Ron Paul 2012: When should Ron Paul announce his decision? ran two polls earlier this year regarding Ron Paul’s potential candidacy for the presidency in 2012. The first poll ran from February 13 to 23 and the second poll ran from June 1 to 8. The results were almost exactly the same: 93% of our readers want Ron Paul to run for President in 2012.

If Ron Paul runs for President in 2012, when should he announce his decision? As soon as possible so we can all start campaigning (or support another candidate in case Ron Paul doesn’t run), or at a later time (when?), to await further developments and focus on auditing/ending the Fed for the time being?

When should Ron Paul announce his decision for 2012?

  • Immediately (50%, 1,558 Votes)
  • early 2010 (12%, 370 Votes)
  • early 2011 (8%, 252 Votes)
  • September 2009 (8%, 249 Votes)
  • mid 2010 (8%, 237 Votes)
  • late 2010 (7%, 213 Votes)
  • late 2009 (5%, 152 Votes)
  • Other (specify below) (3%, 84 Votes)

Total Voters: 3,115

Loading ... Loading ...

  • If Ron Paul runs for President in 2012 – He WILL WIN! Please Run Ron – WE NEED YOU!


  • lori ierace

    I want to see him in a white wig! Go RON GO!!

  • deb

    Announce it immediately – give us what is lacking most – HOPE!!!

  • Do not waste time on this, announce it right away and pass the word!

    I am already working with my brother getting the message out with painting my car and his truck with infowars website and a local one as well. Would love to put Ron Paul for Pres on there to!

    Revolution Now!

  • Sarah

    Dr. Paul,

    I think you should not announce your run until November 2011. Just like anything else, you must play a little hard to get. Perhaps play coy and say something like “I would not run a campaign that the American people did not compel me to do so” (something that is worded better- I’m no speech writer). If you basically make it known that if you get enough supporters you will run, that would give this organization and others a meaningful purpose from now until campaign season, otherwise it’s a waiting game. Also, I don’t want the American people to tire of you too soon, you must become the star of the 2012 campaign and the symbol of hope for the Republican Party. It also wouldn’t hurt to pick a non-controversial , handsome and charming running mate; someone like Rick Santorum. This way the dumbed-down media cannot make issues out of VP candidate buffoonery (think Edwards, Biden and Palin) which distracts from the ISSUES.

  • Leyla Paul

    Ron Paul needs to be in the public eye as a critic, a form of official opposition and an alternative candidate to the current regime. I say regime, because Obama is merely the front man who’s been well-trained in a cadence and an artificial oratory. He was set up to take the fall which will come eventually. Meanwhile, Ron Paul has been an accomplished, consistent person of integrity. He’s a known entity with no closed books or hidden agenda. The sooner he’s out there as THE declared opposition candidate, and essentially the president-in-waiting, the more likely his name recognition will work in our favor. However, Paul has to avoid getting trapped into flubs or mis-steps as numerous obstacles will be placed in his way at every step and every turn. So, the sooner Ron is OUT THERE as a more ethical, more consistent, more viable choice, the better will be the chance of more votes when the time comes. Obama’s honeymoon is already over. Soon the disenchantment will lead people to look seriously for a credible alternative that is a known person – a tried and true leader to restore the great reality of what once was. Ron — Declare Now!

  • Sarge

    Ron should run as an Independent! I would imagine that many feel as I do that we have had it with the lies of both the Republicans and the Democrats. We were led down a road by the last administration and we are being led down a road by this administration. We will be slaves to other nations if these people are not stopped and soon. They are destroying our futures and the futures of our children. Start reading up on the Council for Foreign Relations which Bush and Obamma are both members. America is being suckered! Read their charter and members list.

  • Mike – Seattle

    Let me start off by saying I am a HUGE Ron Paul fan, his beliefs are in line with 99% of mine, I’ve met with him in his office and had a wonderful conversation with him, and I truely believe he is the very best thing for this country.

    With that said, I am slightly skeptical about him running in 2012. The people are DEAD asleep in this country, and I’m not sure that his ideas alone are enough to wake them. If his ideas came in the form of a charasmatic middle aged senator, governor, or business man who spoke well from the podium, then the mainstream Republicans and the Libertarian Republicans may actually be able to come together in agreement. But being on the front lines of his campaign, and being still involved in the Republican party, the divide between the old school republicans (neo-cons) and the libertarian minded republicans is just FAR to big, and I can’t ever imagine them coming over to our side to support Ron.

    BUT, I would LOVE for him to run again, and I would be in full support of him if he did. He has a lot of supporters gaining traction online, such as Peter Schiff with his daily blogs and YouTube following, and Judge Napolitano with his new Freedom Watch show on Fox. That’s just enough exposure that I think he’d definitely give the neo-cons a run for their money!

