|
November 21st, 2012 | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,105
|
Ron Paul: U.S. Should Remain Neutral in Israel-Gaza Conflict
|
November 21st, 2012 | #2 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
|
I agree, and so far we have pretty much stayed out of it, apart from Hillary going over there to look diplomatic.
|
November 21st, 2012 | #3 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,105
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
November 24th, 2012 | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,803
|
Israel's moral blackmail and political manipulation of America has turned America into another Germany: America has been a dupe, a patsy, a despotate and ceaselessly milked cow for the benefit of Israel for almost 70 years now.
We've been swindled into buying their goods at mark up prices, giving them "loans" with no interest or timescale for repayment, aid up front so they can "invest" it and suck even more blood through usury and right now America is at a point where the military "aid" budget given to Israel per year is 3+ billion dollars and accounts for more than half of reported Israel military spending. Ask any right thinking person the cost of Israel to America and they will calculate hundreds of billions and if the cost of having a gargantuan military that spends more than the rest of the world put together on behalf of Israel is concerned the costs are into the tens of trillions. Just Iraq and Afghanistan occupation and Judaization (in the name of democracy as elections are rigged to benefit Big Money interests) probably has a 5 to 6 trillion dollar price tag with kikes making out like bandits. Through it all, American politicians say they are "neutral." To my mind, America has forked over at least a trillion of what amounts to colony money to a country the size of New Jersey and has fought a collective 20 year's worth of occupational, colonial war on Israel's behalf. NEUTRAL. Hah! When the United Nations voted overwhelmingly in favor of recognition of statehood for Palestine and membership in the United Nations, which country was the chief opponent to it ultimately the veto vote? The "neutral" United States, right? |
November 24th, 2012 | #5 | |
drinking tea
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,898
|
Israel is claiming you are sending your troops over to Sinai next week - hardly uninvolved/neutral if true.
http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=148376 posts 1, 4 and 21 are relevant - the rest turned into a megaphoning crapfest. Quote:
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote. |
|
November 24th, 2012 | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,803
|
Wasn't the reason to vote for Obama as a WN was that he wasn't owned by Israel? Oh as if somebody could be president for 4 years without getting assassinated if that were the case.
|
November 24th, 2012 | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,424
|
No, I've seen you construe it like that before, and I don't think it's entirely accurate. What was said, or rather observed, was that Romney was even worse than Obama in his Israel subserviance, or more accurately: that he clearly and demonstrably was the choice of the sitting radical war-mongering Likud-Netanyahu faction; and that had he won, a war against Iran would've not only been possible but very probable.
|
Share |
Thread | |
Display Modes | |
|