“A WAR BASED ON LIES CANNOT BE FIXED BY LAUNCHING ANOTHER WAR”
|| By RON PAUL || Twelve years ago last week, the US launched its invasion of Iraq, an act the late General William Odom predicted would turn out to be “the greatest strategic disaster in US history.”
Before the attack I was accused of exaggerating the potential costs of the war when I warned that it could end up costing as much as $100 billion. One trillion dollars later, with not one but two “mission accomplished” moments, we are still not done intervening in Iraq.
President Barack Obama last year ordered the US military back into Iraq for the third time. It seems the Iraq “surge” and the Sunni “Awakening,” for which General David Petraeus had been given much credit, were not as successful as was claimed at the time. From the sectarian violence unleashed by the US invasion of Iraq emerged al-Qaeda and then its more radical spin-off, ISIS. So Obama sent the US military back.
We recently gained even more evidence that the initial war was sold on lies and fabrications. The CIA finally declassified much of its 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, which was the chief document used by the Bush Administration to justify the US attack. According to the estimate, the US Intelligence Community concluded that:
‘[W]e are unable to determine whether [biological weapons] agent research has resumed…’ And: ‘the information we have on Iraqi nuclear personnel does not appear consistent with a coherent effort to reconstitute a nuclear weapons program.’
But even as the US Intelligence Community had reached this conclusion, President Bush told the American people that Iraq, “possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons” and “the evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program.”
Likewise, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s “bulletproof” evidence that Saddam Hussein had ties with al-Qaeda was contradicted by the National Intelligence Estimate, which concluded that there was no operational tie between Hussein’s government and al-Qaeda.
Even National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice’s famous statement that the aluminum tubes that Iraq was purchasing “are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs, centrifuge programs,” and “we don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud,” was based on evidence she must have known at the time was false. According to the NIE, the Energy Department had already concluded that the tubes were “consistent with applications to rocket motors” and “this is the more likely end use.”
It is hard to believe that in a society supposedly governed by the rule of law, US leaders can escape any penalty for using blatantly false information – that they had to know at the time was false – to launch a pre-emptive attack on a country that posed no threat to the United States. The fact that they got away with it simply makes it all the easier for Washington’s interventionists to try the same tricks again. They already did with Libya and Syria. It is likely they are also doing the same with claims of a Russian “invasion” of Ukraine.
Last week President Obama correctly blamed the current chaos in Iraq on the Bush Administration’s decision to invade. He said, “… ISIL is a direct outgrowth of al Qaeda in Iraq that grew out of our invasion. Which is an example of unintended consequences. Which is why we should generally aim before we shoot.”
However, if the US intervention in Iraq created the “unintended consequences” of ISIS and al-Qaeda, how is it that more US intervention can solve the problem?
A war based on lies cannot be fixed by launching another war. We must just march home. And stay home.
Ron Paul is a former U.S. Congressman from Texas and the leader of the pro-liberty, pro-free market movement in the United States. His weekly column – reprinted with permission – can be found here.
172 comments
It doesn’t matter if we pull out after a month or a century, these savages will continue doing what they do best, slaughtering each-other when no suitable outsider is handy. Best to cut our losses and gtfo now, rather than pointlessly sacrifice more American lives and money.
Ron Paul is a prophet who truly is not recognized in his own time or his own land.
“Ron Paul is a prophet who truly is not recognized in his own time or his own land.”
Don’t count on him saying that about the Dominica, it was a fight for white supremacy in Operation Red Dog which he endorsed.
http://www.projectcensored.org/ron-paul-was-implicated-in-1981-in-the-failed-white-supremacist-invasion-of-dominica/
Great choice of photos to accompany the article Will. Early 2003-4 uniforms and gear obviously showing how closely you’re following the current state of affairs.
As usual Ol’RonBo’s as full of shit as a Christmas Goose.
But Colonel, read my post. There is something to be said for the fact that we probably should not have gone in there. No offense to your service, or your career, but I recall September 2002 being in DC for business and staying at the Marriott Key Bridge. Place was packed with military officers, all involved in planning for Iraq. In the bar that evening many saw Iraq not as a dangerous target or risk to America – they saw it as a great career opportunity. Oh boy, the promotions would be coming soon.
And frankly it was a great career booster. Sadly, we let the egomaniacs run rampant and wound up with crap like Petraus and McChrystal pulled. Both were competent leaders who became enamored with their own importance.
The surge worked on many fronts, they increased combat effects was taking a severe toll on the insurgents. As you suggest, engaging the tribal leaders was a huge success.
If I’d have been in charge for a day or two, I’d have expended every bit of conventional munitions in the Air Farce’s inventory on Afghanistan centered on the Sp?n Ghar (Tora Bora), Kabul and every airfield in Afghanistan and then called it a day. I’d have stationed on a rotating basis a Bde or two of Mech Infantry in Kuwait and reinforced our relationship with Jordan and Israel.
“America would be hapy because we got “revenge”. The MIC would be happy cause they’d get to replace the conventional munitions, the Air Farce would be happy cause they’d have gotten to fly a lot. The Army and Jar Heads would be happy because they’d get to rotate through somewhere “cool”. The Navy would be happy because they’d get to sail in the gulf to back up our presence in Kuwait
Saddam would be held in check because a Mech Bde or two backed up by a CAG versus anything in Iraq was a guaranteed loss. The average Afghanistan wouldn’t have noticed anything but the dirt bag terror exporting expats would all be dead, trapped in their caves or seriously impeded and the gubamint of Afghanistan (such as it was) would be gone (putting all other gubamints contemplating allowing terrorists to hang around on notice).
You should be promoted!! :) I just remember a cousin coming home after a year in Babylon for a non-military agency with a three letter name, saying the whole place was a cluster. And that was 2005. Hence my view of ISIS. We ourselves can’t beat them on the ground, because we’re the reason they get all whiley. Better to bomb the crap out of them and let the functioning Arab states deal with them.
Why are you slamming triclor DBU’s?????
A lot better and more comfortable than that shit that came afterwards.
I can personally vouch for that!!!!!
And the absolute BEST T-shirt to give your gal to sleep in is the olive t-shirt they are wearing!!!!!
I’ve only got 2 or 3 left and they are comfortable as they can be!!!!!