    We love you, Ron, and we’ll support you!
    (Everett, WA)

  • Paul

    Doc, if you’re gonna run, announce it in mid 2010, though I think a shorter, more focused run would be better, so late 2010 or early 2011 would be best for actual campaigning. However, you need to get some grass roots going like you did before.

    When you do run, put everything out there and get away from the bloody Republicans. Various polls and articles I read expressed that, if you had run as a Libertarian you would have done better. However, you can’t be timid in the least, you’re going to have to put everything on the line. We, as a nation, need you in the right place, and that’s going to mean you have to come with boldness and strength, or Americans -not to mention the rest of the world- will just see you as a whiny little man with a small voice. We, as your supporters, know better, but you’re going to have to dig to make sure the rest of the world, not just the United States, knows it.

  • What is the procedure for Ron to get on the ballot?

  • Terry

    I would like to know that there still will be an America in 2012. I’d vote for you today if you could stop the craziness that is taking away the Constitution, and giving too many freedoms to the president with no public vote, and not even sometimes the vote of Congress.
    I want America to stay America. Is that still possible or is it too late? Are we not America anymore? Is it quietly slipping away? I am a decedent of William Hennery Harrison who was president once, and I guess a cousin somehow of Benjamin Harrison who was president too.

    I’ve cried over this country latly. I would hope America could be what I’ve always thought she was, the home of the free, the land of the brave, not the land of the endebted multitudes, the land of the slaves.

    • ron

      i hear u lots an im also afraid obama is sellin out this country and it constitution, even now in our lower courts poor have no rights to speak up for themselves especially in indiana, the courts just dont go by wat the constitution says, for the peple not for the rich government paid peples,

  • Steve

    I think that he should announce ASAP but then back away and focus his energies on contonuing to solve real problems and to expose the real fraud of our government – not on campaigning. Let his actions speak for him. We his people should be busy spreading the word.

  • I think it’s important to announce as soon as possible so what remains of the Republican Party can realize they don’t have anyone else to put up and they can all get behind RP. I am sure ALL of the Libertarian Party would be with RP.

  • Pingback: Should Ron Paul run in 2012 | South Mississippi Campaign For Liberty()

  • T Reamonn

    I’m not even sure what the Republicans can run on in the next election. Foreign Policy? Federal Reserve? Health Care? Civil Liberties? Spending and Tax Cuts?

    Ron Paul is the only one who can and will offer something the American People would be willing to listen to.

    • Mike Rembrandt

      I think Ron Paul would be a great president, but he can’t win. To beat Obama, a candidate will have to be young, dynamic, and must be able to speak in sound bites. Newt Gingrich can’t win for the same reasons. I would support Ron Paul as a vice president candidate.

  • Ron Paul is a bit of hero for many, including me. And of course, he has my vote for the presidency over any of the other jokers in congress, but then I subscribe to the RSS Feed, so perhaps I’m already sipping the kool-aid.

    I think we need to get a little more mainstream support, perhaps even grab some support from the dem’s. Maybe they’re starting to realize that even their super-star can’t grant them their ideals.

    I do feel we are getting closer though. People are starting to get fed up with the road we’re on, and doubt the talking heads.

    When? When the momentum in the pot starts to boil over, right now we’ve still got lukewarm soup.

    I think Ron’s got the right idea jumping around the networks and getting his face out there. People have to ask themselves what he’s all about ( , )

  • Sean

    Ron Paul has to gain support from his fellow republicans before they elect him in the primaries. Republicans are pro-war so there is really no chance in hell that they would support ron paul.That is why Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, and Mitt Romney are considered the “leaders” of the republican party. Ron paul should start his own party or work with his Republicans to reshape their whole philosophy. I seriously doubt that republican supporters would ever be against the war. Republicans are usually gun toting fools.

    • Sean

      Why do you think ron paul didn’t win the presidency last election? He never got into the primaries because he didn’t gain support from Republicans, only libertarians. Unfortunetly libertarians only represent 3% of our country. Even if Ron Paul gains support from the young people, the old grumpy republicans wont stand for that and wont support him.. As we have seen throughout history, the young voters alone wont win the presidency.

      Harsh Reality

      • Peter

        actually, the Independents currently represent about 40% of the voting public. They were the ones behind Ron Paul with a collection of frustrated Conservatives and Liberals later joining in. After Paul dropped out a large chunk of these people reluctantly went over to Obama. And I don’t blame them. McCain was the last on my list. I voted for Paul because he was still on the La. Ballot.

        And now, with Obama giving America daily shock treatments. And the confused GOP’s unchanging rhetoric the amount of disheartened Dems and Repubs are going to grow even larger. This could possibly result in even more voters joining the Independents.

        What may happen is a huge surge in the size of a third party. Imagine that? Both the Dems and the Gop the monority in Congress. One can only dream.

        If I were Paul’s campaign advisor I would suggest that he run as a Vice President running mate with someone younger such as Peter Schiff. Why? Because it would help to rid any notion of yet more false promises being made from yet another typical politician. We all know that Paul is not a typical politician but the majority of voters out there don’t.

