[PV] Bombed if you do, Bombed if you Don't...Ron Paul's Weekly Column

[Frenchy]

---

Bombed if you do, Bombed if you Don't

The latest National Intelligence Estimate has been greeted by a mixture of relief and alarm. As I have been saying all along, Iran indeed poses no quantifiable imminent nuclear threat to us or her neighbors. It is with much alarm, however, that we see the administration continue to ratchet up the war rhetoric as if nothing has changed.
Indeed nothing has changed from the administration's perspective, as they have had this latest intelligence report for some time. Only this week has it been made known to the public. They want it both ways with Iran. On the one hand, they discredit the report entirely, despite it being one of the most comprehensive intelligence reports on the subject, with over 1,000 source notes in the document. On the other hand, when discrediting it fails, they claim that the timing of the abandonment of the weapons program, just as we were invading Iraq, means our pressure must have worked, so we must keep it up with a new round of even tougher sanctions. Russia and China are not buying this, apparently, and again we are finding ourselves on a lonely tenuous platform on the world stage.
The truth is Iran is being asked to do the logically impossible feat of proving a negative. They are being presumed guilty until proven innocent because there is no evidence with which to indict them. There is still no evidence that Iran, a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, has ever violated the treaty's terms – and the terms clearly state that Iran is allowed to pursue nuclear energy for peaceful, civilian energy needs. The United States cannot unilaterally change the terms of the treaty, and it is unfair and unwise diplomatically to impose sanctions for no legitimate reason.
Are we to think that Iran hasn't noticed the duplicitous treatment being received by so-called nuclear threats around the globe? If they have been paying attention, and I think they have, they would see that if countries do have a nuclear weapon, they tend to be left alone, or possibly get a subsidy, but if they do not gain such a weapon then we threaten them. Why wouldn't they want to pursue a nuclear weapon if that is our current foreign policy? The fact remains, there is no evidence they actually have one, or could have one any time soon, even if they immediately resumed a weapons program.
Our badly misguided foreign policy has already driven this country's economy to the brink of bankruptcy with one war based on misinformation. It is unthinkable that despite lack of any evidence of a threat, some are still charging headstrong into yet another war in the Middle East when what we ought to be doing is coming home from Iraq, coming home from Korea, coming home from Germany and defending our own soil. We do not need to be interfering in the internal affairs of other countries and waging war when honest trade, friendship, and diplomacy are the true paths to peace and prosperity.
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst120907.htm

[Fennellco]

[AZXD]

Now that's one hell of a letter.
No wonder I like the guy

• The truth is Iran is being asked to do the logically impossible feat of proving a negative.
• They are being presumed guilty until proven innocent because there is no evidence with which to indict them.
• There is still no evidence that Iran, a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, has ever violated the treaty's terms – and the terms clearly state that Iran is allowed to pursue nuclear energy for peaceful, civilian energy needs.
• The United States cannot unilaterally change the terms of the treaty, and it is unfair and unwise diplomatically to impose sanctions for no legitimate reason.

It's really hard to argue with a logical approach to foreign policy.

Then again, maybe with this secret government we have running things, perhaps Dr. Paul is unaware of the mountains of evidence within the neocon agenda backroom mind I gotta go pee!
Sorry George, I stole your line.

[newKid]

where is judge. . .wait for it. . .wait for it. . .

[Frenchy]

You gotta long wait!

[Pharmakon]

Originally Posted by Frenchy

You gotta long wait!

Why?

[Pharmakon]

Critics from the right say that our intel is not up to snuff and that this must be bad data.
When we do have information on weponizing uranium:
Critics from the left say that our intel is not up to snuff and that this must be bad data.

What the hell are we supposed to believe anymore?

[Tard]

Well, shortly before the U2 flight above Cuba found the Soviets putting nuke in place with which to kill us all, 'intel' announced that it wasn't happening and wouldn't happen because the Soviets had never done anything like this before.

Doubt me? Look it up.
Doubt Iran? It's OK, they'll nuke Europe first, we'll have lots of time to glass 'em before we all die slowly of nuclear winter.

[AZXD]

Originally Posted by Tard

Well, shortly before the U2 flight above Cuba found the Soviets putting nuke in place with which to kill us all, 'intel' announced that it wasn't happening and wouldn't happen because the Soviets had never done anything like this before.

Doubt me? Look it up.
Doubt Iran? It's OK, they'll nuke Europe first, we'll have lots of time to glass 'em before we all die slowly of nuclear winter.

OK
So what's your take on these talking points?
Quote:

• The truth is Iran is being asked to do the logically impossible feat of proving a negative.
• They are being presumed guilty until proven innocent because there is no evidence with which to indict them.
• There is still no evidence that Iran, a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, has ever violated the treaty's terms – and the terms clearly state that Iran is allowed to pursue nuclear energy for peaceful, civilian energy needs.
• The United States cannot unilaterally change the terms of the treaty, and it is unfair and unwise diplomatically to impose sanctions for no legitimate reason.

The nuclear winter may come true someday.
Until then, explain how our involvment makes me safer here at home. Explain how words like McCain's lyrical joke of "Bomb Bomb Iran" does anything to bring stability to any portion of the world. Then explain why we don't just start that nuclear winter as a pre-emptive method of eliminating hunger, disease, and all the other things we think are equally bad.
I have no problem doing what is right. But, who decides, what is right and can we trust their decision making ability?

Hitler went as far as he did by determining that he could not wage war on two fronts, and thus focused on GB. We as a nation have war's on poverty, famine, disease, drug's .......... Heck you name it and we seem all to ready to declair war on anything we think is wrong. OOPS, sorry declair war on anything they think is wrong. No one asked me about any of these wars. They just up and started them and left me with a bill.

It's a globalized world, so why doesn't Iran just buy a nuke? It is no different than a criminal in possession of a stolen gun. The biggest arms dealers are countries. I'm sure if they really wanted them, they would figure out a way to buy them. Hey that yellow cake story had more validity than attempting a DIY approach.

If we wern't so F'N stupid, we'd sell a few of ours to them and be done with this squabble.
Use the profit to fix a different problem.
Like maybe why we have more people locked up for doing bad things than any nation in the history of mankind.
Are we really that bad in this country

IGNORE all this!
It is our governments job to answer these questions.

[yocan]

Originally Posted by Tard

Well, shortly before the U2 flight above Cuba found the Soviets putting nuke in place with which to kill us all, 'intel' announced that it wasn't happening and wouldn't happen because the Soviets had never done anything like this before.

Doubt me? Look it up.
Doubt Iran? It's OK, they'll nuke Europe first, we'll have lots of time to glass 'em before we all die slowly of nuclear winter.

Get a hold of yourself man, they will nuke Israel our only true ally first.