Sensationalist as fuck unofficial Ron Paul commercial.
116 replies, posted
It's a really fucking awesome ad, and it's all true. I want to vote for him.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;34382103]Wait, so when Obama does something, he gets credit. However, when Bush does something, he doesn't?[/QUOTE]
Bush set a deadline for afghanistan? what?
show me that.
lmao at the people who can't seem to get that it's not red scare
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;34382147]Bush set a deadline for afghanistan? what?
show me that.[/QUOTE]
He set a deadline for Iraq, and you give the credit to Obama.
this is a terrible analogy...
taliban were assholes and needed to be ousted
saddam was a schmuck that shouldn't of been in power
america has neither of those running our country - china would have no reason for even setting foreign troops up
I was imagining and then my mind wandered. I don't think I have enough imagination to handle this shit.
[QUOTE=Sottalytober;34382222]this is a terrible analogy...
taliban were assholes and needed to be ousted
saddam was a schmuck that shouldn't of been in power
america has neither of those running our country - china would have no reason for even setting foreign troops up[/QUOTE]
So as long as a country has a bad leader, the US should have free reign to invade and occupy the country for as long as it thinks is necessary?
The trillion-dollar, decade long war in Iraq which the people of both Iraq and the United States oppose is completely justified because Saddam was a [i]"schmuck?"[/i]
[QUOTE=Sottalytober;34382222]this is a terrible analogy...
taliban were assholes and needed to be ousted
saddam was a schmuck that shouldn't of been in power
america has neither of those running our country - china would have no reason for even setting foreign troops up[/QUOTE]
The Taliban are in Afghanistan, not Iraq. As for Saddam, it was not the US's right to decide whether or not he should have been in power. The UN did not approve military action against Iraq. The USA broke international law and the United Nations' mandate by invading. One of Bush's greater crimes.
[QUOTE=Sottalytober;34382222]this is a terrible analogy...
taliban were assholes and needed to be ousted
saddam was a schmuck that shouldn't of been in power
america has neither of those running our country - china would have no reason for even setting foreign troops up[/QUOTE]
what i gathered from the video is that you can't bomb someones country and kill their countrymen for the better part of a decade then call them a terrorist when they fight back
[QUOTE=yawmwen;34382158]He set a deadline for Iraq, and you give the credit to Obama.[/QUOTE]
and then he endorses a candidate who might have violated that agreement?
Consider the political context for a couple seconds.
Bush left 4 months after he signed the agreement, [B]he was essentially a lame duck at that point.[/B]
His decision to make that deadline probably was a last ditch attempt to be remembered for something.
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;34382266]and then he endorses a candidate who might have violated that agreement?[/quote]
There are more issues than just the Iraq War.
[quote]Bush left 4 months after he signed the agreement, [B]he was essentially a lame duck at that point.[/B]
His decision to make that deadline probably was a last ditch attempt to be remembered for something.[/QUOTE]
Obama pulled out of Iraq less than a year before elections, it is probably a last ditch attempt to get elected.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;34382305]There are more issues than just the Iraq War.[/QUOTE]
yeah, the video making fuck-all generalizations.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;34382305]
Obama pulled out of Iraq less than a year before elections, it is probably a last ditch attempt to get elected.[/QUOTE]
no, he was following that deadline.
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;34382318]
no, he was following that deadline.[/QUOTE]
This is really hilarious.
So was he our knight in shining armor who saved us from the war in Iraq(for the sake of re-election), or is Bush the one worthy of credit?
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;34382318]no, he was following that deadline.[/QUOTE]
which deadline
the George Bush one you just learned about, or the 2009, two-brigades-per-month plan that Obama promised during the election?
to be honest I'm surprised that Obama doesn't have Osama locked up in a cell somewhere so that come election time, Obama can trot him out and execute him with his bare hands
That's a sexily done video.
[QUOTE=Sector 7;34382368]which deadline
the George Bush one you just learned about, or the 2009, two-brigades-per-month plan that Obama promised during the election?[/QUOTE]
the bipartisan bush one, derp.
His own party would be pissed at him if he wouldn't.
2-brigades a month is a great platform to get elected on, however it won't go over so well with the military leadership. Obama wanted to maintain his image of being "good with military", so he went with Petraeus, and sacked McChrystal.
[QUOTE=archangel125;34382247]The Taliban are in Afghanistan, not Iraq. As for Saddam, it was not the US's right to decide whether or not he should have been in power. The UN did not approve military action against Iraq. The USA broke international law and the United Nations' mandate by invading. One of Bush's greater crimes.[/QUOTE]
I knew where the Taliban was, that's why I separated the two. But think of Iraq this way. You have a bully - a real asshole who's just shitting on kids. It's not your right to beat the piss out of him is it? It's his parents. Now in this scenario his parents drunks who don't care. So either he gets to keep beating the piss out of kids (Gassing Kurds), or you being stronger then him, can stop it.