Wish I’d bought more at clothing sales back in the day!!!!
You can have my tan ones on June 2nd!
The Army uses the green ones to denote their fire retardedness. Fuel handlers and air crew are supposed wear the green “all cotton” shirts so that they won’t melt to your skin like the tan poly-cotton blend ones will. I was part of a recovery effort for a guy that had one of the high speed Under Armor shirts melted to his skin. hey were outlawed shortly after that.
I know all about fireproofing
I was aircrew Gulf 1 & 2 and collective spent 1.5 years in country. (green nomex – Gulf 1 & tan for Gulf 2 but always with cotton undershirts – we could wear black or tan t’s as well as the olive issue – I’ve got a spiffy tan Australian T as a keep sake)
I was in Afganistan and Kuwait in 2002 when that UnderArmor shit became available and guys were buying it. It cost way too much. I told the guys wearing it about how Royal Marines suffered horrible burns wearing polypo underwear when it melted to their skin during the Falklands War
As you posted it was some time later that guys were getting burnt and they banned them. Plus they ‘picked” just like an old polyester shirt and looked like shit. It’s funny, everytime i see some young guy wearing UnderArmour i think of that. it’s a big brand now and i think there is an approved shirt now.
When we got the POS ACU we were issued ~tan T’s and as far as i know, the olive ones were phased out.
In the Air Force we could wear either tan or olive with the damn things but I just bought some nice Carhartt tan pocket T’s and wore those till I retired..
I have a couple of tan Carhart pocket T’s that I wear when I can find them (my two older boys steal them). They’re a lot more comfortable than the “poly monstrosity issue shirt”. I write “Dad’s” on most of my socks and T’s to keep them from wearing them…
Yep, Carhart makes good stuff.
Good thing about pocket “T”‘s was you could take off the “blouse” (where/when “authorized”) and still have a pocket!!!
Really not a factor with a flight suit though….
Best thing about the pocket was I could jumbo clip a couple of 10s and my debit card to my ID card and leave me wallet at home.
“You can have my tan ones on June 2nd!”
Two words bro, “stop loss”.
I keeeeeed!
MRD and two bad knees baby – no stop loss can stop me now!
I like the three and six color deserts – I still have chocolate chips from the first go around (they’ll fit my 12 year old but not me….
The ACU and the ABU are both a disaster. The Jarheads got it the uniform decision right as usual.
No. No. No. Colonel. They have it all figured out, if we are nice to them, they in turn will be nice to us. We don’t need a military. Ron Paul’s foreign policy is dangerous. Not only dangerous, but ludicrous. One can only Imagine.
I’ll bet Fits doesn’t know how to pronounce “corpsman” either.
The “surge” failed because it was never truly the boots component that worked, it was engaging the Sunni tribal leaders to participate. When Al Maliki reversed that strategy it all went down the tubes. People who argue we should have left 5,000 troops behind, and that would have solved it, or fooling themselves. All we would have done was leave 5,000 targets in Iraq, Al Maliki still would have dissed the Sunnis, and ISIS would still be there. ISIS thrives on one thing – failed states. The utter stupidity of the United States in engaging in a ground war and nation building has fundamentally changed the landscape. There are now four failed states in the region (Iraq, Syria, Libya and Yemen), and another south of Egypt (Sudan). Eliminating ISIS will require eventual engagement of Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia to install new Sunni governments in Yemen, Libya and Syria, and more than likely, an eventual partition of Iraq. In late 2002 Sec. of State Colin Powell told W “if you break it, you own it.” W responded, “only for six years.”
So what’s Dr. wRONg Paul’s plan? Let Shiite Iran control things? Then let them get nuclear weapons and have the Sunni countries get nukes too which would fall into al-Qaeda’s hands if they target them?
Does it really matter to you if Iran has increased leverage over eastern Iraq? Because I don’t think most people care, and they already have it. That was W’s great gift to the Iranians.
And Dr. Paul approves of it giving them nukes.
M2000 sounds like propagandistic fear mongering! Sanctions on Iran are not diplomacy they are a precursor to war and an embarrassment to a country that pays lip service to free trade! Even our CIA has informed us that there is no evidence Iran is building a nuclear weapon. But just think about all the countries that surround Iran that have nukes:
Israel, China, India, Pakistan, and Russia (a bit further away). So it’s not hard to see why they would want one only to defend themselves against everybody else surrounding them that do have them. If anything to gain respect.
However, a better US relationship with Iran may signal the beginning of the end of US meddling in the region and serve as an incentive for Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the Gulf States to solve their problems themselves. We should be promoting free trade, friendship and peace in place of war. That’s the path to prosperity!
That’s what he stated during the debates “genius”, those are HIS WORDS.
M2000, you’re being overly simplistic, there was a greater message he was conveying in that speech. Ron Paul argued that we should be able to rely on classical nuclear deterrence theory to deal with a nuclear Iran, just as we did with the Soviet Union. Paul claimed that during the Cold War, the Soviets had thousands of nuclear warheads, and we deterred them; if Iran gets a couple, it shouldn’t be a big enough deal to warrant intervention.
Uh, sorry, there are a bunch of Sunni states that will want nuclear arms, it’s NOT the same as the Soviet Union plus there is ISIS and al-Qaeda for the more radical Sunnis and Hezbollah for the Shiites.
Yea, let’s ignore the chances of any Sunni or Shiite nukes falling into their hands. When did a Communist decided to burn someone to death and air it on television like that Jordanian pilot? Jordan might want a nuclear program and nukes, Saudi Arabia wants one, Turkey wants one, Pakistan has one, Egypt wants one.
You idiot Paulbots, you’ll just ignite a nuclear arms race, that if these governments fell their nukes would be in the hands of terrorists.
M2000, your comments are more emotionally driven fear mongering rather than fact based concerns.
That Iran will use its nuclear weapons against the U.S. and Israel is rather obviously the centerpiece of the fear mongering campaign against Iran, to build popular support for threats to launch an aggressive attack in order to prevent them from acquiring that weapon. So what’s the real reason that so many people in both the U.S. and Israeli governments are so desperate to stop Iranian proliferation?
