posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 02:46 AM
Originally posted by bottleslingguy
No, he calls it non-interventionism not me.
But you agree with him? No? I don't see much difference between being a none-interventionist and being and isolationist. Isolationism is the more
extreme end of non-interventionism where a country does not involve itself in wars beyond that of it's defense. Ron Paul however goes beyond merely
being a non-interventionist as he has advocated the removal of the US out of the UN along with ending US involvement in NATO. I don't see much wrong
with this. There haven been arguments over this notion and isolationism also includes barring any immigration, preventing international trade
completely, but it is very hard for a nation to truly take that stance.
If it will make you happy, I'll certainly say that Ron Paul could just be a non-interventionist, but then, going right back to the GOP voters, many
of them don't like this. They don't like his stances on Iran either.
I don't think I've ever called you a fraud,
I've been called a fraud in another comment, I never specifically said you referred to me as a fraud. However you did refer to me as some blind
supporter of the status quo, which is a personal attack nevertheless.
If you want to debate without needlessly refering to me as all kinds of things, I'm happy to continue in a more friendlier discussion.
See here's your problem, you think I give a crap what the rest of the gop will accept.
I do care about what the rest of the GOP voters accept and vote for, because in the end they may veryvwell vote in another dubya to bring this country
down further from where it is. I'm sure you care verymuch about the idea of democratic voters supporting Obama again. I'm not sure what shifting off
any care about what GOP voters think is going to help with Ron Paul's chances, unless you really don't care as to whether he gets voted in or not.
If you really don't care about him being voted in then I must say, what a waste of time, in your case.
Paul represents a new way of trying to make this country work productively and with the proper moral heading. I am voting for Paul whether
people like you say he has a chance or not.
Hey, I'm not stopping you from voting and supporting him. Go ahead, and while you're at it, continue to spread his word. If this is a worthy cause,
your investment in this man as a presidential hopeful, then who am I to stop you? I just think he's a fringe candidate with minimal appeal among the
voting public, and I think his supporters (like yourself) are far from reality, but hey, that's my view.