BF2S Forums Media Conspiracy against Ron Paul.

Macbeth wrote:

Ron Paul    77,993    13%

Seems like the Ron Paul revolution is slowing down. Great news.

In SC what did you expect?

Evangelicals and born again bible thumpers aren't interested in RP in the slightest.

It was the Romney v Gingrich debate that caused the above.

Santorum had none of the headlines.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Gingrich would be fun to laugh at as US President, but I'm not sure it would be worth war with Iran.

And we know he'd spend the first 3.5 years doing nothing but blame Obama...

I can't believe you are so warped as to assume that Gingrich would go to war with Iran as soon as elected President...or that any other Republican candidate would. Tough talk on the campaign trail is completely different than decisions that must be made while in office. Even the "warmonger" Bush didn't do anything against Iran militarily.

As for blaming the previous administration...it's a tactic that has worked well for the current one.

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

I can't believe you are so warped as to assume that Gingrich would go to war with Iran as soon as elected President...or that any other Republican candidate would.

Seems odd they're all calling for the bombing to start

No, they aren't. They are calling for keeping military options on the table when dealing with Iran (just as European and GCC nations are) and saying that as CINC, they would use that as a last resort if diplomacy failed (just as European and GCC nations are). The last bit being key.

Even the "warmonger" Bush didn't do anything against Iran militarily.

He labeled them part of the 'axis of evil' when the moderates reached out the hand of peace, now you have the radicals to deal with - well done.

Rhetoric. And since the moderates weren't in power, how would their "reaching out" have made a lick of difference? That's like trying to hold the regime in Iran accountable for not doing anything about the Libertarian or Green parties "reaching out" to them from the US.

As for blaming the previous administration...it's a tactic that has worked well for the current one.

Haven't seen much of that happening TBH, which is surprising given the appalling mess Bush left.

You really need to get your hearing checked. It's been nothing but that for 3+ years.

All I hear from Gingrich is ranting about Obama, no concrete plans, just platitudes about 'small govt'.

No kidding. That's something I despise about politics (and car salesmen): tearing down the competition, rather than talking up your own brand.

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

No, they aren't. They are calling for keeping military options on the table when dealing with Iran (just as European and GCC nations are) and saying that as CINC, they would use that as a last resort if diplomacy failed (just as European and GCC nations are). The last bit being key.

Your ears need cleaning.
Rick Santorum: 'I will bomb Iran's nuclear facilities'

Perhaps yours do. Or you need some reading comprehension classes:

Your linked article's FIRST PARAGRAPH wrote:

GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum, said in an interview on NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday that if the Iranians refuse to open up their nuclear facilities for inspection he would bomb them.

Note the bolded part. That means, "if all other efforts, such as diplomacy and economic sanctions, have failed". Leaving military strikes as a last option. As stated previously.

Rhetoric. And since the moderates weren't in power, how would their "reaching out" have made a lick of difference? That's like trying to hold the regime in Iran accountable for not doing anything about the Libertarian or Green parties "reaching out" to them from the US.

The moderates were in power.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Khatami

But Bush needed his next boogeyman and spurned their offers, so now you have Ahmedinijad and an Iranian nuclear program.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … 00727.html

You should really try reading history - not just lapping up Fox.

Maybe you should try learning how Iran's government actually works. Khatami holding the Presidency =/= "the moderates being in power"

And I don't watch Fox. Or CNN. Or MSNBC. Unless I feel like a laugh.

You really need to get your hearing checked. It's been nothing but that for 3+ years.

Not seen anything TBH. If I had I'd say Bush deserved it.

Of course you would. I would expect nothing less from a blinkered idealogue such as yourself.

No kidding. That's something I despise about politics (and car salesmen): tearing down the competition, rather than talking up your own brand.

Usually means they have no coherent policies whatever

Welcome to American politics, regardless of party affiliation.

eleven bravo wrote:

i notice how republicans always try to act as if they arent partisan

Being disgusted with the political system is not a party-specific trait.

But nice try.

eleven bravo wrote:

lol that's soooo FEOS

lol that's soooo GS.

That had nothing to do with your ban, and you know it. If you want to discuss further, take it to PMs.

eleven bravo wrote:

i just dont like you.  why? because no matter how much you are presented with evidence counter to any of your claims i have yet to ever see you apologize or admit to being wrong.  very small of you.

Then you haven't paid much attention. Which isn't at all surprising.

And I couldn't give a squirt of lukewarm shit if you liked me.

Why does Iran get threatened with bombing for not letting weapn inspections occur?

Israel hasn't and they do have nukes.

israel is not a part of the NPT.  Iran is.

But there is no pressure whatsoever to have Israel sign the NPT

Last edited by AussieReaper (2012-01-25 19:57:38)