perception. While we are in serious need of a PR campaign with the Muslims world I would not forego just action in its pursuit.[quote]

Since they always get funding from us they must get “permission” from us. They cannot even act of their own accord. It is not in their best interest and it is not in our best interest. [/quote]

Absolutely agreed.[quote]

I also agree that the militants need to be dealt with but not at the expense of innocent women and children who have nothing to do with the conflict. They are victims and nothing more.

Imagine if the US military descended on Oakland, CA with tanks and fighter jets to deal with a few militant Black Panthers – that is the essence of what Israel is doing.[/quote]

I agree, but this is simply stating a problem. What is the proper way to fight such an enemy? Should America sit by and do nothing in the event the Israelis simply wanted to carpet bomb the place? In that way we’d stay out of the fight, but I see America as a force for justice in the world. I suppose this is simply a point we could contend forever though.

It seems to me that so long as the Israelis put forth an honest effort to avoid civilian casualties (which are unavoidable in war, particularly when militants seek civilian casualties to gain sympathy) then Israel’s most merciful action would be to end this – NOW. By forcing the kid gloves on them, we ensure more civilian deaths in a prolonged struggle.

mike

22

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
sigh I voted for this guy and I stand by that vote. But when he leaves domestic policy he really loses it.[/quote]

Even at the start of this country, (a virtual Paul utopia), we still had Muslims attacking our shipping in north Africa. No amount of “trading with them” (as Paul advocates), stopped them from boarding our ships and kidnapping our citizens and selling them into slavery. The only thing that did was…wait for it…foreign intervention! We built a navy, sailed over there, and stomped them. It took us about 30 years to figure out that that was the only thing that the Barbary powers responded to, but we finally did it.

The idea that “if we through Israel under the bus, the Muslims would suddenly become happy with us” is so absurd it makes Paul look like he’s never read a history book and is borderline senile, much like our current president. And the idea that “we only support Israel in this conflict” is likewise idiotic. We’ve gotten the damn Muslims together with the Jews a million times to work things out. Israel makes concessions, the Muslims make none, and sooner or later the Muslims start the violence again. This is the same way Muhammad himself behaved. He would sue for a hudna when he felt he was weak militarily, and when he strengthened, he broke the treaty. Further, we see Islamic protesters around the world telling the Jews to “remember Khaibar!” Khaibar was a peaceful Jewish farming oasis in Arabia that Muhammad attacked (while all the farmers were on their way to work) for no other reason than that he wanted to take their stuff and kill a bunch of them.

Ever notice how both Bush and Paul have the same kookish, crackpot look on their faces all the time?

23

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:

Honestly I don’t think the world has much to fear from the entirety of jihading muslims. That said, you cannot allow them to fire rockets at whim into Israel. What if Canada were doing that to us? Regardless of their effectiveness you cannot allow your borders to be violated.
[/quote]

When Pancho Villa “invaded America” by raiding Columbus, New Mexico, he killed 18 Americans. This is three more than the number of Israelis who have been killed so far, after over one thousand Qassam rockets have been fired into Israeli territory by Hamas.

Notice, however, that General Pershing did not, in response, launch a full assault on Chihuahua State, did not pound civilian neighborhoods with howitzer fire, and did not lead a cavalry battalion through towns, shooting and sabering people indiscriminately.

The punitive operation concentrated on punishing the people actually responsible for the attacks. They took out Villa’s generals the old-fashioned way: by finding the varmints and plugging them. That it was ultimately unsuccessful in killing Villa himself is beside the point.

Similarly, during the Haitian Cacos Rebellion, the American Expeditionary Force did not indiscriminately firebomb Haitian villages in hopes of killing a Caco or two. Instead, a certain Marine sergeant named Herman Hanneken made his way through thick jungle in blackface, found rebel leader Charlemagne Peralte, took him out with one shot from his Colt 45, then brought him back to his commanding officer tied to a donkey.

Herman Hanneken’s action would be the equivalent of an IDF sergeant making his way through the crowded streets of Damascus, bearded and clad in shemagh, finding Khaled Mashal, taking him out with one well-placed shot from his Jericho pistol, then bringing him back to Jerusalem tied to the hood of his Humvee.

Highly improbable, perhaps, but probably more efficient than what the Israelis are doing now.

24

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pat wrote:
If the Black Panthers where launching missiles and committing acts of terror on a daily basis, I would expect the government to act.

Not with tanks and planes.[/quote]

With what a strongly worded letter?

25

[quote]pat wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pat wrote:
If the Black Panthers where launching missiles and committing acts of terror on a daily basis, I would expect the government to act.

Not with tanks and planes.

With what a strongly worded letter?[/quote]

See my post above.

