By Kevin “Coach” Collins
It is hard to say who, other than our Islamist enemies, benefits from Ron Paul’s slick ad asking, “What if China had bases in Texas?” Paul uses it to promote his delusional view of the world and certainly fools some well-meaning but ill-informed Americans. Those who don’t want us to fight with our hands tied behind our back are easy prey for the gibberish Paul is selling because this ad blurs the lines between the frustrating manner we have prosecuted the war on terror and the very valid reasons for entering into it to begin with.
Many Americans who understand the appallingly halfhearted way the war in Viet Nam was “fought” have an understandable predisposition toward believing we are fighting a “civil war” or “meddling in the affairs of other countries” when we take proactive measures in fighting our war on terror. Paul knows this and shamelessly plays on it for votes.
Nevertheless, implying there is no difference between Viet Nam and the current war on terror is as addle brained as saying there is no difference between night and day.
Because it was largely true that nothing when North Viet Nam and the Chinese attacked South Viet Nam, would not have brought that war to our shores, does not in any way mean a “live and let live” policy toward the Islamist will insure our safety – just ask the Spanish train bombing victims about that.
Paul’s misguided foreign policy would have us deny the threat of Islam based on the implied notion that we can treat Iran and organized Islamist terror groups as if they are just another group of Nazis speaking a different language. The Nazis did not want to destroy our way of life; they wanted to take over our way of life. The Islamists don’t want to take over our way of life they want to murder every one of us and spit on our way of life.
In its Verses of The Sword, the Koran instructs Islamist to cheat lie steal in order to ultimately murder all infidels for merely living. It says nothing about putting these things into practice only if attacked by the West. Ron Paul either doesn’t understand this at best; or doesn’t want his supporters to understand this at worst.
Slick ads that cloud the differences between the enemies of the 1940s and the enemies we face today do nothing to keep us safe; on the contrary they lull us into a false sense of security. Shame on you Ron Paul; shame on you.
Use this site to contact your Congressional Representative: https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
To learn more use this link:
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=3790
Have you answered this week’s CiR.com poll?
In this world you may have knowledge or you may have repose, but you may not have both.
What have you done today to deserve to live in America?
Comments on this or any other coachisright.com essay can be sent by following the posting instructions below.
Related posts:
- In Iowa and New Hampshire Non-Republicans are supporting Sanjaya Paul as their “pig party” entry
- Ron Paul joins sides with the traitor Rosenbergs’ son, calls WikiLeaks traitor Manning a “patriot”
- China gets to examine our stealth helicopter wreckage because Obama trusts Pakistan
- As China Sells missiles to Iran Pakistan and Syria Obama kowtows to his masters
- Operation Shady RAT: China again
Loading ...
We didn’t get into the war because of 9/11/2001. We were already engaged in a back and forth fight with Bin-Laden for years. Ron Paul was one of the only people who saw this coming. Like now no one wants to listen. Watch this video until the end. It’ll send chills down your spine. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embed…
Wow, dude, put down the bong. That clip is from 1999, Osama bin Laden was involved in the Somalia mess and the first WTC bombings (hint, that was well before this floor speech–you know like–in '93). Paul wasn't saying anything new. Paul has not been prescient or more knowledgeable than most of those who follow international events. Paul is not "amazing" he is rather mundane–except that he is also dangerously naive.
I can think of no better man to be in charge of our domestic agenda, nor any worse man to sit as Commander in Chief.
The Talmud instructs Jews to cheat lie steal in order to ultimately murder all Gentiles for merely living.
You're the one that sounds like a Nazi (i.e. not-see)!!! Go get all those evil muslims and put them in concentration camps, eh?
Kim, I challenge you to prove where it is written in the Talmud that Jews are instructed to lie, cheat and steal "in order to ultimately murder all Gentiles for merely living"… We know there are passages in the Islamist's Koran stating these objectives; but I seriously doubt there exists any such intentional deceits and genocidal proscriptions in the Talmud.
Could you be confusing the two?