The U.S. Government’s real reason: Iranian nuclear weapons would prevent the U.S. from attacking Iran at will, and that is what is intolerable. The latest person to unwittingly reveal the real reason for viewing an Iranian nuclear capacity as unacceptable was GOP Senator Lindsey Graham, one of the US’s most reliable and bloodthirsty warmongers.
On an aside Joseph Stalin the Communist Dictator of the Soviet Union ordered the massacred 22,000 people in the Katyn Forest Massacre. Why are the few civilians burned to death by Shiites/Sunnis any worse and more significant than the 22,000 who were killed by Stalin’s massacre? Does it really make a difference whether civilians is killed by burning or poisoning or bombing or shooting them?
Anybody can make up any accusation that they want and rational people demand evidence before they believe it, which is the lesson we ought to have learned from the claims of government officials that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction!!
Nuke Experts play down threat of uranium in the hands of ISIS:
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/iraq-turmoil/nuclear-experts-play-down-threat-uranium-stolen-isis-n152926
You idiot, Hezbollah has mass murdered Americans before, if Iran is destablized or its Sunni counterparts are destabalized how much would one of their nukes fall into Hezbollah’s hands for Iran or ISIS for Sunni?
Are you that dumb and blind? It’s NOT like the Soviet Union, there is no big ocean separating the Sunnis and the Shiites from each other nor from Israel. Our world is more inter connected and yet you Paulbots ignore that.
When you have an aggressive U.S. foreign policy of bombing, invading and occupying countries you’re going to gain enemies that want to retaliate against you! Doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that out!!
M2000: On your Hezbollah comment, absorb what Ronald Reagan said in his memoir about the irrationality of militarily intervening in the Middle East:
“Perhaps we didn’t appreciate fully enough the depth of the hatred and the complexity of the problems that made the Middle East such a jungle. Perhaps the idea of a suicide car bomber committing mass murder to gain instant entry to Paradise was so foreign to our own values and consciousness that it did not create in us the concern for the marines’ safety that it should have.
In the weeks immediately after the bombing, I believe the last thing that we should do was turn tail and leave. Yet the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there. If there would be some rethinking of policy before our men die, we would be a lot better off. If that policy had changed towards more of a neutral position and neutrality, those 241 marines would be alive today.”
You know you’re on the losing side of an argument when your last refuge is to outright insult the character of the person rather than debate the argument itself!!
M2000 by the way, you know you’re on the losing side of an argument when your last refuge is to outright insult the character of the person rather than debate the argument itself!!
That’s the typical line you Paulbots say all the time because whatever stupid words come out of Dr. Paul’s mouth it’s always right even though it’s NOT. Egypt wants a nuclear program and nuclear weapons, Jordan wants a nuclear program and nuclear weapons, Turkey wants a nuclear program and nuclear weapons, Saudi Arabia wants a nuclear program and nuclear weapons.
All because Iran will get a nuclear program and nuclear weapons. You idiots think this is just like how the Soviet Union was, that’s totally 1000 percent stupid and wrong.
M2000; like I said, its clear you’re not willing to put your life on the line for a cause you adamantly believe in but you’re totally fine with having other American kids risk there’s!!
I think you’re not.
You don’t like America, you like America’s enemies.
Last i checked the aggressive offensive war propaganda was unAmerican. Where does it say in the Constitution that we should be waging aggressive, offensive wars and bombing, invading, and occupying foreign lands without Congressional authority. Where does it say that politicians can be held unaccountable for lying us into war and face zero punishment. That’s unAmerican!
Idiot, shooting the messenger about a Sunni-Shiite conflict that’d get nuclear, yea “smart move”.
That’s crazy there’s no nuclear Sunni-Shiite conflict. If so why are like NO other 1st World Countries taking serious action against the nuclear moment you describe? They’re not because there’s no nuclear threat.
It will once Iran becomes nuclear, after all that’s what Dr. Paul wants to happen. An Iran with nukes.
So all the 1st World Countries know that Iran will have nuclear weapons and then use those nuclear weapons against them so their response is to sit back and watch? You’re making no sense right now. It’s clear that other countries are not concerned, if so they would’ve took action if they felt threatened.
There is something called covert operations via terrorism or are you too stupid? May it be by Iran or may it be by their Sunni counterparts should the Sunni countries develop nukes and collapse due to the stupid “Arab Spring” uprisings which these nukes will be “lost”.
How’s are those covert Ops working for us? Operation Merlin anybody as exposed by James Risen of NY Times!? Brilliantly!! Lol!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Merlin
Fing Paulbot, you put words into my mouth.
It’s a lesson in CIA incompetence and failure not success!!
I was TALKING ABOUT THIS you idiot Paulbot, fine, live next to Hezbollah and see what happens:
http://www.10news.com/news/terrorist-group-setting-up-operations-near-border
So i guess your an idiot for putting your faith in the CIA war machine. there like the 3 stooges
So it must be okay that Hezbollah can use nukes against us and ISIS with Sunni nukes, yea that’s “wonderful” you dumb Paulbot. Hope you’re the first on the hit list.
Total fear mongering and pure speculation. No facts again!!
You idiot, you’d completely ignore Hezbollah operating covertly on our Mexican borders, heck their Sunni counterparts in al-Qaeda tried to go into from Canada.
Gee, it’s no wonder why Paulbots agree with crony Capitalists that want “cheap labor” and why they ignore security at the borders.
Alarmists like yourself have been saying that for years when has any of it been proven as fact. Any illegal can get across so how come the news stories from credible agencies haven’t reported Hezbollah here already?
But is Hezbollah really all that bad when we’re willing to work with them?
Newsweek: “Relations between [Hezbollah] and the U.S. are developing positively,” a Lebanese newspaper quoted a pro-Western parliament member as saying.”
“Sources in Washington, DC have told reporters at Israel’s DEBKAfile that secret discussions involving the White House and Hezbollah have recently taken place in the island nation of Cyprus.”
http://rt.com/usa/155728-hezbollah-cyprus-us-talks/
CIA in bed with Hezbollah:
http://www.newsweek.com/2014/10/10/has-isis-crisis-pushed-cia-bed-hezbollah-274517.html
Why Is the Obama Administration Courting Hezbollah?
