Ron Paul: Prophet, Soothsayer or Just Drinking Bad Tea

This is from the ancient time of January 2007 and Ron Paul, like his buddies at antiwar.com, nailed it in a follow up speech. He nailed it if you live in the alternative world of Reid, Pelosi, Schumer and Justin Raimondo, IOW, you haven't any vision except that which shapes your own little world and those who buy into it.

The Irrelevance of Military Victory
by Rep. Ron Paul
January 16, 2007

A military victory in Iraq is unattainable, just as it was in the Vietnam
War.

Losers love this analogy except when you bring up that Congress (Democrats) caused millions to be murdered when they cut funding to the free government of South Vietnam that we had left unprotected.

At the close of the Vietnam War in 1975, a telling conversation took place
between an NVA colonel named Tu and an American colonel named Harry Summers. Col. Summers reportedly said, "You never beat us on the battlefield." Tu
replied, "That may be so, but it is also irrelevant." It is likewise irrelevant
to seek military victory in Iraq.

Irrelevant? Yes, it was. Colonel Tu knew our government and Congress better than we did because he studied us. If we follow your advice, now we can have millions more murdered in the middle east and Iraq, just like your kind accomplished with the aid of Colonel Tu and his compatriots.

As conditions deteriorate in Iraq, the American people are told more blood must
be spilled to achieve just such a military victory. Twenty thousand additional
troops and another $100 billion are needed for a "surge." Yet the people remain
rightfully skeptical.

Yep, conditions have deteriorated. No improvement any where. Just ask Pelosi and Reid.

Though we've been in Iraq nearly four years, the meager goal today simply is to
secure Baghdad. This hardly shows that the mission is even partly
accomplished.

Forget Anbar. Karbala. Diyala. Forget the rest of the country. Only think about Baghdad and what the mainstream press feeds you.

Astonishingly, American taxpayers now will be forced to finance a
multi-billion-dollar jobs program in Iraq. Suddenly the war is about jobs! We
export our manufacturing jobs to Asia, and now we plan to export our welfare
jobs to Iraq – all at the expense of the poor and middle class here at home.

Huh? Ron, don’t cut and paste between speech templates in the future. You only confuse yourself.

Plans are being made to become more ruthless in achieving stability
in Iraq. It appears Moqtada al-Sadr will be on the receiving end of our military
efforts, despite his overwhelming support among large segments of the Iraqi
people.

Yep, good call. Pacification, negotiation and encouragement is just plain ruthless.

It's interesting to note that one excuse given for our failure is leveled at the
Iraqis themselves. They have not done enough, we're told, and are difficult to
train.

Yet no one complains that Mahdi or Kurdish militias or the Badr
Brigade (the real Iraq government, not our appointed government) are not
well-trained. Our problems obviously have nothing to do with training Iraqis to
fight, but instead with loyalties and motivations.

I’m confused here, what election did you see Mr. Paul? When was your election voting the Badr Brigade into power held? We must have missed it. BTW Ron. Do you want troops out of Iraq now leaving those who believed in us in the lurch or do you want better training for Iraqi forces. Make up your mind.

We claim to be spreading democracy in Iraq, but Sadr has far more democratic
support with the majority Shi'ites than our troops enjoy. The problem is not a
lack of democratic consensus; it is the antipathy toward our presence among most
Iraqis.

Antipathy? Not on the part of Iraqis, especially not among the 100,000s Iraqis returning to Iraq weekly. Sadr has far more democratic support? Again, which election do you speak of? Was it on a different channel or different plane?

In real estate, the three important considerations are location, location,
location In Iraq, the three conditions are occupation, occupation, occupation.
Nothing can improve in Iraq until we understand that our occupation is the
primary source of the chaos and killing. We are a foreign occupying force,
strongly resented by the majority of Iraq's citizens.

Thanks for the real estate lesson, but is occupation (you know just like a hostile force does) the same of assistance and encouragement for a people to become free and live in a democracy while working with them to expel those murdering and maiming in the name of religion? Will this increase the value of property?

Our inability to adapt to the tactics of 4th generation warfare compounds our
military failure. Unless we understand this, even doubling our troop strength
will not solve the problems created by our occupation.

Yeah, Patraeus is a doofus, unlike you.

The talk of a troop surge and jobs program in Iraq only distracts Americans from
the very real possibility of an attack on Iran. Our growing naval presence in
the region and our harsh rhetoric toward Iran are unsettling. Securing the Horn
of Africa and sending Ethiopian troops into Somalia do not bode well for world
peace. Yet these developments are almost totally ignored by Congress.

Congress doesn’t need Bush conquering the whole world single-handed to confuse and distract you guys. Congress couldn’t find its own butt with both hands and directions.

Rumors are flying about when, not if, Iran will be bombed by either Israel or
the U.S. – possibly with nuclear weapons. Our CIA says Iran is 10 years away
from producing a nuclear bomb and has no delivery system, but this does not
impede our plans to keep "everything on the table" when dealing with Iran.

Don’t you just wish those damned Jews would quit running our military-industrial strength government? It’s our country you Jews. Shoo. Go away.

We should remember that Iran, like Iraq, is a third-world nation without a
significant military. Nothing in history hints that she is likely to invade a
neighboring country, let alone do anything to America or Israel. I am concerned,
however, that a contrived Gulf of Tonkin-type incident may occur to gain popular
support for an attack on Iran.

You’re right Ron. Iran never mentioned wiping Israel off the map and killing all the Jews and other infidels while in the Gulf of Tonkin. You got us there. Iran is just a puppy dog waiting to be given a loving pet.

Even if such an attack is carried out by Israel over U.S. objections, we will be
politically and morally culpable since we provided the weapons and dollars to
make it possible.

I never thought of this! It’s just like I used to tell my kids, “You’re just as much to blame. You encouraged your sister. Go sit in the corner.” Question, if Israel is running our country how is our country going to order Israel not to do this, but do that? Oh, those crafty neocons.

Let's hope I'm wrong about this one.

You were. Get some new tea leaves.

Hillary A Mommyesque Ball Of Emotion

Ann Althouse pretty much wraps this up. Neatly so.

Did yesterday's hostage crisis teach us anything about Hillary Clinton?

Is that what you want in a President? Someone who feels extra confusion because she's a mother?
But I don't believe that for one minute. I think that was just what was considered a good script. I don't happen to think it is a good script, because I don't want a President to roil into a mommyesque ball of emotion when a few people are in danger. Yet that's not Hillary. The only question is why she thought a statement like that was a good. She probably wanted to make sure not to confirm the widely held belief that she's unemotional, and, while she was at it, delight all the ladies out there who lap up emotional drivel.

Hillary does a walk through of the site, a day late and a dollar short, as if she is gonna find a clue that breaks the case wide open. Book'em Danno! Oh, and Danno, don't screw with me, make it snappy!