I to would like to see a link to such Jewish gibberish. I study the Torah and have never seen anything like that ever. Please enlighten me. . .
Kim,
you need to have your physician change your medication…
Kim,
please visit: Love The Jewish People http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/1000/1000_01….
Paul is as intellectually dishonest as he is dangerously naive. The example you mention is a perfect example of his tendency to draw moral equivalence between two decidedly non-equivalent philosophies. China-intolerant, oppressive, anti-free speech, anti-free press, anti-religious expression . . . pretty much the antithesis of America whose citizens enjoy all of those rights which the Chinese deny their own people.
He has done the same in equating Iran to Israel–or the Palestinian people to Israel.
Will, I agree with you…It's also very difficult to discern where Libertarian mantras and "isms" end and Paul's personal flights of fancy begin.
Actually, I don't believe him to be naive in the least sense though…..while brilliant on a few limited subjects, Paul suffers from the same belief in his own hype as other Congressmen have evinced.
My suspicion of him is that he is more sly and wily….a typical opportunist…as are most politicians.
I suspect that the national forum he has enjoyed of late, through the debates, has emboldened him ideologically, to the point of allowing some of the looniness , inconstancy, and inconsistent applications of philosophical underpinnings to show through.
While I personally tilt a bit toward SOME of the isolationism Paul espouses, especially after all these damnable and costly wars (in terms of both lives and dollars), I dang well do NOT believe that it is in our best interests to casually dismiss, as Paul does, the venom embedded within the Muslim Brotherhood's determination to destroy Israel and any country which supports her.
Paul is absolutely correct about the corruption inside the Beltway…but we already knew that !
daddysteve your comment was pulled for language.
Americans are tired of being the Police of the world. We need to mind our own business. Nobody pays us to do this job, it comes out of American tax payers pockets, and in such economic times, the world is going to have to defend itself. Israel is quite capable of taking care of itself, it does have nuclear weapons, something Iran does not. . .
Stop the Wars. . .
Stop the Lies. . .
Stop the Corruption. . .
RP in 2012.
Sorry to disagree With the coach, but words like delusional and gibberish are deriding, and I take exception to suggesting that any of our conservative candidates are anything less than smart and patriotic.
The grassroots coalition that RP has formed is going to be a powerful force that will need to be addressed by quasi conservatives. . .
"A closed mind is like a closed fist, it can not receive anything of value. . ."
Think about it
dbassd…I definitely will challenge your claim that "our conservative candidates are anything less than smart and Patriotic" !
When will you, and others, get it through your heads that the majority of the "Federalistas" in Washington, including the candidates being selected for us, are nothing more than opportunists, liars, cheats, robbers, back-room-deal-barons, and frauds.
How in the Sam Hill can this EVER be misconstrued as "patriotism"? Especially when the costs and "un-intended (or intentional) consequences of their gross stupidities and gamesmanship fall onto the shoulders of the American citizens, financially and in freedoms lost?
And… if they are so bloody "smart", why do they continually get caught up in their own lies, pecadillos, and deceptions???
De-fund the bastards, defame them, and disobey them… that is the only way we can hope to regain our country.
I certainly hope dbassd, that you are not suggesting that we here, at Coach is Right, are quasi conservatives for nothing could be further from the truth…..
I must say however that you show considerable "Cheek" in asserting that Ron Paul is a "conservative"…last time I looked, he was a dyed-in-the-wool Libertarian ideologue. He's a Constitutionalist in many regards…but that does not make him a Constitutional Conservative..
I've been down this Libertarian road ( personally speaking), so often that I'm weary from the rhetoric…..there is much about Libertarianism which I still espouse and practice…..however, the Purist Libertarian doctrine coming from Paul is as Utopian, Idealistic, and unworkable as Progressive Socialism. Give me a Libertarian pragmatist any old day !
So whom do you endorse for GOP candidate for POTUS?
As you can tell my erudition and rhetoric is weak, as is my research capabilities.
In fact I have always abhorred politics and politicians. I have always trusted that our elected leaders would take care of the problems that the governance of persons always entails. Boy was I wrong!