“Evidence has recently emerged suggesting that the U.S. has opened a line of direct communication with the Lebanese Shia Islamist organization Hezbollah. Details of the contacts have emerged from a variety of sources. Most notably, an article by respected Washington based journalist Hussein Abdul Hussein in the Arabic language newspaper al-Rai contended that the direct contacts are handled by British diplomats, who transfer messages back and forth between Hezbollah and the Americans.”
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/365813/why-obama-administration-courting-hezbollah-jonathan-spyer-benjamin-weinthal
WSJ: The Obama administration also has markedly softened its confrontational stance toward Iran’s most important non state allies, the Palestinian militant group Hamas and the Lebanese militant and political organization, Hezbollah. American diplomats, including Secretary of State John Kerry, negotiated with Hamas leaders through Turkish and Qatari intermediaries during cease-fire talks in July that were aimed at ending the Palestinian group’s rocket attacks on Israel, according to senior U.S. officials.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-iran-relations-move-to-detente-1414539659
I hope it happens under Rand Paul’s watch! Because he and you Paulbots would look stupid!
M2000 You won’t answer the question: Where are the Republicans on opposing the budding U.S. and Hezbollah Alliance? Surely they would be running to Fox News to proclaim we’re getting in bed with terrorists! How do you explain this one? Await your ‘astute’ insight…
Are you going to include Dr. Paul’s son? Maybe that makes him a fraud too.
If Rand Paul is talking out of both sides of his mouth (don’t know that he is) than he’s a hypocrite just as the rest of them: Reps and Dems on this issue.
And his papa has no problems with his own Paul franchise being used in his name just like the Bushes and the Clintons. Bwahahaha, you Paulbots are in a big surprise, Dr. Paul really does support that with the Dominica in Operation Red Dog.
Bigger question for you is with Hezbollah being so high on your short list of public enemy No.1 terrorist organizations how do you reconcile that w/ your support for Rep. party and where is your criticism of the Republican party on the issue of the budding US alliance with Hezbollah?
They’re a terrorist group stupid. Hamas is a terrorist group too.
You didn’t answer the question. If there such an evil terrorist group then why is our government working with known terrorist groups genius??? Doesn’t this go against our values?
You idiot, Hezbollah attacked our embassies overseas.
They attacked the US Embassy in Lebanon in 1983 aside from the US barracks;
Attacked it again in 1984;
Hijacked Flight 847;
Targeted the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia in 1996.
Those are the American targets that they’ve attacked, and you want to know why they’re dangerous? Boy, that’s like saying the Nazis are not going to do anything bad to anyone they don’t like that’s not like them.
Genus: For the 4 time answer the question, why is the American Government working with Hezbollah as reported in Newsweek, Wall Street Journal, and National Review?
Are just going to play stupid and pretend we’re not working with Hezbollah even though the mainstream media has reported it.
Does it look like I support that Paulbot? And oh, you idiots claim there is such a grand Israeli Lobby trying to make us go to war are you that dumb and stupid? Arming Shiite fanatics is so “wonderful”.
Let me finish that one for you Chicken-hawk arming Shiite + Israeli fanatics is so wonderful.
You equal Israel with Hezbollah, you’re dumb as dumb as any Paulbot is. You’re nothing more than an imbecile. Hezbollah has killed so many Jews as well as Americans you doofus.
The fact that you’re not fine with Israel being armed or any one else against Hezbollah or their Sunni counterparts shows what sort of judgment you lack. It’s no wonder wRONg Paul will never win any national election because people are sick of his anti-Americanism and his supporters are just dumber than he is.
Maybe if this were the Dominica, Dr. Paul and you idiots would be fine supporting white supremacists. But not go there yourself to help out the white supremacists because that’d make you a chicken-hawk, bwahahahaha!
M2000 as mentioned you are the definition of a chicken-hawk because in looking at everything you ever said you believe you’re advocation of war makes you wise, resolute, and strong. Whereas anybody who disagrees with you is idiotic, weak and cowardly.
The flaw in your perception is not that you want the U.S. to fight a war which you clearly do not plan to fight yourself, but rather, that you assign to yourself the courage and strength of those who will actually fight the war, simply because you sit in your home, protected and safe, and advocate that the war be fought.
Just a reminder, “Chicken-hawkism” is the belief that advocating a war from afar is a sign of personal courage and strength, and that opposing a war from afar is a sign of personal cowardice and weakness. A “chicken hawk” is someone who not merely advocates a war, but believes that their advocacy is proof of the courage which those who will actually fight the war in combat require.
So how come Dr. Paul didn’t volunteer himself to help out his white supremacist buddies in the Dominica in Operation Red Dog, but makes his entire political franchise about non-interventionism which you Paulbots waste your time with? You Paulbots hate our allies more than hating our foes.
22 reasons why Ron Paul is not a racist: http://www.buzzfeed.com/ccbaxter/22-facts-that-dont-jibe-with-ron-paul-being-a-rac-41xp
So how come the article states he was called to testify by the defense counsel then?
http://www.nytimes.com/1981/06/21/us/2-guilty-in-new-orleans-for-plot-on-dominica-invasion.html
Come on Paulbot? Answer? Sure the judge didn’t let him testify but come on? What sort of judgment is that if he’s not a racist then? Why is his name even in the article then? And why is he continued to have these associations with white supremacists?
Read the NYT article link and nowhere does it mention anything about Ron Paul, you sent the wrong thing. Read the Buzzfeed link he disavowed the newsletter a long time ago that’s such old news to bring it up. If you follow him than you would know that wouldn’t even make sense. You don’t gain a large following especially of young people, syndicated publishing of your articles in CNBC, WSJ, etc. and 2 NY Times Best Selling Books by being a racist. You are such an ignorant hater, its funny!
Liar:
http://newsone.com/1805245/ron-paul-was-implicated-in-attempted-white-supremacist-island-invasion/
I’ve heard Ted Cruz is copying his moneybomb tactics, maybe he can go complain about it at the United Nations the way he did with his fellow Paulbots! Should have just bought it like that porn star did with a website named after her:
http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/02/11/1572411/ron-paul-united-nations/
You’re so pathetic! You sent me an NYTimes article supposedly about Ron Paul’s connection to an invasion yet nowhere in it does it mention his name or reference him? And your answer is to provide another article from a super sketchy news source. Either you don’t read the articles you post or your a blatant liar trying to get one by us!! Chickenhawk either way your sadly pathetic. Lying is the last refuge for someone clearly losing the argument. Over and out.
wRONg Paul’s lawyer was asked to testify on behalf of the defense counsel. Bwahahaha! That’s too funny!
