- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: For all you Rand Paul and/or Tulsi lovers
Posted on 1/5/20 at 5:29 pm to MeatCleaverWeaver
Posted on 1/5/20 at 5:29 pm to MeatCleaverWeaver
If Iran knew we wouldn’t retaliate would that make them more, or less, likely to attack the US?
1
Posted on 1/5/20 at 5:30 pm to MeatCleaverWeaver
Or maybe we can stop bombing everyone.
We’ve already freedomed the shite out of the Middle East and nothing’s changed. Except now we have less freedoms in America.
We’ve already freedomed the shite out of the Middle East and nothing’s changed. Except now we have less freedoms in America.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 5:35 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:I hear you and don't necessarily disagree, but if you get punched in the nose, you have to punch back
SCLibertarian
and hard
I'm not sure Rand would do that
Posted on 1/5/20 at 5:36 pm to AtlantaLSUfan
If Rand were Pres. we would not have any troops in the ME.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 5:36 pm to Robin Masters
The Iranian Regime's #1 priority is staying the regime. An all out war with the U.S. would put that at great risk. They will back down before losing their control of Iran.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 5:37 pm to RTRinTampa
quote:no
Isn't the very definition of imminent, highly likely?
imminent means "will happen soon"
Posted on 1/5/20 at 5:37 pm to MeatCleaverWeaver
quote:
this reiterates why Paul will NEVER be my man for POTUS.
+1
Posted on 1/5/20 at 6:02 pm to Ripley
Rand and Tulsi would have voted against WWII.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 6:10 pm to MeatCleaverWeaver
You don’t have to be world police to defend yourself against an attack. frick people! This isn’t complicated.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 6:13 pm to MeatCleaverWeaver
I like Rand.
He's likely correct as to outcome.
But, to the extent his opinion means he would not have acted. I disagree.
I disagree with Tulsi also.
He's likely correct as to outcome.
But, to the extent his opinion means he would not have acted. I disagree.
I disagree with Tulsi also.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 6:21 pm to MeatCleaverWeaver
The more I read up on it the more I reluctantly support killing him. But Rand is right though, this puts many more US citizens both in the military and others abroad in danger than would have been otherwise. So do we allow a small number to die to avoid risk to a greater number? I don’t know that the answer is as easy as it appears.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 6:22 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:exactly
You don’t have to be world police to defend yourself against an attack. frick people! This isn’t complicated.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 6:26 pm to Sentrius
quote:
good example of why he should not be President.
*another
Posted on 1/5/20 at 6:41 pm to MeatCleaverWeaver
Maybe they would like it better if we just sent Iran some cash?
Posted on 1/5/20 at 6:42 pm to Folsom
quote:
Paul would never proactively protect America and its citizens. Paul is a “theoretical” bull shite artist.
I think if Rand was President he would do everything in his power to bring troops home and not have them in situations like this. Like someone else said, I disagree with him here but he's not wrong. It will embolden Iran to retaliate but some times you have to hit a bully in the mouth to show them they can't keep getting away with it. So when Iran does retaliate we hit them harder. Eventually they will stop.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 6:45 pm to MeatCleaverWeaver
quote:Because he evaluates risk differently than you?
I know it’s not a surprise coming from either of these but this reiterates why Paul will NEVER be my man for POTUS. Never.
OK
Posted on 1/5/20 at 6:58 pm to AtlantaLSUfan
quote:
Or maybe we can stop bombing everyone.
Hippies need a new shtick.
Just my opinion...others may feel differently.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 7:00 pm to RTRinTampa
quote:
but Rand Paul is now worried that killing the Iranian General ordering aforementioned attacks makes it more likely we get attack.
That's what is so fricking stupid here. The likelihood of Iranian backed attacks on US resources is 100% with or without these missile strikes. You can either take them like a bitch or hit back. Striking the individual orchestrating all of the anti-American attacks is the perfect strike, IMHO.
Great job Mr. President, keep up the good work.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 7:00 pm to Tiger Roux
quote:
If Rand were Pres. we would not have any troops in the ME.
Same non serious thinking process as people who say..
"If there weren't any billionaires there wouldn't be any poverty."
Posted on 1/5/20 at 7:04 pm to MFn GIMP
quote:
I think if Rand was President he would do everything in his power to bring troops home and not have them in situations like this.
If you think the opposition to Trump is crazy, it would be even worse with Rand. Your Romney's, Graham's and Rubio's would actively campaign for the Democrat, because policing the world has become the basest of American political orthodoxies, regardless of political party. Rand is the most conservative member of the Senate, and yet you have people in this thread who would likely pull the lever for a Biden or a Clinton over him because the formers would guarantee our foreign meddling continue. So what you essentially have is a group of voters who call themselves conservatives but would rather see higher taxes, identity politics and creeping socialism, all because they want to perpetuate the Marxist-influenced foreign policy of neoconservatives.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News