        Will they listen this time? Will they even have the chance to listen? As a third party? Perhaps. As a Republican? Doubtfull. Unless the GOP is a completely new GOP.

        • Sean

          John Mccain almost got 10 times as many votes as Ron Paul in the primaries. Peter Schiff is an economist, not a lawyer. Peter schiff is a shmuk and nobody would vote for him.. No republican constituents want an anti-war canidate. Obama will either win or lose 2012 with a landslide. Every president in history is usually re-elected to finish carrying out their plan. To undo everything we are doing is a complete waste of money. For example, FDR was president for three terms..

          • Sean

            Republicans are neo-conservatives who advocate economic and millitary power to bring liberty across the world.

          • Peter

            Sean: “Every president in history is usually re-elected to finish carrying out their plan.””To undo everything we are doing is a complete waste of money”

            “WE” are doing? We as in -“on Obama’s staff”- perhaps?

            Well that statement certainly explains everything don’t you think? It explains why you are so Pro-Obama and Anti- Paul. Sean you either work for Accorn,Obama,ABC or all three of them.

            Peter Schiff and Ron Paul are exactly what we need right now.Schiff is now even being praised by the very same sarcastic News Pundits that use to scorn him. He’s an excellent Economist. Our country’s biggest problem right is “THE ECONOMY”. Not laws. We don’t need any more laws. Laws are what forced banks into handing out bad loans.

            FED Laws are killing the free markets.Tax Laws are detroying the Amercian drive to succeed. We need an Economist. Obama’s proposal? “If you’re three months behind on your house note and your credit cards are maxed out, then you need another credit card to get things going.”

            I hope Obama/Accorn is paying you well for all of this Sean.

          • Sean

            “We” as in a country, “We the PEOPLE.”

            “Leave the President free to choose his own coadjutors, to pursue his own measures, and support him and them, even if we think we are wiser than they, honester than they are, or possessing more enlarged information of the state of things.” –Thomas Jefferson

            Do you know why Thomas Jefferson wrote this?? He wrote this because he didn’t want stupid philosphy to break up the country. A majority of America wants Obama to lead and because we are a REPUBLIC, Obama will be our chosen president. We should respect the REPUBLIC and the majority of our country. Just because we disagree on certain issues doesn’t mean that America will fail and that doesn’t give us the right to wish that America will fail.

            I think Ron Paul would make a GREAT president and Peter Schiff would make a great economic advisor. I never said likewise so I would appreciate if you would read before you make sensless comments that don’t relate to me or anything I say.

          • longshotlouie

            That’s sound thinking, sean.

            One problem, though …… it only applies if we believe that the president truly has the country’s best interest in mind.
            In this case, sound thinking calls for a different approach.

            Wishing for America to fail?
            Still enjoy the spinning, huh sean?

            Should we be accepting words of wisdom from such a low-level coadjutor?

          • Sean

            Well you are out of tune with the rest of America who do believe that Obama is thinking about the best interest for the country. What is truely the best interest for the country is a matter of opinion. Obama won the presidency based on that opinion.. I think there are different approaches he could have taken but I didn’t vote for him for that very reason. Just because I disagree with certain philosophies doesn’t mean i’m right to ridicule him or imply that the rest of the country is dumb because they don’t reflect my personal opinions.

          • longshotlouie

            The rest of America? Do you get dizzy from the spinning?

            Main Entry:2ridicule
            Function:transitive verb
            Inflected Form(s):ridiculed; ridicul·ing
            Date:circa 1700
            : to make fun of

            Main Entry:1dumb
            Etymology:Middle English, from Old English; akin to Old High German tumb mute
            Date:before 12th century
            1 a: lacking the human power of speech bof a person often offensive : lacking the ability to speak
            2: temporarily unable to speak (as from shock or astonishment)
            3: not expressed in uttered words


          • Sean

            I’m glad you know where the online dictionary is.

          • longshotlouie

            Thanks for acknowledging the point.

            The point being that denouncing the presidents Marxist Socialist tendencies is not ‘making fun’ of him. In fact, it’s not even funny.
            And since those that do not agree, like you, are speaking, then you cannot be ‘dumb’.

            The only implication is ignorance
            , not being dumb, or even stupid.

            And before you get offended, again …..

            lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified


          • Sean

            err.. you don’t even know what i’ve been talking about. I wasn’t talking about u.. this is what offended me..

            “WE” are doing? We as in -”on Obama’s staff”- perhaps?

            Well that statement certainly explains everything don’t you think? It explains why you are so Pro-Obama and Anti- Paul. Sean you either work for Accorn,Obama,ABC or all three of them.” – Peter

          • Sean

            hahaha, so you really think you are that smart and the rest of our country is ignorant? Please, how old are you?