The day Dr. Paul was exposed as a chicken-hawk and yet his Paulbot followers embrace him to this day:
http://www.nytimes.com/1981/06/21/us/2-guilty-in-new-orleans-for-plot-on-dominica-invasion.html
You fing moron, why are you okay with it then Paulbot? Arming Shiite fanatics is such a “nice thing” to do. As bad as arming their Sunni counterparts.
If Hezbollah is so horrible and such a threat to national security please explain why out government is working with them? This seems to directly contradict your fear mongering:
Newsweek: “Relations between [Hezbollah] and the U.S. are developing positively,” a Lebanese newspaper quoted a pro-Western parliament member as saying.”
WSJ: “The Obama administration also has markedly softened its confrontational stance toward Iran’s most important non state allies, the Palestinian militant group Hamas and the Lebanese militant and political organization, Hezbollah. American diplomats, including Secretary of State John Kerry, negotiated with Hamas leaders through Turkish and Qatari intermediaries during cease-fire talks in July that were aimed at ending the Palestinian group’s rocket attacks on Israel, according to senior U.S. officials.”
http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-iran-relations-move-to-detente-1414539659
http://www.newsweek.com/2014/10/10/has-isis-crisis-pushed-cia-bed-hezbollah-274517.html
Idiot, you embrace being soft on the terrorists that’s just “lovely”.
Where are the Republicans (or Democrats) calling out our budding alliance with Hezbollah? McCain, Palin, Boehner anyone??
How about Rand Paul? You forgot to add him, he signed the letter to Iran you stupid Paulbot. I guess if you want to keep the Paul franchise going you’re going to have to hide how Rand Paul signed the letter which his papa and his Paulbots will ignore.
M2000 I called you a chicken-hawk because in looking at everything you ever said you believe you’re advocation of war makes you wise, resolute, and strong. Whereas anybody who disagrees with you is idiotic, weak and cowardly.
The flaw in your perception is not that you want the U.S. to fight a war which you clearly do not plan to fight yourself, but rather, that you assign to yourself the courage and strength of those who will actually fight the war, simply because you sit in your home, protected and safe, and advocate that the war be fought.
Chicken-hawkism is the belief that advocating a war from afar is a sign of personal courage and strength, and that opposing a war from afar is a sign of personal cowardice and weakness. A “chicken hawk” is someone who not merely advocates a war, but believes that their advocacy is proof of the courage which those who will actually fight the war in combat require.
Therefore M2000 you win the award of “Chicken-hawk” on this issue! Put it high on your mantle of life accomplishments!!
Look at you, being in this desperate mood. F off.
Nice comeback, I know 5th graders with more wit! The truth is getting to you! Funny!
Says the Paulbot who regularly uses the term “chicken-hawk”, f*ck off.
I only regular use it when I describe you, who happens to sounds like Edgar Allan Poe’s retarded echo!!
Paulbot, you really don’t have any original thoughts other than from Dr. Paul.
I just called you EAP retarded echo and that’s the best and most creative you got!! You really do have like little repartee!
Weakling, Paulbot is a coward.
You’re further validating my chicken hawk comment.
You’re childish behavior exposes what a Paulbot will always behave like.
How is the Iranian Government today more of a threat than the Soviet Union during the Cold War? Back up your speculation.
it supports terrorism you moron, it has mass murdered Americans you jerk.
Have we not killed innocent women and children that have nothing to to do with terrorism? This the part where you tell us we’re angels…
Idiot, you don’t seem to care do you? You don’t give a sh*t about civilian causalities, I know Dr. Paul and his Paulbots regularly use them as human shields to protect and defend actual terrorists.
I just said we’re killing civilians that have nothing to do with terrorism?! How is that not caring?? Clearly I’m being critical of it.
So letting terrorists come into the country with Open Borders no matter if they’re Sunni or Shiites with nukes is okay?
No, never said that. And how exactky are they coming into the U.S. with nukes?
You moron, that’s what’d it lead to and you don’t care you try to shut me up by calling me a “chicken-hawk”.
How will it lead to that? They do not have warplanes, battleships or ICBM’s. Chicken-little you sound paranoid?
Paulbots again show they’re cowards.
You are by far the Cowardly award recipient today. You have yet to articulate why you will NOT fight a war that you have been championing? Its easy to have others fight for you right? You’re too scared to get out on the battlefield yourself.
Coward, you make up stuff.
Hey Paulbots, thanks for letting Iran have nukes because its Sunni counterparts want nukes too like the following:
Egypt:
http://www.theisraelproject.org/egyptians-support-iranian-nuclear-program-want-own-nuclear-weapons-2/
http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/10/19/new-poll-egyptians-turning-toward-iran-want-nuclear-weapons/
Saudi Arabia:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-24823846
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/14/saudi-arabia-may-go-nuclear-because-of-obama-s-iran-deal.html
Jordan:
http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Jordan-and-Russia-to-sign-10b-nuclear-deal-this-month-394732
Turkey:
http://www.thetoc.gr/eng/news/article/die-welt-turkey-secretly-developing-nuclear-weapons
But hey, Dr. Paul stated Iran needed nuclear weapons to become more powerful, so therefore its Sunni counterparts must become more powerful even in the midst of ISIS and the stupid “Arab Spring” threatening the stability of these countries which these nukes can fall into the wrong hands.
Thanks Paulbots, you just made yourselves the perfect Useful Idiots for nuclear terrorism on American soil, all we just need is Open Borders to let them all in and we have both parties whom are running pro-Open Border candidates that do just that.
Maybe the RNC/DNC can give Dr. Paul a cabinet position to make it all happen faster.
