He wont use those codes unless congress thinks we need to. We often forget that the President is not a dictator. For him to use those launch codes we would have to be in a war THAT CONGRESS APPROVED. The last thing he would do is use force because he believes that peace is much more powerful than force.
We also forget that Bill Clinton dropped more bombs on Iraq than the first gulf war. We also forget we are under real no terrorist threat at all. Ask a random person in the inner city what they are more scared of, a cop or a terrorist. Guess their answer.
We do gain more in peace than war and this is coming from someone who was pro-war against Iraq and had family from Iraq.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snake Doctor
Actually when Ross Perot ran as a 3rd party candidate he pulled votes pretty equally from both sides, so it has been done before.
So if Paul runs as an independent, and let's say it's Hillary vs Romney or Giuliani....then Paul gets the libertarian wing of the republican party to vote for him, and the anti-war part of the democratic party to vote for him.
So he may get 20% but that's not gonna be enough to win, and I think he'll pull enough votes from both sides that it wouldn't affect the outcome.
Here's the thing about Ron Paul, and this is just an honest non-biased opinion. I have nothing against the guy and I admire his conviction, and even agree with him on quite a few things.
He's just not a guy that you look at and listen to and think "Ok, this is the guy I want to trust with the nuclear launch codes"
That, more than any of his positions, is why he can't really win. It may not be fair, but that's really the way it is.  |