26

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Mikeyali wrote:

Honestly I don’t think the world has much to fear from the entirety of jihading muslims. That said, you cannot allow them to fire rockets at whim into Israel. What if Canada were doing that to us? Regardless of their effectiveness you cannot allow your borders to be violated.

When Pancho Villa “invaded America” by raiding Columbus, New Mexico, he killed 18 Americans. This is three more than the number of Israelis who have been killed so far, after over one thousand Qassam rockets have been fired into Israeli territory by Hamas.

Notice, however, that General Pershing did not, in response, launch a full assault on Chihuahua State, did not pound civilian neighborhoods with howitzer fire, and did not lead a cavalry battalion through towns, shooting and sabering people indiscriminately.

The punitive operation concentrated on punishing the people actually responsible for the attacks. They took out Villa’s generals the old-fashioned way: by finding the varmints and plugging them. That it was ultimately unsuccessful in killing Villa himself is beside the point.

Similarly, during the Haitian Cacos Rebellion, the American Expeditionary Force did not indiscriminately firebomb Haitian villages in hopes of killing a Caco or two. Instead, a certain Marine sergeant named Herman Hanneken made his way through thick jungle in blackface, found rebel leader Charlemagne Peralte, took him out with one shot from his Colt 45, then brought him back to his commanding officer tied to a donkey.

Herman Hanneken’s action would be the equivalent of an IDF sergeant making his way through the crowded streets of Damascus, bearded and clad in shemagh, finding Khaled Mashal, taking him out with one well-placed shot from his Jericho pistol, then bringing him back to Jerusalem tied to the hood of his Humvee.

Highly improbable, perhaps, but probably more efficient than what the Israelis are doing now.

[/quote]

Complete apples-to-oranges comparison, and you know it.

The Israelis aren’t “shooting and sabering people indiscriminately,” otherwise there would be a ton more of them dead. Really, if Israel wanted to do such a thing, they just need to park some artillery outside of Gaza and fire until the entire place is rubble.

The problem with the “civilian deaths” in Gaza has more to do with Arab Palestinians deliberately using women and children in their jihad:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024377.php
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024370.php
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024316.php
(here they are doing it in Olso: http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024357.php)

The real question, I think, is “Why are you so prone to believing Arab Muslim lies?” The Religion of Peace attacked a bunch of farmers in the Phillipines last week, and a bunch of Hindus and Westerners in the Taj Mahal hotel about six weeks ago. Muslim Malays are attacking Buddhists in the Thai south. Muslims have been attacking Jews all over the West for the past couple of weeks and exclaiming, “Hitler didn’t finish the job!” But you still can’t seem the connection between plain old jihad and the violence in Gaza, which is precisely what drives the Palestinians: jihad. They state as much at every available opportunity: “Remember Khaibar, Jews!” Is there a reason you deliberately ignore what comes out of the Arab Palestinians very mouths?

27

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
The problem with the “civilian deaths” in Gaza has more to do with Arab Palestinians deliberately using women and children in their jihad:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024377.php
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024370.php
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024316.php
(here they are doing it in Olso: http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024357.php)[/quote]

I’m curious- do you read ANYTHING that doesn’t so closely resemble your twisted world views? Or anything that challenges your line of thought or opinions?

Or is it all ‘jihadwatch’ and whatever other far right wing anti-Muslim websites you bookmark as often as possible?

Again: Jihadwatch.org is not a credible source, stop posting it as if it is. Seriously, are you fucking high?

28

I’m still waiting for your explanation as to the difference between a Muslim and an Islamist, PRCalDude.

And what do you mean by calling me a “Patriot?” Should I take it as a compliment, or an insult?

29

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
I’m still waiting for your explanation as to the difference between a Muslim and an Islamist, PRCalDude.
[/quote]

An Islamist is a Muslim who actually believes and practices what is written in the Qur’an regarding jihad against the kuffar, esp. Surahs 9:5, 9:29, and 9:111:

Like I said, your curiosity about the contents of the Qur’an is about as deep as it is of the Bible. There can be little doubt 9:29 and 9:111 have a bearing on the Muslims in Palestine who “fight the people of the book” and “slay and are slain,” except to those who are incorrigibly dense.

30

[quote]Inner Hulk wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
The problem with the “civilian deaths” in Gaza has more to do with Arab Palestinians deliberately using women and children in their jihad:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024377.php
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024370.php
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024316.php
(here they are doing it in Olso: http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024357.php)

I’m curious- do you read ANYTHING that doesn’t so closely resemble your twisted world views? Or anything that challenges your line of thought or opinions?

Or is it all ‘jihadwatch’ and whatever other far right wing anti-Muslim websites you bookmark as often as possible?