Got to call BS on these articles: “According to the US based think-tank, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the BBC report on possible nuclear sharing between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia is partially incorrect. There is no indication of the validity or credibility of the BBC’s sources, nor does the article expand on what essentially constitutes an unverified lead. Furthermore, if Pakistan were to transfer nuclear warheads onto Saudi soil, it is highly unlikely that either nation would face any international repercussions if both nations were to follow strict nuclear sharing guidelines similar to that of NATO.[24] A research paper produced by the British House of Commons Defence Select Committee states that as long as current NATO nuclear sharing arrangements remain in place, NATO states would have few valid grounds for complaint if such a transfer were to occur.[25]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Saudi_Arabia
Of course, you Paulbots will deny these Sunni countries will ever or want to develop nukes to counter Iran. Are you that dumb and stupid? Of course you are! Then you’ll all cite the same sources you originally went after as “false”.
Idiots.
Absorb the TRUTH!!! Admit you’re a Warmonger!!
Pathetic, you Paulbots are pathetic, you believe in Dr. Paul’s comments that Iran wants a nuke to make itself more powerful but ignore its Sunni counterparts wanting nukes to also make themselves more powerful.
Contradiction alert.
Why don’t you go out there and fight this fight instead of yapping your mouth from the safety and comfort of your home about sending young americans to do it for you???
Death of America: 1776-2015.
Death Due to Paulbots and Open Border fanatics who made it easier for Sunni and Shiite crazies to have nukes, first they killed each other but then their “lost” their nukes that they made supposedly for defense.
You’re paranoid and don’t understand what’s going on.
Nuke Experts play down threat of uranium in the hands of ISIS:
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/iraq-turmoil/nuclear-experts-play-down-threat-uranium-stolen-isis-n152926
Chicken deserves to be roasted, that’s you Paulbot.
You sound like a chicken-hawk. Go buy a one way air ticket today to fight Iran!!! Put up or shut-up!!
You’re an idiot, do you realize how stupid you look with that “chicken-hawk” comment? If terrorists were on our soil and the military were searching for able bodied men to fight them I wouldn’t mind helping.
You are the one who should shut up, Dr. Paul has been involved with the 9/11 “Truth” crazies like Alex Jones, no wonder you Paulbots want to refuse that Sunni countries will not be upset over Iran having nukes should they get some.
M2000; its clear you’re not willing to put your life on the line for a cause you adamantly and fanatically believe in but you’re totally fine with having other American kids risk there’s!!
Says the Paulbot who ignores Sunni-Shiite history about their conflict and what’d happen if Iran gets a nuke.
As I’ve said it’s totally illogical and idiotic comment, an Iran- U.S. / Israel nuclear war would be a textbook example of Mutual Assured Destruction. The doctrine of MAD requires a credible second-strike capability by the target country, and U.S./Israel would be absolutely certain to retaliate. So it’s a nonsensical argument on your part.
The terrorists are on our soil?! Who is saying that other than conspiracy theorist lunatics? You ‘wouldn’t mind helping’ this is coming from someone so strongly supportive and defensive of military intervention. You hardly sound convincing!
Thanks for being an idiot.
Like I said below you are the poster child for chicken hawkism
M2000 as I said before, I called you a chicken-hawk because in looking at everything you ever said you believe you’re advocation of war makes you wise, resolute, and strong. Whereas, anybody who disagrees with you is idiotic, weak, and cowardly.
The flaw in your perception is not that you want the U.S. to fight a war which you clearly do not plan to fight yourself, but rather, that you assign to yourself the courage and strength of those who will actually fight the war, simply because you sit in your home, protected and safe, and advocate that the war be fought.
Chicken-hawkism is the belief that advocating a war from afar is a sign of personal courage and strength, and that opposing a war from afar is a sign of personal cowardice and weakness. A “chicken hawk” is someone who not merely advocates a war, but believes that their advocacy is proof of the courage which those who will actually fight the war in combat require.
Therefore M2000 you win the award of “Chicken-hawk” on this issue! Put it high on your mantle of life accomplishments!!
Chicken-hawk, the oldest pathetic cry from a Leftist that’s now borrowed by Paulbots.
Chickenhawk fits you well!! Have you booked your 1 way ticket to Iran to fight!! That’s right your like a little puppy all bark no bite. It’s clear you not wliking to put your life on the line; but you’re toralky okay with other young Americans doing so!! Cowardly.
F*ck off crybaby Paulbot.
You idiot, you want to deny how there is a huge history between Sunnis and the Shiites fighting each other? This will make it all go nuclear.
You’re willing to sacrifice for a stupid cause that might end up getting millions of Americans mass murdered by nuclear terrorism?
They want to kill each other let them. We don’t need to referee it! Why don’t you go out there and fight this fight instead of yapping your mouth from the safety and comfort of your home about sending young americans to do it for you. M2000, just go out there and referee it since your such a champion of this war.
You idiot, their nukes will get in the hands of terrorists like ISIS and Hezbollah are you that dumb and blind sided you’d ignore that? Are you stupid to suggest nothing like that could ever happen that we shouldn’t do anything about it even making sure Iran does ever become more moderate in its stances?
The USA is going to commit suicide because of Paulbots like you and Open Border fanatics that’d make it easier for the “loose” Sunni and Shiite nukes to get in.
We have our own open border problems in TX don’t need to worry about other countries. ISIS is a band o rebels using chinese and american weapons. They don’t have fighter jets where they can reach us from 6,000 miles away. Sounds like paranoia and alarmism from you.
You forgot to add Russian you idiot. You’re downright pathetic, yea downright pathetic, that’s pre 9/11 talk. Like how the Boston bombings happen Paulbot? Even with conventional bombs? How about the London bombings? The bombing in Spain?
Pathetic. I hope you Paulbots are sealed in a Dark Chapter in this country’s history and stay there forever.
BS on Egypt a country incredibly in flux: “Egypt is not known to have pursued a dedicated nuclear weapons program since its independence. It began its nuclear program in 1954 which expanded to include Russian 2MW nuclear research reactorETRR-1 that was opened by President Gamal Abdel-Nasser at Inchass in 1961. Further development in its nuclear program was stopped in 1967 after its defeat in the Six Day War.[2]
In addition, in 1992 Egypt acquired a more powerful 22MW multi-purpose research reactor ETRR-2 from Argentina.[12]
Egypt signed the NPT in 1968 which it then later ratified in 1981. It has since 1974 worked to make the Middle East a nuclear weapons free zone.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
So you think those statements by Hezbollah chanting “Death to America” mean nothing? And didn’t Dr. Paul run as a Libertarian against Reagan?