I became involved when the Muslim Marxist, with no BCert was running. I have found out that the illusion that I have been living under has been planned and implemented for several hundred years. You know the conspiracy of the illuminati, NWO,CFR,,et al.
I have since realized that, and have been awakened. Now with the help of the internet, I have been on a vigil of amassing info. Thank God for the internet, as it makes it so much easier to choose what you believe the truth to be, as opposed to having the media prepare the information for you.
It seems that you are an expert at what you do, and when I blog, I usually, paint in huge strokes, so as to get the main point across.
Congress has an approval rating of 9% and plummeting, and that is enough to let anyone know what the heck is going on in DC, and it aint Good.
It is a globalist agenda, and Americans do not want any of that, unless they are at the top of that chain.
WE are the the top dog in this world, in many ways, and we intend to stay there.
We are not perfect, and we have a lot of work to do in order to earn the respect of the world again. We need to work on that.
Americans are a unique culture that is very misunderstood by many in the world today.
I still like Paul over the other candidates, but would and could very easily listen to what you have to offer on candidates, as I have to agree with you fully on what you wrote.
Again whom would you suggest. . . And at this stage of the game would it be pragmatic?
Waiting to hear what yo have to say with baited breath(?)
Seriously. . .
The Chinafication of America. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nO1ROoDcfFw&fe…
Good links there Raymond. Stuff I have not seen, and very informative, , ,
Just a thanks and keep up the good work!
Listen "Coach" If you call Obama a stable President, you need to hang up your pen and take a perment vacation. If this So-Called "WAR" on terrorism were fought as though the U.S. meant to win it, it would have been done with before Iraq got started.
Don't blow fluff up my Arse and tell me the sun is shining when I can't see the sun at all. And don't get the wrong idea, Bush, as well as the rest of the Rhinos in congress has been sleeping with the enemy a long time now.
Tom, I think you may have erred here. I've been a contributor here at Coach is Right for over a year +; and I can honestly and truthfully tell you that I have NEVER heard "Coach" refer to Obama as any thing remotely resembling "stable".
There have been a "gazillion" word attributed to this unlikeable President at CiR, and none of them, to my recollection have been favorable.
Perhaps you have mixed up the dialogs somewhere along the line.
As for blowing fluff up your arse….you will most certainly notice that occurrence if you don't put a lid on this unfounded ad hominem attack on Coach. Pay attention, the sun is shining whether you see it or not.
All of the candidates besides Ron Paul either have the majority of their contributions coming from big business, or big banks. Why is Ron Paul receiving more contributions from military than any other candidate? Why is it not mentioned that he is the only candidate to have ever served in the military? Why are an enormous number of veterans coming out in droves to support him?
I noticed an article by Paul Craig Roberts, who worked for Reagan. Mr. Roberts is a Ron Paul supporter. I am so very tired of the status quo and will not vote for anyone that doesn't have a consistent message and accepts donations from lobbyists and banks. What is wrong with this point of view? I am tired of being called Paulbot, commie, leftist, etc. I have been a conservative and have voted consistently for conservatives my entire life. I will no longer accept Rinos or Globalists as my only alternative and I will vote for Ron Paul if he is nominated.
Also, I noticed that many democrats and independents are moving to Paul in huge numbers because they feel let down by Obama. Nearly every one of them has stated they will not vote for any other Republican, because the rest of them are neocons who want war. No other candidate will draw their numbers. Obama will not win if Paul is nominated, however he will keep them if anyone else is nominated, which guarantees four more years.
I believe this commentary sort of misses the point of the ad. It's intention is not to shame, but to explain. Its force is not normative, it is descriptive.
Paul's argument is that American escalating military presence in the Middle East is Al'Qaeda's #1 recruitment tool, and serves only to embolden extremism. To understand why this is the case is merely to understand basic human psychology; when you feel repressed and hopeless, you do crazy things. Similarly, the Nazis came to power in no small part as a result of the economic ruin brought about by the Treaty of Versailles. The German people felt repressed and unjustly treated by the allied powers, and the Nazis were able turn this into extremely effective propaganda.