          • Peter

            “Leave the President free to choose his own coadjutors, to pursue his own measures, and support him ” –Thomas Jefferson

            Oh you mean like Bush going to an unwarranted and unpopular War?

            Sean, where are the checks and balances? You do believe in checks and balances right? Who in Washington is balancing the budget right now? Congress? Obama? Who is the check to Obama’s plans IF (for argument’s sake) Obama were to attempt to void the 2nd Amendment? Who could stop him? Congress? Really? You wanna bet your freedom on Pelosi?

            If the President is making decisions that are against the will of the people (Iraq War) and the Congress caves in to his agenda(like the Democrats did with Bush) VIA being literally “bought out” (pork spending bills) where does the will of the people end up?

            Bush passed the first Bail Out,while polls showed that 78% of the voters were against it. Well, he passed it anyway. The recent Tarp fund again showed that the majority of voters were against it. And just like Bush, once again, Obama passed it.When he knew that it was unpopular. Why did he do it? I thought he was suppose to be about “Change”.

            I respect Obama as my President. But I reserve my right to dissent. And I voice my dissent through my Representatives with phone calls and emails.But if my voice is suppressed due to Pork,Arrogance and Corruption in Politics. Then getting behind the Prez and behaving like a good little tax payer doesn’t cut it.

            Hitler came into unlimited power because of too much trust,adoration and a lack of a stern opposition to keep him in check. Obama (though he may not be Hitler)is getting closer everyday to being in that same postiton.

            I doubt that’s what Jefferson had in mind.

          • Ralph

            I live in PA under [rep] dont’t matter voted every year 30+ years. Ron Paul was not even on the ticket but I wrote him in anyways. I just couln’t bring myself to vote for McCain or Oboma. I’m glad I did because some of my friends never did vote. Now maybe this time 2012 he’s going to run if not I’ll be writing him in anyway. Who else is there? We’re in real bad shape. All this power to another professional politician. We may not even make 2012 as the USA. Trouble is real close and I’m scared a lot of people are going to get hurt. Americans, good people of all races. When people go hungry the time will be close so sad, it’s sickening, and for what reason? Money? Power? What will be left ??? GOD Bless the USA

            Thank you,
            Ralph Miller

          • Ralph,

            Thanks for your comment. Passing on our United States of America to our posterity as millions have done for us from our Founding Fathers on and often at great personal sacrifice has been my motivation for all I do in our Ron Paul Campaign For Liberty. I share your passionate concerns. Our future generations will revile us when they learn at great personal risk in illegal classes on American history what could have been theirs.

            The results of the direction we take as a nation will be a challenge to our survival. Perhaps our preparedness will be insufficient for disasters to come, so I am politically active to prevent what we might not survive.

            The future belongs to the survivors and their descendants like all alive today and it has for all of history, but not all will survive what comes next. Perhaps we won’t prevail politically though I will give it my best. Ron Paul supporters are my favorite people and my heroes for doing what is right at their expense even when it appears futile. Never give up. Never quit. But, should our best efforts prove insufficient, then let’s plan on outliving those who choose to pass on “change” to our posterity instead of their heritage.

            Join me in a newly created preparedness group for Campaign For Liberty members:

            Ronald H Levine
            Sandy, Utah

    • longshotlouie

      Your rhetoric is stale.

      The Republican Party will be changed from the bottom up, or it will be history. We kicked a few holes in the door and loosened the hinges in ’08. In 2012 we intend to kick down that door.

      It is too late in history for a third party attempt.

      p.s. Looks like the Democrats are ‘for the war’ now.

      • Sean

        If republicans wanted ron paul to run for president, they wouldn’t call sarah palin their leader. Republican addvocates are for war so it won’t be done from the bottom up. You are a libertarian which makes up 4% of the population. You can get legislation passed with 4% but you can’t win a presidency.

        • Sean

          how many libertarian senators do you know of running as republicans before 2012? Do you know how many republicans supported hr 2346? There was only one republican senator that voted against it.

      • Deirdre Mullen

        Long shot Louie:
        Yes! Wise words. Kick down that door in 2012. The Republican party MUST be changed.

        If you read James Burnham’s Analysis of Conservatism, which was written in the late 1950s, the two parties have almost entirely changed places with each other – and regular folks are still so attached to these names, to how they define themselves, that they don’t recognize it is no longer that simple. In fact, it hardly matters at all from where I’m standing. I don’t think party affiliation matters anymore, because if it did, we would have seen much more support for Ron Paul from his supposedly “Republican” party. And while he won the debates OVER AND OVER the other Republican candidates stood there in total confusion as to what to do when faced with those rare qualities – naked truth and integrity. Ron Paul doesnt’ have to worry about his image – he just opens his mouth and there is no other substitute. No retractions, no I-don’t-recall, no I-never-said-that, because he says the same thing all the time, the truth, and never has to bother chasing himself to remember the last lie he told. That must be exhausting for some of these politicians.