Yea, Paulbot tries to rewrite Dr. Paul as a Reagan Conservative even though he and his Paulbots hate Conservatives and side with far left Democrats. Except if they’re for the Joos.
Responsible people judge things by action and not rhetoric. Actions are what matters. Example John McCain stood up in the middle of a presidential campaign and sung songs about….”bomb, bomb, bomb, bombing Iran…”
In other words, a crackpot saying something is very different then somebody doing something.
If you look at the reality of actions over the various countries, what you see is that the U.S. currently occupying two nations on either side of the Iranians (eastern and western borders), Afghanistan and Iraq because those are countries that we invaded, bombed and are now occupying.
Over the last 5 years the Israelis have invaded and bombed Lebanon, Syria and slaughtered a huge number of civilians in the Gaza Strip.
By contrast, when was the last time Iran has invaded any other countries? You have to go back several centuries.
Over the last few years you have had constant threats issued by the U.S. and Israel about attacking Iran militarily.
So if you want to look at who the threats are and the actual aggressors are, I think its a very hard case to make that Iran is some sort of unique threat because of some crazy rhetoric its president makes and could never possible carry out.
As far as Iran testing missiles, if testing missiles is the sign of an aggressive regime then the U.S. and Israel should be brought before the UN and be charged with all sorts of crimes because nobody tests missiles more frequently and more aggressively than those two countries. Testing missiles is something that virtually every nation with a military does. And what Iran is saying in regard to testing those missiles, is if you are going to continue to threaten us with military action.
McCain sang it once…the Mullahs in Iran chant it many times. You stupidity is indeed showing.
So it’s acceptable behavior? Are you McCain’s apologist? Sounds like a case of the pot is calling the kettle black! The height of hypocrisy!!
So it’s acceptable that the Mullahs chant “Death to America” according to a Paulbot, but wails when anyone else on the other side just says it one time…
Its name calling rhetoric! What are you 5 years old… sticks and stones… Your rationale, lets bomb a country because the called us a bad name? You sounds like a Warmonger on a temper tantrum!
Funny, you Paulbots use “warmonger” when I point out the Sunni-Shiite issue that’d happen if Iran gets nukes. Stupid Paulbots, I have no sympathy for you if it does happen on this soil.
Pick up a weapon and fight your insane extremist cause or shut-up!!
Paulbot, you’re a chicken who deserves to be roasted, why? Cause you’re always going to be proven wrong.
Die for the cause you believe in or are you too scared to scared to take action??
You’re nothing more than a filthy anti-American coward.
You’re a coward for not taking action and fight for a cause you so strongly believe in. Its easy to yap your mouth 6,000 miles away in the comfort and safety of your own home and tell other americans’ to fight for you; yet you take no action for this cause you so strongly believe in. It’s cowardly and hypocritical. Enough said!!
Bwahaha, look at you, you’re the one whom is the coward here. You are willing to let a state sponsor of terrorism gets nukes that’d nuclearize a stupid religious issue.
A coward is a person who turns the other way when it comes time to take action in a cause they believe in like yourself. You have done absolutely squat when it comes to this cause you believe in but you’re quick to point out what other people should be doing. Again the height of hypocrisy and cowardism.
For the record its BS and therefore see no need to intervene militarily. That doesn’t make me a coward but it makes you one because you have taken no action in this cause you believe in!!!
M2000 absorb the Definition of Coward: “someone who is not brave enough to fight or do something difficult or dangerous that they should do”. Now are you planning on fighting Iran??
M2000; its clear you’re not willing to put your life on the line for a cause you adamantly and fanatically believe in but you’re totally fine with having other American kids risk there’s!!
Paulbot emotional crybaby.
You enlist in the Iran war yet?!
Such a cowardly comeback.
Like I said, its clear you’re not willing to put your life on the line for a cause you adamantly and fanatically believe in but you’re totally fine with having other American kids risk there’s!!
That’s cowardly!! You’re like a little puppy all bark and no bite!!
You’re the one who won’t coward. Says the Paulbot who worships someone like wRONg Paul who praised the death of Chris Kyle who served in Iraq.
You having a senior moment? Pretty baffling comment, you’re advocating, defending and glorifying war with Iran; not me. I’m against it because it’s BS as they do not pose any imminent threat to the US, last I checked Iran doesn’t have warplanes, battleships, or ICBMs to attack us.
This is “your” war that you’re advocating and not once have you said you’ll go over there and put up the fight to them. That’s why its cowardly on your part. You believe in it but when it comes time take any action you turn tail.
You idiot, Russia is giving Iran its nuclear technology or are you just stupid? Heck it’s giving its Sunni counterparts the same nuke tech too.
Way too emotional as a typical Paulbot is.
Paulbots = chickensh*ts ready to be roasted, might be a little bit on the crispy side due to the radiation from the nuclear terrorism they denied would happen to them because of the crazy Sunni-Shiite war that just went nuclear on our own soil…
As an American, you should support the right to free speech. You actually sound like a communist shrill or a religious extremest who cannot stand the freedoms we Americans are supposed to have and who once had. If a nation stands up and voices death to America, I do not see that as our signal to attack their freedom.
This is pathetic, you Paulbots throw around “chicken-hawk” when I talk about how Sunnis and the Shiites will go nuclear with each other. Yea, that’s not preventing freedom of speech.
So I take it to the Paulbot, when the Iranian Supreme Leader states the chant over and over again, it must mean “nothing” at all:
http://nypost.com/2015/03/23/irans-supreme-leader-screams-death-to-america-amid-ongoing-nuclear-talks/
We should be kind to him…
To the delusional Warmonger; where’s the evidence of an aggressive Iran other than sensationalist crackpot rhetoric????
When was the last time Iran has invaded any other countries? You have to go back several centuries.
We are more of an aggressor in this region, if you look at the reality of actions over the various countries, what you see is that the U.S. currently occupying two nations on either side of the Iranians (eastern and western borders), Afghanistan and Iraq because those are countries that we invaded, bombed and are now occupying.
And yet Iran is displaying rhetoric that signals something else which must be okay for a Paulbot that Iran betrays its non-interventionist foreign policy.