Again: Jihadwatch.org is not a credible source, stop posting it as if it is. Seriously, are you fucking high?[/quote]

Seriously, can’t you read the Qur’an?

31

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
I’m still waiting for your explanation as to the difference between a Muslim and an Islamist, PRCalDude.

An Islamist is a Muslim who actually believes and practices what is written in the Qur’an regarding jihad against the kuffar, esp. Surahs 9:5, 9:29, and 9:111:

[/quote]And how many Muslims do you think take those surahs literally? All of them? Most of them?[quote]

Like I said, your curiosity about the contents of the Qur’an is about as deep as it is of the Bible. There can be little doubt 9:29 and 9:111 have a bearing on the Muslims in Palestine who “fight the people of the book” and “slay and are slain,” except to those who are incorrigibly dense. [/quote]

I’ve studied both, thanks. I don’t think that most Christians and Jews today take Deuteronomy 7 and 13 all that literally, either. Should they?

32

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
I’m still waiting for your explanation as to the difference between a Muslim and an Islamist, PRCalDude.

An Islamist is a Muslim who actually believes and practices what is written in the Qur’an regarding jihad against the kuffar, esp. Surahs 9:5, 9:29, and 9:111:

And how many Muslims do you think take those surahs literally? All of them? Most of them?

Like I said, your curiosity about the contents of the Qur’an is about as deep as it is of the Bible. There can be little doubt 9:29 and 9:111 have a bearing on the Muslims in Palestine who “fight the people of the book” and “slay and are slain,” except to those who are incorrigibly dense.

I’ve studied both, thanks. I don’t think that most Christians and Jews today take Deuteronomy 7 and 13 all that literally, either. Should they?[/quote]

Christians don’t take Deut. 7 seriously because Jesus was the fulfillment of the Law (Matthew 5:17-20) and the true Israel (Matthew 2:15), and the consummation of the entire Old Testament (Luke 24). Deut. 7 is not ignored, it’s fulfilled. Christians aren’t under the same obligations as Old Testament Israelites.

Muhammad, on the other hand, issued Surah 9:5 as a decree that abrogated all of his peaceful surahs during his Meccan period:

So, your comparison between the Bible and the Qur’an is completely ridiculous.

33

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
So, your comparison between the Bible and the Qur’an is completely ridiculous.
[/quote]

Why? Both books are works of fiction that incite hatred of other people who believe alternative fictions.

34

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
So, your comparison between the Bible and the Qur’an is completely ridiculous.

Why? Both books are works of fiction that incite hatred of other people who believe alternative fictions.[/quote]

Prove it. Where does Jesus “incite hatred towards other people who believe in alternative fictions?” Where does Paul? Where does Peter? Where does John?

35

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
So, your comparison between the Bible and the Qur’an is completely ridiculous.

Why? Both books are works of fiction that incite hatred of other people who believe alternative fictions.

Prove it. Where does Jesus “incite hatred towards other people who believe in alternative fictions?” Where does Paul? Where does Peter? Where does John? [/quote]

You’re kidding… Right?

36

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Mikeyali wrote:

Honestly I don’t think the world has much to fear from the entirety of jihading muslims. That said, you cannot allow them to fire rockets at whim into Israel. What if Canada were doing that to us? Regardless of their effectiveness you cannot allow your borders to be violated.

When Pancho Villa “invaded America” by raiding Columbus, New Mexico, he killed 18 Americans. This is three more than the number of Israelis who have been killed so far, after over one thousand Qassam rockets have been fired into Israeli territory by Hamas.

Notice, however, that General Pershing did not, in response, launch a full assault on Chihuahua State, did not pound civilian neighborhoods with howitzer fire, and did not lead a cavalry battalion through towns, shooting and sabering people indiscriminately.

The punitive operation concentrated on punishing the people actually responsible for the attacks. They took out Villa’s generals the old-fashioned way: by finding the varmints and plugging them. That it was ultimately unsuccessful in killing Villa himself is beside the point.

Similarly, during the Haitian Cacos Rebellion, the American Expeditionary Force did not indiscriminately firebomb Haitian villages in hopes of killing a Caco or two. Instead, a certain Marine sergeant named Herman Hanneken made his way through thick jungle in blackface, found rebel leader Charlemagne Peralte, took him out with one shot from his Colt 45, then brought him back to his commanding officer tied to a donkey.

Herman Hanneken’s action would be the equivalent of an IDF sergeant making his way through the crowded streets of Damascus, bearded and clad in shemagh, finding Khaled Mashal, taking him out with one well-placed shot from his Jericho pistol, then bringing him back to Jerusalem tied to the hood of his Humvee.