        The name and meaning of the word Republican has been hijacked and no longer really retains its original definition, which was nebulous anyway. A more appropriate one for the NOW might be Authoritarian. In my opinion though, what they call themselves no longer matters, what matters to these individuals at the top tiers of government now is that they are supported in their vote for laws that primarily benefit themselves financially, even at the cost of lives. Profiteering from war is absolutely where the buck stops, and those who can’t see it are A) too gullible, too susceptible to the jingoism to see what’s really happening, i.e. blind patriotism, or B) they are on the payroll themselves . Either or. The only thing you can do is educate them and then hope.

        When people ask me now if I am a Republican, Democrat, Liberal, Conservative, I just say I am an American who wants to save the form of constitutional government which has served us in the past. Let’s get Ron Paul elected in 2012 and stop the insanity.

    • Whitetop

      I was a neocon (theocon) once too, but I was enlightened. Most Republicans and Independents (and maybe lots of Democrats) are potential Ron Paul voters–they just don’t know it yet.
      We just need to keep making lots of noise (as in TEA Parties, etc.). They will start listening eventually.
      Let’s keep the momentum going and increasing.
      OK? OK!

    • mark

      Sean, Your opinion of Republicans is rather twisted. Gun totting fools? War mongers? The definition of a Democrat/liberal is that they don’t want anyone but themselves to have guns because they are the only responsible ones.

      Republicans are pro war? Take a look at history Sean, who dropped the first 2 atomic bombs? Who started WWII by forcing the Japenese into responding to our embargos on them? Who started Vietnam and who escaladed it, remember who stopped it? Who started the Korean War? Who bombed Kosovo? in response to a conflict we had no business in? Who lobbed missles into Sudan killing civilians? Who sent troops into Somalia and for what reason, to bring little Somalia to the US for those of us who actually work to support? Check out your history facts Sean. Democrats have always been the war mongers and just wait, w/a president that refuses to show his birth certificate and is legally fighting showing it, serious conflicts are just over the horizon. Hope your too old ot be drafted.

      • Sean

        How long ago were all of those wars? Are you trying to say that the philosophy of the republican party has not changed. Do you know what the term Neoconservative means?

        Republican intervention with wars in the past 30 years…

        1981 –Libya. First Gulf of Sidra Incident On August 19, 1981, US planes based on the carrier USS Nimitz shot down two Libyan jets over the Gulf of Sidra after one of the Libyan jets had fired a heat-seeking missile. The United States periodically held freedom of navigation exercises in the Gulf of Sidra, claimed by Libya as territorial waters but considered international waters by the United States.[RL30172]

        1982 — Sinai. On March 19, 1982, President Reagan reported the deployment of military personnel and equipment to participate in the Multinational Force and Observers in the Sinai. Participation had been authorized by the Multinational Force and Observers Resolution, Public Law 97-132.[RL30172]

        1982 — Lebanon. Multinational Force in Lebanon. On August 21, 1982, President Reagan reported the dispatch of 80 Marines to serve in the multinational force to assist in the withdrawal of members of the Palestine Liberation force from Beirut. The Marines left September 20, 1982.[RL30172]

        1982-1983 — Lebanon. On September 29, 1982, President Reagan reported the deployment of 1200 marines to serve in a temporary multinational force to facilitate the restoration of Lebanese government sovereignty. On September 29, 1983, Congress passed the Multinational Force in Lebanon Resolution (P.L. 98-119) authorizing the continued participation for eighteen months.[RL30172]

        1983 — Egypt. After a Libyan plane bombed a city in Sudan on March 18, 1983, and Sudan and Egypt appealed for assistance, the United States dispatched an AWACS electronic surveillance plane to Egypt.[RL30172]

        1983 — Grenada. Citing the increased threat of Soviet and Cuban influence and noting the development of an international airport following a bloodless Grenada coup d’état and alignment with the Soviets and Cuba, the U.S. launches Operation Urgent Fury to invade the sovereign island nation of Grenada.[RL30172]

        1983-89 — Honduras. In July 1983 the United States undertook a series of exercises in Honduras that some believed might lead to conflict with Nicaragua. On March 25, 1986, unarmed US military helicopters and crewmen ferried Honduran troops to the Nicaraguan border to repel Nicaraguan troops.[RL30172]

        1983 — Chad. On August 8, 1983, President Reagan reported the deployment of two AWACS electronic surveillance planes and eight F-15 fighter planes and ground logistical support forces to assist Chad against Libyan and rebel forces.[RL30172]

        1984 — Persian Gulf. On June 5, 1984, Saudi Arabian jet fighter planes, aided by intelligence from a US AWACS electronic surveillance aircraft and fueled by a U.S. KC-10 tanker, shot down two Iranian fighter planes over an area of the Persian Gulf proclaimed as a protected zone for shipping.[RL30172]

