Ron Paul points out that we overthrew the democratically elected government of Iran in the 50's, and installed the Shah, who's reign was brutal and was responsible for the deaths of many thousands of Iranians, and for keeping most of them in poverty as he looked after the upper classes. Over 20 years later they have a revolution, finally managing to overthrow the Shah. Whatever we think of the current Iranian rulers, they are the choice of the Iranian people, who seem much happier with them than they were with the Shah, and we should not have any more say in who runs their country, than they should have in who runs ours'.

Rick Santorum says that Iran are building terrorist training camps, they oppress their population, and they cannot be allowed to have the ability to be able to develop nuclear weapons.

Ron Paul points out that Iran is surrounded by countries with nuclear weapons, such as China, Russia, Israel, and Pakistan, and that it's not surprising that Iran might want one for themselves, so that they might be treated with a bit more respect internationally.

Rick Santorum seems to be spouting typical war rhetoric, just like Bush and Blair did before we invaded Iraq. We are already imposing sanctions on Iran, which Ron Paul points out is usually what we do, before starting a war.

Here's a short Fox news video:

Ron Paul schools Santorum on Iran

Here are a few interesting articles by Ron Paul:

''The tired assertion that America ''supports democracy'' in the Middle East is increasingly transparent. It was false 50 years ago, when we supported and funded the hated Shah of Iran to prevent oil nationalisation of Iranian oil, and it's false today''

Does Santorum want to start yet another costly, unnecessary, and bloody war? It sure looks that way to me, and it seems that Mitt Romney spouts the same rhetoric.

Ron Paul seems to be the voice of reason and logic, which is not something we see much of in politics nowadays.

Dusty

on that pole Paul won by alot.but you wont see it from the media. Why? Because the media does not want Paul in the Whitehouse.it is a fact. Heck we even have so called Rs on here that wont suport the correct Candidate. they say err Pariot the media, Paul is unelectable. But currently in 3rd. so Obama will win.because us real patriots will write in paul. split the vote.

Good points. Do you think he would run as an independent candidate if he doesn't get the GOP nomination?

I can see him not getting it as he's obviously not part of the mainstream political machine (whatever that might be).

Dusty

nope. the leage of woman voters and the Rs and Ds have made it next to imposible to get into debates. Paul has mentioned this many times.BTW Rummy got a 1mill donation from a buisness partner. Paul got 1mill from many doners of normaly 200 $ or less

The points that Congressman Paul has made with regards to Iran -as described above -are spot on, but they will probably not enamour him to the base of the right, who crave a bogey-man like Iran, in order to see foreign policy issues as "fer us or agin-us" style contests.

Whether those sort of views are sufficient to mean that he does not win the nomination is open to debate. Given the de-facto existence of a third party, with, on the face of it, much more popular support than his own Libertarian party had ever generated, perhaps some principles should come to the fore and Congressman Paul should run as an Independent, on behalf of the Tea Party?

Originally Posted by QQuestor

nope. the leage of woman voters and the Rs and Ds have made it next to imposible to get into debates. Paul has mentioned this many times.BTW Rummy got a 1mill donation from a buisness partner. Paul got 1mill from many doners of normaly 200 $ or less

That's a pity. He seems to be getting sidelined by the media already, despite his obvious popularity.

Dusty

well that will be the 1st time i have agreed with you leccy. the rest of his points are correct too. you know lots less Goverment, end the fed. end SS medicare and medicaid... all the usual stuff i spout. less taxes no welfair. and trade with everyone on the planet. aliance with none.

Originally Posted by leccyflyer

The points that Congressman Paul has made with regards to Iran -as described above -are spot on, but they will probably not enamour him to the base of the right, who crave a bogey-man like Iran, in order to see foreign policy issues as "fer us or agin-us" style contests.

This is true, and we see endless amounts of this 'fer us or agin us' rhetoric here.

Whether those sort of views are sufficient to mean that he does not win the nomination is open to debate. Given the de-facto existence of a third party, with, on the face of it, much more popular support than his own Libertarian party had ever generated, perhaps some principles should come to the fore and Congressman Paul should run as an Independent, on behalf of the Tea Party?

Another political party would be a good idea, since his policies are so far removed from the rest of the GOP, and their policies seem to bear more similarity to those of the Democrats.

I wonder though, how easy it would be for a 3rd party to compete. I assume that the U.S. political system must be geared more towards having two parties, since that's all they realistically seem to have. As I understand it, the Tea Party is currently like a party within a party.

Dusty

you miss typed it Dusty

Another political party would be a good idea, since his policies are so far removed from the rest of the GOP, who's policies seem to bear more similarity to the Democrats.

Another political party would be a good idea, since the policies of the GOP are removed from the rest of the republican princapals., who's policies seem to bear more similarity to the Democrats.

as for demm noo he is no where neer a dem . Less Gov intervwention into our lives.

Originally Posted by QQuestor

you miss typed it Dusty
as for demm noo he is no where neer a dem . Less Gov intervwention into our lives.

What I meant was that the policies of other GOP candidates seem closer to the policies of the Democrats, than Ron Paul's policies are to the policies of the other GOP candidates.

As far as foreign policies go, that is.

Dusty

i know. i just wanted to be correct. to much spin in media allready

Originally Posted by leccyflyer

The points that Congressman Paul has made with regards to Iran -as described above -are spot on, but they will probably not enamour him to the base of the right, who crave a bogey-man like Iran, in order to see foreign policy issues as "fer us or agin-us" style contests.

Whether those sort of views are sufficient to mean that he does not win the nomination is open to debate. Given the de-facto existence of a third party, with, on the face of it, much more popular support than his own Libertarian party had ever generated, perhaps some principles should come to the fore and Congressman Paul should run as an Independent, on behalf of the Tea Party?

Dear diary,

I have now agreed 100% with a Leccy post for the second time in a week. Either he is coming to his senses or I am losing my sanity.

Originally Posted by leccyflyer

The points that Congressman Paul has made with regards to Iran -as described above -are spot on, but they will probably not enamour him to the base of the right, who crave a bogey-man like Iran, in order to see foreign policy issues as "fer us or agin-us" style contests.

Whether those sort of views are sufficient to mean that he does not win the nomination is open to debate. Given the de-facto existence of a third party, with, on the face of it, much more popular support than his own Libertarian party had ever generated, perhaps some principles should come to the fore and Congressman Paul should run as an Independent, on behalf of the Tea Party?

Good points. The more attractive RP looks to the international crowd here, the less of a chance he has with the right here in the US of A. The TP is for a strong defense, among our other concervative goals. This is where RP would fall very short.........no pun intended

Originally Posted by Real Ira

Dear diary,

I have now agreed 100% with a Leccy post for the second time in a week. Either he is coming to his senses or I am losing my sanity.

When yo start agreeing with ET, then you should worry. Check to see if if you're starting to grow moonbat wings!!

Originally Posted by FL Knifemaker

When yo start agreeing with ET, then you should worry. Check to see if if you're starting to grow moonbat wings!!

I just checked in the mirror and no moonbat wings. A great relief too, I was really starting to worry about myself.