Highly improbable, perhaps, but probably more efficient than what the Israelis are doing now.

[/quote]

Good post. Thanks for the Hanneken story, I read that years ago, the Corps’ Banana Wars history is great stuff.

37

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
Mikeyali wrote:

Honestly I don’t think the world has much to fear from the entirety of jihading muslims. That said, you cannot allow them to fire rockets at whim into Israel. What if Canada were doing that to us? Regardless of their effectiveness you cannot allow your borders to be violated.

When Pancho Villa “invaded America” by raiding Columbus, New Mexico, he killed 18 Americans. This is three more than the number of Israelis who have been killed so far, after over one thousand Qassam rockets have been fired into Israeli territory by Hamas.

Notice, however, that General Pershing did not, in response, launch a full assault on Chihuahua State, did not pound civilian neighborhoods with howitzer fire, and did not lead a cavalry battalion through towns, shooting and sabering people indiscriminately.

The punitive operation concentrated on punishing the people actually responsible for the attacks. They took out Villa’s generals the old-fashioned way: by finding the varmints and plugging them. That it was ultimately unsuccessful in killing Villa himself is beside the point.

Similarly, during the Haitian Cacos Rebellion, the American Expeditionary Force did not indiscriminately firebomb Haitian villages in hopes of killing a Caco or two. Instead, a certain Marine sergeant named Herman Hanneken made his way through thick jungle in blackface, found rebel leader Charlemagne Peralte, took him out with one shot from his Colt 45, then brought him back to his commanding officer tied to a donkey.

Herman Hanneken’s action would be the equivalent of an IDF sergeant making his way through the crowded streets of Damascus, bearded and clad in shemagh, finding Khaled Mashal, taking him out with one well-placed shot from his Jericho pistol, then bringing him back to Jerusalem tied to the hood of his Humvee.

Highly improbable, perhaps, but probably more efficient than what the Israelis are doing now.

Complete apples-to-oranges comparison, and you know it.

The Israelis aren’t “shooting and sabering people indiscriminately,” otherwise there would be a ton more of them dead. Really, if Israel wanted to do such a thing, they just need to park some artillery outside of Gaza and fire until the entire place is rubble.

The problem with the “civilian deaths” in Gaza has more to do with Arab Palestinians deliberately using women and children in their jihad:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024377.php
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024370.php
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024316.php
(here they are doing it in Olso: http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024357.php)

The real question, I think, is “Why are you so prone to believing Arab Muslim lies?” The Religion of Peace attacked a bunch of farmers in the Phillipines last week, and a bunch of Hindus and Westerners in the Taj Mahal hotel about six weeks ago. Muslim Malays are attacking Buddhists in the Thai south. Muslims have been attacking Jews all over the West for the past couple of weeks and exclaiming, “Hitler didn’t finish the job!” But you still can’t seem the connection between plain old jihad and the violence in Gaza, which is precisely what drives the Palestinians: jihad. They state as much at every available opportunity: “Remember Khaibar, Jews!” Is there a reason you deliberately ignore what comes out of the Arab Palestinians very mouths?

[/quote]

Except that Palestinian terrorism was an almost wholly secular, nationalist phenomenon for decades.

38

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:

Christians don’t take Deut. 7 seriously because Jesus was the fulfillment of the Law (Matthew 5:17-20) and the true Israel (Matthew 2:15), and the consummation of the entire Old Testament (Luke 24). Deut. 7 is not ignored, it’s fulfilled. Christians aren’t under the same obligations as Old Testament Israelites.

[/quote]

Martin Luther would have disagreed with you. I don’t think he actually smote the Jews with the edge of the sword, as suggested in Deuteronomy 13, but he did have some pretty outspoken views of the Jews and what should be done to them. And he did use Deuteronomy 13:12-17, ironically, as justification for the burning of synagogues and Jewish schools, destruction of Jewish prayer books, defrocking of rabbis, razing of Jewish homes, the confiscation of Jewish property, and finally, their forced labor, expulsion and killing.

Nothing against Martin Luther. He was just a product of his upbringing and the times in which he lived. But this is, after all, one of the single most important figures in Christian history. The man who reformed Christianity. At least as important to Protestantism as Muhammad was to Islam.

Christians today, however, have the free will to reject Luther’s opinions, and form their own attitudes toward members of other religions.

As do Muslims.

39

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Prove it. [/quote]

There is nothing to prove. People make up their own mind based on what they want to believe is correct. This goes for Christianity as it does for any other belief system.

40

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Prove it.

There is nothing to prove. People make up their own mind based on what they want to believe is correct. This goes for Christianity as it does for any other belief system.[/quote]

LOL. So “hatred-inspiring fictions” are now “what they want to believe is correct?”