        1985 — Italy. On October 10, 1985, US Navy pilots intercepted an Egyptian airliner and forced it to land in Sicily. The airliner was carrying the hijackers of the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro who had killed an American citizen during the hijacking.[RL30172]

        1986 — Libya. Action in the Gulf of Sidra (1986) On March 26, 1986, President Reagan reported on March 24 and 25, US forces, while engaged in freedom of navigation exercises around the Gulf of Sidra, had been attacked by Libyan missiles and the United States had responded with missiles.[RL30172]

        1986 — Libya. Operation El Dorado Canyon On April 16, 1986, President Reagan reported that U.S. air and naval forces had conducted bombing strikes on terrorist facilities and military installations in the Libyan capitol of Tripoli, claiming that Libyan leader Col. Muammar al-Gaddafi was responsible for a bomb attack at a German disco that killed two U.S. soldiers.[RL30172]

        1986 — Bolivia. U.S. Army personnel and aircraft assisted Bolivia in anti-drug operations.[RL30172]

        1987-88 — Persian Gulf. After the Iran-Iraq War resulted in several military incidents in the Persian Gulf, the United States increased US joint military forces operations in the Persian Gulf and adopted a policy of reflagging and escorting Kuwaiti oil tankers through the Persian Gulf, called Operation Earnest Will. President Reagan reported that US ships had been fired upon or struck mines or taken other military action on September 21 (Iran Ajr), October 8, and October 19, 1987 and April 18 (Operation Praying Mantis), July 3, and July 14, 1988. The United States gradually reduced its forces after a cease-fire between Iran and Iraq on August 20, 1988.[RL30172] It was the largest naval convoy operation since World War II.[4]

        1987-88 — Operation Earnest Will was the U.S. military protection of Kuwaiti oil tankers from Iraqi and Iranian attacks in 1987 and 1988 during the Tanker War phase of the Iran-Iraq War. It was the largest naval convoy operation since World War II.

        1987-88 — Operation Prime Chance was a United States Special Operations Command operation intended to protect U.S. -flagged oil tankers from Iranian attack during the Iran-Iraq War. The operation took place roughly at the same time as Operation Earnest Will.

        1988 — Operation Praying Mantis was the April 18, 1988 action waged by U.S. naval forces in retaliation for the Iranian mining of the Persian Gulf and the subsequent damage to an American warship.

        1988 — Operation Golden Pheasant was an emergency deployment of U.S. troops to Honduras in 1988, as a result of threatening actions by the forces of the (then socialist) Nicaraguans.

        1988 — USS Vincennes shoot down of Iran Air Flight 655

        1988 — Panama. In mid-March and April 1988, during a period of instability in Panama and as the United States increased pressure on Panamanian head of state General Manuel Noriega to resign, the United States sent 1,000 troops to Panama, to “further safeguard the canal, US lives, property and interests in the area.” The forces supplemented 10,000 US military personnel already in the Panama Canal Zone.[RL30172]

        1989 — Libya. Second Gulf of Sidra Incident On January 4, 1989, two US Navy F-14 aircraft based on the USS John F. Kennedy shot down two Libyan jet fighters over the Mediterranean Sea about 70 miles north of Libya. The US pilots said the Libyan planes had demonstrated hostile intentions.[RL30172]

        1989 — Panama. On May 11, 1989, in response to General Noriega’s disregard of the results of the Panamanian election, President Bush ordered a brigade-sized force of approximately 1,900 troops to augment the estimated 11,000 U.S. forces already in the area.[RL30172]

        1989 — Colombia, Bolivia, and Peru. Andean Initiative in War on Drugs. On September 15, 1989, President Bush announced that military and law enforcement assistance would be sent to help the Andean nations of Colombia, Bolivia, and Peru combat illicit drug producers and traffickers. By mid-September there were 50-100 US military advisers in Colombia in connection with transport and training in the use of military equipment, plus seven Special Forces teams of 2-12 persons to train troops in the three countries.[RL30172]

        1989 — Philippines. 1989 Philippine coup attempt. On December 2, 1989, President Bush reported that on December 1 US fighter planes from Clark Air Base in the Philippines had assisted the Aquino government to repel a coup attempt. In addition, 100 marines were sent from the US Navy base at Subic Bay to protect the US Embassy in Manila.[RL30172]

        1989-90 — Panama. Operation Just Cause On December 21, 1989, President Bush reported that he had ordered US military forces to Panama to protect the lives of American citizens and bring General Noriega to justice. By February 13, 1990, all the invasion forces had been withdrawn.[RL30172] Around 200 Panamanian civilians were reported killed. The Panamanian head of state, General Manuel Noriega, was captured and brought to the U.S.