[QUOTE=archangel125;34381910]Because if they pull out now, the Taliban will step in almost instantly to fill the gap. They'll depose and kill Karzai, and then begin an ideological 'cleansing' in the name of Allah.[/QUOTE]
Forgive me, but I always thought that the Taliban insurgency was the "get the hell out of our country" kind of people while Al-Qaeda was the religious extremist group.
Or perhaps it was a mix?
I don't [I]think[/I] (keyword think, because I really have no idea) the Taliban was something that was religiously motivated in a major way. I think I heard something about them housing Al-Qaeda agents, but I always thought that was more of a "we don't like America, neither do you, go figure" sort of thing.
But then again, religion has always been a major cause of conflict in the Middle East.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;34382367]This is really hilarious.
So was he our knight in shining armor who saved us from the war in Iraq(for the sake of re-election), or is Bush the one worthy of credit?[/QUOTE]
to be honest, no one is the winner or the knight here. However Bush was pro-"take as long as it takes" up until the very end of his term, and Obama campaigned on a withdrawal. See the difference here?
also relevant
[quote]it reminds me of all the idiots in class who were quick to raise their hands to tell the professor how watching city of god changed their entire outlook on poverty. if something so brief and obviously tailored as propaganda is able to change your opinion about something then perhaps that opinion shouldnt be changed.[/quote]
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;34382416]to be honest, no one is the winner or the knight here. However Bush was pro-"take as long as it takes" up until the very end of his term, and Obama campaigned on a withdrawal. See the difference here?[/QUOTE]
Which is ironic because the one who campaigned on a withdrawal was following the timeline set by the "take as long as it takes" president.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;34382440]Which is ironic because the one who campaigned on a withdrawal was following the timeline set by the "take as long as it takes" president.[/QUOTE]
it wasn't set or "made" by him for fucks sake, he just signed it. It's more the baby of [B]Robert Gates[/B] than either Obama or Bush.
Robert Gates probably was the one who said "fuck off" to Obama's 2-brigades/month policy.
um i know you guys have a hardon for shitting on ron paul but this video is both LATE AS SHIT and still completely correct
it's made to make people understand and sympathize with the fact that we're just unquestionably running into someone elses country and doing whatever we please, it isn't scaring people into voting for ron paul. once again i know you get stiff at the opportunity to make fun of ron paul but you're really late and you're desperately trying to find something bad in a good commercial
[editline]25th January 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sector 7;34381677]It's not out to cast the "reds" as the bad guys, it's trying to denounce our foreign military presence by switching the perspectives.
As for the OP, this isn't new, it isn't news, and it's not newsworthy. It's a movie made by a Ron Paul fan based on a speech made by Ron Paul a good while back. Calling it a 'commercial' is completely incorrect, and trying to debase a politician for promoting peace and diplomacy is pretty fucked up.[/QUOTE]
thank you
[editline]25th January 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;34381809]Thing is when you consider that its point and delivery are extremely sensationalist and demagogue-ish... that's when things start to get absurd.[/QUOTE]
thing is when you consider what you're saying, you're just bitching about a video with a great point and a great purpose so you can get funny ratings for making a shitty ron paul thread
it's so fucking easy to criticize ron paul for all the stupid deplorable shit he actually thinks, yet you somehow miss all that and you have to use [B]unofficial[/B] advertisements that make a solid point to try and fling shit at him, how can you mess this up
[QUOTE=Kopimi;34382467]um i know you guys have a hardon for shitting on ron paul but this video is both LATE AS SHIT and still completely correct
it's made to make people understand and sympathize with the fact that we're just unquestionably running into someone elses country and doing whatever we please, it isn't scaring people into voting for ron paul. once again i know you get stiff at the opportunity to make fun of ron paul but you're really late and you're desperately trying to find something bad in a good commercial
thank you[/QUOTE]
late as shit? sir this video is 1 month old. While others of the same speech have been posted, they all pale in comparison to this one in exposing how ridiculous his generalizations are.
I'm not saying it's a bad commercial, in fact it's a FUCKING MASTERPIECE of demagoguery. I'm just pointing out how it distorts the truth.
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;34382489]late as shit? sir this video is 1 month old.
