superdude17*

let's get one thing straight: I am glad that Pervez Musharraf is leading Pakistan right now. I don't care what anyone thinks. I don't want anyone else leading the country.

Sebelius for VP, not Hillary

Ron Paul is an ignorant fool, a demagogue and a one trick pony. Appeasement didn't work in the 1930's and it still doesn't work today. When you just keep letting national security threats do whatever they want to, they just grow stronger and stronger and you are merely delaying when you will have to fight them, and allowing the costs of that fight to accrue as they grow stronger.

The choice between giving Musharraf aid was the choice between fighting the war on terror or not. Had we not given Musharraf aid, we could not have invaded Afghanistan and thus not have gone after Al Qaeda's base of operations. So once again, the idiot Paul contradicts himself saying that he was in favor of going after Afghanistan but of course he opposes the only way we could have done so (forming an alliance with Pakistan so we could travel into Afghanistan).

__________________
Forum Rule 3: Discuss the Issue, not your opponent.

apawllo

Yeah, I got my facts confused. It becomes difficult while we attempt to run so many nations at once. At any rate we've funded Musharraf's operation in Pakistan, and the $10 billion dollars figure is absolutely spot on.

Sebelius for VP, not Hillary

It's funny, I didn't have any trouble with the facts despite the "so many" nations we run (Iraq and Afghanistan). You talk about the importance of foreign policy experience, yet the basic facts of 2 or 3 countries are giving you a hard time?

Yeah, the US pumped $10 billion into Pakistan, which was invaluable in allowing us to get access to do our operations in Afghanistan. Is Paul now against invading Afghanistan? Is he for it before he was against it?

__________________
Forum Rule 3: Discuss the Issue, not your opponent.

Contumacious

MOD_DEM78

This just validates the Republican position of fear first, intervention second. Ron Paul is banking on the premise that a majority of Americans want to close off their borders and limit global exposure. You can't wave the flag of democracy and then run for cover every time extremist factions under the guise of al Queda issue edicts of Jihad, and then innocent people pay the price with their lives. The U.S. has an obligation not only to govern and protect every American, but to protect those that can't provide for themselves. The problem with this administration is that communities around the world feel that with great disregard for their beliefs that Bush has launched a "Holy Crusade" of sorts to take revenge for his father. Now we are faced with the precarious postion of whether or not to secure an unstable nation. Now we have to intervene, because no one can ascertain the accountability of the $10 billlion dollars given to Musharoff. In all probability this money is in corrupt hands, and given the tenuous situation at hand, Musharoffs' security forces will be ill equiped to defend against a take over of nuclear facilities. The United States and the world as a whole must take action immediately, or we are going to have another North Korea on our hands.