        1990 — Liberia. On August 6, 1990, President Bush reported that a reinforced rifle company had been sent to provide additional security to the US Embassy in Monrovia, and that helicopter teams had evacuated US citizens from Liberia.[RL30172]

        1990 — Saudi Arabia. On August 9, 1990, President Bush reported that he had ordered the forward deployment of substantial elements of the US armed forces into the Persian Gulf region to help defend Saudi Arabia after the August 2 invasion of Kuwait by Iraq. On November 16, 1990, he reported the continued buildup of the forces to ensure an adequate offensive military option

        1991 — Iraq. Persian Gulf War On January 16 America attacked Iraqi forces and military targets in Iraq and Kuwait, in conjunction with a coalition of allies and UN Security Council resolutions. Combat operations ended on February 28, 1991.[RL30172] (See Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm)

        1991 — Iraq. On May 17, 1991, President Bush stated that the Iraqi repression of the Kurdish people had necessitated a limited introduction of US forces into northern Iraq for emergency relief purposes.[RL30172]

        1991 — Zaire. On September 25-27, 1991, after widespread looting and rioting broke out in Kinshasa, US Air Force C-141s transported 100 Belgian troops and equipment into Kinshasa. US planes also carried 300 French troops into the Central African Republic and hauled evacuated American citizens.[RL30172]

        1991-96 — Operation Provide Comfort. Delivery of humanitarian relief and military protection for Kurds fleeing their homes in northern Iraq, by a small Allied ground force based in Turkey.

        1992 — Sierra Leone. On May 3, 1992, US military planes evacuated Americans from Sierra Leone, where military leaders had overthrown the government.[RL30172]

        1992-1996 — Operation Provide Promise was a humanitarian relief operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the Yugoslav Wars, from July 2, 1992, to January 9, 1996, which made it the longest running humanitarian airlift in history.[5]

        1992 — Kuwait. On August 3, 1992, the United States began a series of military exercises in Kuwait, following Iraqi refusal to recognize a new border drawn up by the United Nations and refusal to cooperate with UN inspection teams.[RL30172]

        1992-2003 — Iraq. Iraqi No-Fly Zones The U.S. together with the United Kingdom declares and enforces “no fly zones” over the majority of sovereign Iraqi airspace, prohibiting Iraqi flights in zones in southern Iraq and northern Iraq, and conducting aerial reconnaissance and bombings. (See also Operation Southern Watch) [RL30172]

        1992-95 — Somalia. “Operation Restore Hope” Somali Civil War On December 10, 1992, President Bush reported that he had deployed US armed forces to Somalia in response to a humanitarian crisis and a UN Security Council Resolution. The operation came to an end on May 4, 1993. US forces continued to participate in the successor United Nations Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM II). (See also Battle of Mogadishu)

        2000 — Sierra Leone. On May 12, 2000 a US Navy patrol craft deployed to Sierra Leone to support evacuation operations from that country if needed.[RL30172]

        2000 — Yemen. On October 12, 2000, after the USS Cole attack in the port of Aden, Yemen, military personnel were deployed to Aden.[RL30172]

        2000 — East Timor. On February 25, 2000, a small number of U.S. military personnel were deployed to support of the United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET). [RL30172]

        2001 — Afghanistan. War in Afghanistan. The War on Terrorism begins with Operation Enduring Freedom. On October 7, 2001, US Armed Forces invade Afghanistan in response to the 9/11 attacks and “begin combat action in Afghanistan against Al Qaeda terrorists and their Taliban supporters.”[RL30172]

        2002 — Yemen. On November 3, 2002, an American MQ-1 Predator fired a Hellfire missile at a car in Yemen killing Qaed Senyan al-Harthi, an al-Qaeda leader thought to be responsible for the USS Cole bombing.[RL30172]

        2002 — Philippines. OEF-Philippines. January 2002 U.S. “combat-equipped and combat support forces” have been deployed to the Philippines to train with, assist and advise the Philippines’ Armed Forces in enhancing their “counterterrorist capabilities.”[RL30172]

        2002 — Côte d’Ivoire. On September 25, 2002, in response to a rebellion in Côte d’Ivoire, US military personnel went into Côte d’Ivoire to assist in the evacuation of American citizens from Bouake.[6] [RL30172]

        2003 — 2003 invasion of Iraq leading to the War in Iraq. March 20, 2003. The United States leads a coalition that includes Britain, Australia and Spain to invade Iraq with the stated goal of eliminating Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and undermining Saddam Hussein.[RL30172]

        2003 — Liberia. Second Liberian Civil War On June 9, 2003, President Bush reported that on June 8 he had sent about 35 combat-equipped US military personnel into Monrovia, Liberia, to help secure the US Embassy in Nouakchott, Mauritania, and to aid in any necessary evacuation from either Liberia or Mauritania.[RL30172]

        2003 — Georgia and Djibouti “US combat equipped and support forces” had been deployed to Georgia and Djibouti to help in enhancing their “counterterrorist capabilities.”[7]

        2004 — 2004 Haïti rebellion occurs. The US sent first sent 55 combat equipped military personnel to augment the US Embassy security forces there and to protect American citizens and property in light. Later 200 additional US combat-equipped, military personnel were sent to prepare the way for a UN Multinational Interim Force, MINUSTAH.[RL30172]