I'm not saying it's a bad commercial, in fact it's a FUCKING MASTERPIECE of demagoguery. I'm just pointing out how it distorts the truth.[/QUOTE]
how is this distortion of the truth?
it's a valid analogy designed to reason with people and show them why the war in the middle east is such a heavy conflict that affects tons of people, just because it uses the invasion of our homeland as a basis for, oh i don't know, A COMPARISON TO THE INVASION OF SOMEONE ELSES HOMELAND, doesn't mean its demagogy
and yes it's a month old you're a bit late to the party on this spectacularly stupid shit flinging contest
like yeah i get that you hate ron paul but at some point you have to use some semblance of logic and reasoning before you post something stupid and say "LMOA LOOK GUYS!!"
Does this guy not get how words work? They go left to right, top to bottom, not left, up, left, down, back to the right of the first word, but a bit smaller, down, right, right, up, 90 degrees clockwise and right, really big and up, left.
[QUOTE=Kopimi;34382467]thing is when you consider what you're saying, you're just bitching about a video with a great point and a [b]great purpose[/b] so you can get funny ratings for making a shitty ron paul thread[/QUOTE]
electing ron paul isn't a great purpose imo, that's an opinion.
[QUOTE=Kopimi;34382467]
it's so fucking easy to criticize ron paul for all the stupid deplorable shit he actually thinks, yet you somehow miss all that and you have to use [B]unofficial[/B] advertisements that make a solid point to try and fling shit at him, how can you mess this up[/QUOTE]
my purpose isn't to fuck ron paul, it's to show how this specific video is used to do that.
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;34382517]electing ron paul isn't a great purpose imo, that's an opinion.
my purpose isn't to fuck ron paul, it's to show how this specific video is used to do that.[/QUOTE]
right the video serves no purpose other than electing ron paul it's not like it poses any sort of philosophical point intended to explain to people the severity of the situation of the war in the middle east and how it affects other people nope just ron paul 2012
stop being an idiot
[QUOTE=Sottalytober;34382399]I knew where the Taliban was, that's why I separated the two. But think of Iraq this way. You have a bully - a real asshole who's just shitting on kids. It's not your right to beat the piss out of him is it? It's his parents. Now in this scenario his parents drunks who don't care. So either he gets to keep beating the piss out of kids (Gassing Kurds), or you being stronger then him, can stop it.[/QUOTE]
It's still not the US's right. The United Nations dictates international law, and the USA is quick to pounce on any country that disobeys their ruling. This time, the U.S. government was the criminal. Saddam needed to be overthrown, but only by his own people. America did not liberate, it invaded, and because of that war, nearly two hundred thousand innocent civilians died, and the nation's infrastructure has been completely ruined.
[quote=joes33431;34382403]Forgive me, but I always thought that the Taliban insurgency was the "get the hell out of our country" kind of people while Al-Qaeda was the religious extremist group.
Or perhaps it was a mix?
I don't think (keyword think, because I really have no idea) the Taliban was something that was religiously motivated in a major way. I think I heard something about them housing Al-Qaeda agents, but I always thought that was more of a "we don't like America, neither do you, go figure" sort of thing.
But then again, religion has always been a major cause of conflict in the Middle East.[/quote]
The Taliban aren't a direct threat to the USA, but they were the dominant political power in tribal Afghanistan before NATO attacked in response to their supposed harbouring of Al Qaeda. And they supplied a huge percentage of the world's opium, which was another convenient reason for the war in Afghanistan. They are religious extremists of a terrible kind by anyone's standards, but they aren't what I'd call terrorists.
[QUOTE=Kopimi;34382511]how is this distortion of the truth?
it's a valid analogy designed to reason with people and show them why the war in the middle east is such a heavy conflict that affects tons of people, just because it uses the invasion of our homeland as a basis for, oh i don't know, A COMPARISON TO THE INVASION OF SOMEONE ELSES HOMELAND, doesn't mean its demagogy
and yes it's a month old you're a bit late to the party on this spectacularly stupid shit flinging contest
like yeah i get that you hate ron paul but at some point you have to use some semblance of logic and reasoning before you post something stupid and say "LMOA LOOK GUYS!!"[/QUOTE]
Distortion of the truth?
"the reality is that our military presence on foreign soil is as offensive to the people that live there as armed chinese troops would be if they were stationed in Texas"
what? for a long time our military presence was welcomed in SK. Same with Germany.
It's propoganda, plain and simple. Don't try to whitewash it.
[editline]24th January 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Kopimi;34382535]right the video serves no purpose other than electing ron paul it's not like it poses any sort of philosophical point intended to explain to people the severity of the situation of the war in the middle east and how it affects other people nope just ron paul 2012
stop being an idiot[/QUOTE]
why don't you stop the fucking ad hominem then we can talk?
the video states common sense for the first part.
[quote]i mean all it takes is a little common sense to know people in other countries dont want to be told what to do by bigger countries.[/quote]
again, don't whitewash it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.