[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Ron Paul seems pretty clueless when he makes statements like he did in the debate as does Pat Buchanon.
[/quote]
Wait just a damn second, are you seriously telling me that when Rudy says to Paul “that is an absurd theory” he does not sound clueless? Mr 9/11 himself?
Oh come on Zap.
No, not everyone does. Maybe in recent years since the Iraq war more people are starting to believe this, but after 9/11 and for a few years post that it was not the view.
"By a 51% to 38% margin, most Americans do not believe that “there is anything that the U.S. did wrong in its dealings with other countries that might have motivated the 9/11 terrorist attacks.” This is largely unchanged from how the public viewed this question in the weeks following the attacks themselves, nearly three years ago.
Even fewer (28%) believe there is any way that the U.S. was “unfair” in its dealings with other countries that might have motivated the terrorist attacks, though this percentage has risen from 23% two years ago, and 21% in late September 2001."
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=866
You read it that way. To me its like saying the Treaty of Versailles is justification for WW2. You don’t understand that most Americans before 9/11 had very little idea what the USA was doing globally.
Except for a major conflict, like the first Gulf War and the situation in Bosnia, you would be hard pressed to find an average someone that could tell you where our military bases where, why they were there, and what we were doing in that region.
Why is it a bad idea? Because it “emboldens our enemies”?
I for one like to know that an individual running for the President has a solid understanding of cause and effect and the nuances of our foreign policy. Something Ron Paul appears to have more than anyone else. If the polls are to be believed, most of the people watching these debates seem to feel that what Paul says is pretty good stuff.
So does Rudy’s apparent lack of knowledge on the 9/11 Commission Report.