        2004 — War on Terrorism: US anti-terror related activities were underway in Georgia, Djibouti, Kenya, Ethiopia, Yemen, and Eritrea.[8]

        2006 — Pakistan. 17 people including known Al Qaeda bomb maker and chemical weapons expert Midhat Mursi, were killed in an American MQ-1 Predator airstrike on Damadola (Pakistan), near the Afghan border.[9][10]

        2006 — Lebanon. US Marine Detachment, the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit[citation needed], begins evacuation of US citizens willing to the leave the country in the face of a likely ground invasion by Israel and continued fighting between Hezbollah and the Israeli military.[11][12]

        2007 — Somalia. Battle of Ras Kamboni. On January 8, 2007, while the conflict between the Islamic Courts Union and the Transitional Federal Government continues, an AC-130 gunship conducts an aerial strike on a suspected Al-Qaeda operative, along with other Islamist fighters, on Badmadow Island near Ras Kamboni in southern Somalia.[citation needed]

        2008 — South Ossetia, Georgia. Helped Georgia humanitarian aid[13], helped to transport Georgian forces from Iraq during the conflict. In the past, the US has provided training and weapons to Georgia.

        • longshotlouie

          yepper, neo-cons and neo-liberals luvz them some war.

        • Del

          Maybe it’s NOT the Crack, or the kool-aid, maybe you’re just mental. As someone that’s old enough to remember the events from the 80’s that you got data on from…apparently Highlights magazine…I can tell you that Libya was the ONLY country to claim those waters as their own. Besides, those Libyan missiles were fired at the U.S planes outside those waters. They attempted to flee back to Libya. I can tell you one thing for sure. You shoot at me…I shoot back.
          The rest of your Highlights details are routine procedure for every president. Most of them were either provoked, or requested. Do you have a problem with keeping drugs out of this country?
          Multi-national forces are an obligation we have as a world power to provide to the U.N, and NATO.
          You equate humanitarian aid to military presence in a War? You are indeed young, and stupid. When you have a few more experiences in life you might just learn something useful, instead of proving your limited mental capacity.
          As the adage goes…Better to remain silent, and be thought a fool than to open your mouth, and remove all doubt.

          • a no brainer

            It wasn’t the crack. He is intellectualy stunted from mold and uncirculated air in his basement.

            I did read on another thread here that he did LSD for 10 years, which is a bit strange since he’s around 24 yo.

        • mark


          You seriously need help, or a job. Obviously if you do work it’s for the DNC, Obama, or ACORN. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a Republican, which are now just 1990’s Democrats, but a Constitutionalist/Libertarian. But you miss the point don’t you. Democrats apparently are so much more likely to kill hundreds of thousands or millions as opposed to a few thousand. You site military actions from the 80’s and 2000 but forget about the fact the 80’s middle east issues are due almost entirely to Democratic foreign policy from the 40’s through the 70’s and Ragan was dealing with Carter’s incompetence. If you want to talk about inappropriate intervention just look to Cuba, Panama, Iran, Iraq, Israel etc. Have fun Sean.

  • Mike V

    The sooner he announces his candidacy, the sooner people can start taking notice of him and his positions. He was marginalized so bad during the last election, I don’t want to see him and his positions overlooked again. Obama will continue to become more and more unpopular; if Ron Paul can get his opinions and views out there early, people who want ‘change’ and Constitutional government will see that they do have someone out there speaking for them. I’m tired of looking at polls showing GIngrich and JIndall as the leaders of the party–let a real leader announce his decision to run and start gaining momentum! RON PAUL 2012!!

  • Lancelot

    I am adamantly a Ron Paul fan. His every stance on government is completely what i believe. Ron has a lot of stuff to do,and he needs all the help he can get. He should announce it immediately because i am waiting for the cue and when that happens i will be putting up the fliers talking to people in street and i along with other will put that man in the presidency. We need to know right now

  • john

    It would be great to have him start campaigning in early 2010, because that way once the FED is audited(if its audited), The masses of the people can see how corrupt it is and how Ron Paul wants to end it. (And i do believe the bill said it would require a complete audit by the date of 2010.)

    But i dont know if much of anything is changing. People still seem to care more about American Idol then they do about double-digit inflation and unemployment.

    Ofcourse i still have faith that maybe 50% of the population will take Ron Paul’s side if he can manage to abolish the FED after its audited. All i know is its going to take a gigantic wake up call to America if anything is going to change. I think thats what people NEED to see if Ron Paul even stands a chance of being elected. They need to see him going up against this gigantic money monster and get rid of it once and for all. Even the masses should respond well to this.

    Its going to be quite a battle though, being the FED undoubtetly has Obama, the senate, and half of congress on their side.

    Ron Paul 2012!!!