Explaining motivations in no way morally justifies what some Muslim terrorists have done and what some want to continue doing, any more than my explanation about the motivations of Weimar Germans vindicates the horrible crimes of the Nazi party they joined and supported. To pretend not to understand this distinction is deliberately sophistical.
Paul's point is only that America has a chance to rewrite the Treaty of Versailles in the Middle East. If we scale back our military presence in these lands, and stop trying to pull the strings of the leaders of their governments, organised terrorists will eventually dwindle down to only those few truly insane people whose hatred of America is rooted in something other than self-interest.
From a pragmatic point of view; 9/11 was the largest terrorist attack that the US has ever seen and it required many years of planning by one of then best-funded (with Saudi money) terrorist organisations in the world, and sheltered by the most ideologically insane regime the Middle East has seen since the Middle Ages. That is to say, this was a once-in-a-lifetime kind of job, with all the planets aligning for the terrorists. 3000 innocent Americans died.
Since then, the American government has lost over 8000 servicemen in Afghanistan and Iraq, spent trillions of dollars it manifestly cannot afford, and killed nearly a million Iraqi civilians, in defense of our safety. Is this a fair trade off?
The “killed nearly a million Iraqi civilians” part is totally bogus. It is a made up figure feed to the CAIR’s useful idiots in the western media. Nice try.
Coach
Christian Hegele:
By saying :
“Paul’s argument is that American escalating military presence in the Middle East is Al’Qaeda’s #1 recruitment tool, and serves only to embolden extremism…….
“Paul’s point is only that America has a chance to rewrite the Treaty of Versailles in the Middle East. If we scale back our military presence in these lands, and stop trying to pull the strings of the leaders of their governments, organised terrorists will eventually dwindle down to only those few truly insane people whose hatred of America is rooted in something other than self-interest.”
Your comment makes my point very well. Paul and his followers don’t want to understand that the Islamists are NOT a European cousin nation gone astray. Referencing the Treaty of Versailles is so perfect in explaining how wrong Paul and his followers are that I wish I had thought of it. The one and only goal for the Islamists is the fiery end of the world. It has been for 1400 years. Their wish for our death has nothing at all to do with our presence in the Middle East. It has to do with our presence on earth. Please read the Verses of the Sword referenced in the original essay then ask yourself who is right about the intentions of the Islamists.
Thank you for reading CiR and commenting on our site.
Coach
I admit that, after rereading your article, I had misinterpreted its thesis. I'm sorry for misrepresenting what you were trying to say in my reply.
My initial thought is that we cannot ever say with confidence what their motivations are. I don't think either of us has been immersed in the daily life of those communities which are hotbeds for extremist recruitment. But it seems likely that motivations are multi-faceted.
Ideology probably plays a role, certainly in solidifying commitment amongst recruits already friendly to the Islamist cause by fitting their struggle within some cosmic narrative. But it seems unlikely to me that mere ideology is sufficient to explain the growth in the number of people who volunteer their lives to violence against, in particular, the US and Israel (as opposed to other wealthy, non-Islamic countries). Economic and political motivations must certainly pick up some of the explanatory slack.
To illustrate, I am inclined to think that if Russia had maintained its aggressive military presence in the Middle East, for instance, it would be a more frequent target of attack than it is. Russia, of course, faces violent Islamic terrorism in the north Caucasus, but all indications point to this as politically-rooted in the situation in Chechnya. Again, I think this justifies my point that political and economic motivations cannot be simply ignored, no matter what cosmic ideological justifications the terrorists also spew.
Christian Hegele…I really respect the manner in which you offered the apology to Coach This shows me that you're a "Mensch".
You may not yet be finished arguing other points with Coach, but you appear to be doing so honorably.
I can see you are trying to understand but you are still reluctant to allow that this is pure ideology. Because you are not an Islamist nor have you carefully studied them as I have this is quite understandable. Nevertheless the truth is the truth. I have authored one book on Islam and coauthored a second. I have done my than 700 hours of research on these people and I believe I can speak authoritatively about their aim.
