It is OK with me. So there, I am against Ron Paul.
Why it is OK to kill innocent civilians without due legal process while it is not OK to kill known terrorists? Why was there no outrage from Ron Paul for killing Osama bin Laden and putting a prize on Muamar Omar, yet, Ron Paul is screaming for killing Awlaki, just because he was a US citizen?
Let me tell you something:
1. When you are a terrorist, you are the enemy of the country. Bush declared the War against Terror. When you are in a war, you don't ask your enemy to have legal rights, US citizen or otherwise. A brave US marine faces the enemy in a battlefield. He does not shout, "hey enemy you have the right to remain silent ... etc." . That marine just shoot that SOB.
2. When you are outside the country, you are not protected by the US Constitution. You just cross the border of North Korea and carry a gun. Hey, Kim Jong Il, I ahve the right based on the second amendment. They just shoot you. You go to Iran and bad mouthing the Ayatollah. They shoot you. You cannot say: But the first amendment says I have the freedom to say ...
3. Ron Paul is right that we should not be the police of the world, and I support that stand 100%. But his other ideas, extreme libertarians are not my cup of tea.
4. Any more terrorists against the US, citizens or otherwise, kill that SOBs, and let those in death rows eat vegetables if they insists in getting gourmet meals.
Enough rants for today! |
