Thursday, June 21, 2007

Ron Paul Wrong

LGF notes that Ron Paul voted against the resolution calling on the UN to sanction Ahmadinejad for his threats against Israel.

What's this guy's problem? Does he support a nation currently engaged in the killing of US servicemen in Iraq and Afghanistan (by supplying, at the very least, armaments) threatening to destroy a long-time US ally?

5 comments:

C Bowen said...

Dr.Paul has made clear there should be no more wars based on UN resolutions, and this bill is a pretext for war on Iran, which is clearly a stupid and evil idea but the Cowardly Congress voted for it.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Paul is pro-America and anti-UN. What's your problem? Do you support global government? Global government is Satanic. Why do you hate Jesus?

Anonymous said...

Jay,

Here is Rep. Paul's recent article on this subject. Take a look and see if you agree:

http://www.antiwar.com/paul/?articleid=11171

Anonymous said...

Though the House has passed resolutions repudiating Iran because of the referenced statements and other bills have been submitted, this one is critical because it urges the UN to charge Ahmadinejad with a serious crime.

This is much stronger than a "sanction".

If the UN does this, Iran will be asked to give up Ahmadinejad. It will not. The UN can decide to use force against Iran to arrest the man. The UN will then call upon the US to supply that force. The US will go to war against Iran. Ahmadinejad will be arrested and tried in Israel, as required. Other Arab countries will be upset by this and all hell will break loose.

There are other ways, as Ron Paul has shown.

Jay.Mac said...

Let me see if I understand- he wants to buddy up to Tehran instead of confronting the regime. Let's leave aside for the moment that this vote is a step towards war, it's patently no such thing. Iran has threatened to destroy a member state of the UN and a staunch US ally- doing nothing really doesn't seem to be working at the moment, but demanding sanctions is far from going to war.

His "plan" is to engage with Tehran, with the regime that currently supplying munitions and expertise to terrorist groups that are killing US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, the regime fomenting much of the unrest there. That's his big plan to fix Iraq?

And what's his plan to prevent a nuclear armed Iran from obliterating the state of Israel and plunging the Middle East and possibly the world into war? Diplomacy has been the tool the UN and EU have been using to try and convince Iran to stop their nuclear program- it hasn't worked one iota. It's plain that Iran won't listen and further engagement, trade, etc with them is not going to change anything.