Ron Paul has his own political pursuits he has a right to have a presidential campaign; he cannot control who his candidate opponents are. Ron Paul and Ronald Reagan were friends.
Ronald Reagan endorsing Ron Paul:
“Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country.”
Source of Quote: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/02/when-ronald-reagan-endorsed-ron-paul/70913/
Here’s what Ron Paul said about Reagan at the time of his passing:
“I was one of the millions attracted to Ronald Reagan by his strong support for limited government and the free-market. I felt affinity for a politician who based his conservative philosophy on “. . . a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom . . .” I wish more of today’s conservative leaders based their philosophy on a desire for less government and more freedom.”
Dr. Paul, is naive. He has a cult following that will agree with anything he says, but not well thought out.
All one has to do is think about those they love and the danger he would put them in. I know the argument give me liberty or death, but the context is different than Paul might apply.
His strategies are dangerous. We will end up with another Hitler someday, but who knows where the target is if we listen to Paul.
Great message of Liberty, but we already have that, why risk it? Our ancestors fought hard to gain it. Let’s not be fools and waste their blood.
When has Iran exhibited aggressive offensive acts of war such as bombing, invading and occupying countries in the last +200 years? We are more guilty of that behavior than they’re! Look at our Middle East foreign policy history.
This whole Iran building a nuclear bomb propaganda is reminiscent of the Bush WH lie that Iraq’s got WMDs. There are obvious similarities. The claims basically are the same. The principal claim in the lead-up to the war in Iraq was that Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction, specifically nuclear weapons. This was the claim that probably made the most number of people willing to support it. That is the same claim being made about Iran — that they are too developing nuclear weapons, even though American intelligence agencies and virtually everybody else, including Israeli intelligence, says there is no evidence that Iran has actually decided to build a nuclear weapon.
Does it really matter? You are probably young and naive. Keep your innocence as long as you can, but don’t dare think for one moment people need not be mindful of the damage that can be done, if they do increase “leverage.”
Do you trust them with your life? Your families life? All those that you love?
Simple questions, but answers are required before you make a decision.
His policy is one of ignorance. Love his message of Liberty, but after that I am lost in the abyss. Do you seriously think we are an island? That if we just “leave” them alone they will comply and leave us alone?
Think about it. When have they ever?
Dick Chaney told Dick Armey that Sadam Hussein had a suitcase nuke.
According to Gellman’s book, Cheney told Armey that Iraq would soon have “packages that could be moved even by ground personnel” and “a delivery system in their relationship with organizations such as al Qaeda.” These claims, writes
Gellman, “crossed so far beyond the known universe of fact that they were simply without foundation.”
“Armey is a very angry man at this point,” Gellman told Stewart. “He was against the war. … He was actually weeping in the well of the House when he cast his vote.”
Chaney lied to Dick Armey to get him to support the Iraq invasion. At the time also, President and his minions were lying about weapons of mass destruction to entire nation. That means the war mongers on this site dissing on Ron Paul by definition do not have a clue what they are talking about. After all, where are they getting their so-called facts.
McCain was praising Prince Bandar bin Sultan, then the head of Saudi Arabia’s intelligence services and a former ambassador to the United States, for supporting forces fighting Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria. McCain and Senator Lindsey Graham had previously met with Bandar to encourage the Saudis to arm Syrian rebel forces.
Like elements of the mujahideen, which benefited from U.S. financial and military support during the Soviet war in Afghanistan and then later turned on the West in the form of al-Qaeda, ISIS achieved scale and consequence through Saudi support, only to now pose a grave threat to the kingdom and the region. It’s this concern about blowback that has motivated Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to encourage restraint in arming Syrian rebels. President Obama has so far heeded these warnings.
John McCain’s desire to help rebel forces toss off a brutal dictator and fight for a more just and inclusive Syria is admirable. But as has been proven repeatedly in the Middle East, ousting strongmen doesn’t necessarily produce more favorable successor governments. Embracing figures like Bandar, who may have tried to achieve his objectives in Syria by building a monster, isn’t worth it.
So it makes sense for Paulbots to support Iran to go nuclear to help out the “neo-cons” by letting Saudi Arabia go nuclear.
If things go bad, we can all stay at Ron’s house.
I’m sure we’d have plenty of candle light?
Ron Paul need to retire. His son shows promise, but I am not so sure he hasn’t been brainwashed?
We’ve been there for 25 years and what do we have to show for it over than American lives lost and taxpayer money wasted? Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity!
wRONg Paul does indeed deserves to retire. He’s a crank, wants to give nukes to Iran but his Paulbot turdlings ignore the Sunnis will want nukes too. Only far things could go nuclear…
Ron Paul is right we need to stop being the policeman for the world and get our american troops the hell out of that crazy country. Ronald Reagan said in his memoir about the irrationality of the Middle East:
“Perhaps we didn’t appreciate fully enough the depth of the hatred and the complexity of the problems that made the Middle East such a jungle. Perhaps the idea of a suicide car bomber committing mass murder to gain instant entry to Paradise was so foreign to our own values and consciousness that it did not create in us the concern for the marines’ safety that it should have.
In the weeks immediately after the bombing, I believe the last thing that we should do was turn tail and leave. Yet the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there. If there would be some rethinking of policy before our men die, we would be a lot better off. If that policy had changed towards more of a neutral position and neutrality, those 241 marines would be alive today.”
M2000 on your “Paulbot” perjorative per Urban Dictionary (pretty funny as it sums you up well):
“TOP DEFINITION
Paulbot
Freedom and personal liberty loving online supporters of Ron Paul were given this name by close-minded individuals who only follow main-stream media’s propaganda and lies. The close-minded refuse to believe that Ron Paul has more support than landline phone polls reflect, and therefore any online entity that supports Ron Paul must be a ‘bot’. Fortunately for America there are millions of people who support the only hope for America’s future, Ron Paul.
“That article was written by a Paulbot, no one really wants to stop paying income tax or end the war in Iraq.”
“I want the government to take care of me from cradle to grave so I never have to be accountable for anything, I’ll never be a Paulbot!”
“Looks like the Paulbots showed up at another straw poll. Ron Paul won with almost twice the amount of votes as the 2nd place finisher.”
Source: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Paulbot