Chechnya was a failure for them because the Russians didn’t take the bait. Their plan was to commit such atrocious crimes against innocent Christians that Christian anger flare up and give them the all-out war they crave. The Russians saw through the Belan attack and kept a total media blackout of the rapes of 12 year old girls who were then murdered and thrown out windows. The truth has only leaked out and when it has Christians have found it so disgusting as to be unbelievable (because they insist upon thinking of Islamists as European bad guys –BIG MISTAKE!
Again I say sir, these are NOT European adventurers gone astray. They don’t give a damn about politics and they beg for the chance to die and take us with them to satisfy their idea of religion. In Islam there is no mercy, there is not a word about Allah loving mankind, and in fact the Koran tells Islamists they were condemned to hell at birth no matter what they do in life. This is why they can so easily be talked into killing robbing cheating stealing honor killing maiming women with impunity and any number of criminal acts disguised as piety.
Coach
I am indeed reluctant to admit it is pure ideology, if only because I refuse to admit that the human being is so malleable as to allow its most basic, naturally-selected instincts toward biological self-preservation and self-interest to be subverted by insane ideological rhetoric alone — if but in the most extreme cases of innate psychological dysfunction. I do not disagree that there are some leading Islamist figures whose psychology is thus dysfunctional, but it strikes me as extremely unlikely that every one of their grunts and footsoldiers share it. For this reason, I have to believe that recruitment is driven by more tangible motivations, and, moreover, in the case of Islamic terrorism such tangible justifications may be easily identified.
Regardless, I urge you not to affect a summarily dismissive allocution in your responses, for I do not think my views are prima facie absurd. I took your previous reply to indicate more than a small measure of contempt, which I think is unbefitting of your role as debate moderator.
To Christian Hegele…One thing to remember Christian…In America, Religious beliefs and tenets are an option to be practiced or not.
The same does not hold true of Muslim controlled countries.
Islam is the skin, a person's physical dermis is secondary and subordinate to it.
From infancy, the laws of Mohammed are drilled into the very structure of everyday life. One does not escape it, but the hapless souls subjected to its "isms" will die for it…..willingly.
According to our lexicon that would appear, as you say, dysfunctional
They may suffer some passing mortal desire to continue on in life. but when they are reminded of their afterlife rewards and the greatness of Allah, every fear (except survival perhaps), becomes lessened.
How can you not understand, or at least accept, that such zealousness actually does exists outside of a psychotic or neurotic state ?
Simply because such ardor does not lay at the core of American reasoning, logic systems, or Christian or Jewish belief systems; does not mean that they are NOT fundamental to other mid-East perspectives.
It is, in my opinion, naive and dangerous to get caught up rhetorical "head-trips" in trying to explain or understand the Jihaddist perspectives. Just know them for who and what they are….different from us in many unimaginable ways.
I can assure you that even the "grunts and the foot-soldiers" are not simply malleable…they have been washed in ideological blood-letting and taking since birth.
You need to pull your head out of the sand, love.
Christian Hegele,
In this life you may have knowledge or you may have repose, but you may not have both . Now that you have been given the knowledge believe what makes you feel safe and comfortable. I think we have now carried this to its natural conclusion.
Thank you for a civil and thoughtful exchange. Your comments add to the discussions we enjoy herte each day.
Coach
I was aware of many of the facts, including the excerpts from the Qu'ran, which you've cited. But I think your arguments have effectively highlighted reasons to believe they might be more significant than I'd previously thought. Although I still stand by most of I have stated, you have given me more to think about.
One thing you've just said sticks out at me, though, and I found it somewhat injurious. I am hardly emotionally-invested in most of the views I hold. If I affirm an opinion, it is rarely for merely pragmatic reasons, viz. safety or comfort. As a former Catholic, for instance, I know intimately and would love to possess again the supreme safety and comfort of knowing God exists. But I do not and cannot.
In any case, I thank you for your time, for this kind of reasoned discussion as profitable as it is rare — or rare online, at least.
-CH