Why is everyone on the Ron Paul bandwagon?

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by projectvxn
 


To right a US withdraw from the rest of the world will create a power vacuum filled by one of two things

1. China


Already occurring.


2. Radical Islamic Extremism.


man, all that fox news has you scared, like a little mouse or something. No, man. These guys will never become a power block. Why? See the "extremism" in there? yeah. The crazies are as happy to kill each other as anyone else. To form a power block, they'd have to actually get their # in order. Which isn't going to happen.

However, an Islamic power block is possible - if iran were to ditch its baggage from 1980, and find a spokesweasel that didn't have a "hit me" note taped to his back, they could easily become a dominant power in the middle east and central Asia. Same story if Turkey were to stop trying so hard to keep being a "Third Way" nation and started showing some initiative. These places were hte seats of empires in the past, no reason the future couldn't offer the same.

But no, the extremists aren't going to achieve anything of lasting note.


Neither of them good.


Frankly China's no worse than the US, in this regard. it's also no better. If htey move in, there's not going to be any net change.
edit on 22/10/2011 by TheWalkingFox because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


Yeah idealism versus cold hard reality the world rarely lives up to great expectations.

Nothing to argue there.



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 

I agree that we probably don't need bases all over the world. HOWEVER. His notion that if we just withdraw from the world and mind our own business that we will never be attacked again is ridiculous.

He seems to have this idea that because we are the most powerful country militarily that we can afford to drop our guard, recall all the spies, and not kick any more ass. He believes that no one can cause us injury and that no one is planning to regardless of our policy in foreign affairs.

I think that view is very naive

As a vet I respect you and your opinion. I know you're the type that has your buddies backs, ours, and you're a thinking man to boot. Thank you.

You also know that foreign policy is causing us much of the terrorism problem I think?

Hopefully Dr. Paul would be wise enough to keep an intelligence presence in the world--just no dirty tricks.

But doesn't it make sense that if we're off 95% of the foreign soil we're on now we could draw the line at our borders and institute a "cross it and experience nuclear annihilation so you better win because your home country is gone!" policy?

I think we have that power, and it's the proper use of that power. It would save much bloodshed I believe. Peace & OohRah.



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


Excuse me, but no. It's not a "Fox News" fear. It's part of a reality we have to deal with.



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by neo96
 


I agree.

I believe our focus needs to be more surgical and tactical rather than large scale.

But, again, this doesn't mean we should just withdraw from the world and pretend we're not a part of it.


America can no longer sustain almost $1 trillion a year for our military to occupy foreign countries we're not at war with. We artificially prop up their economies by being present. We need to prop up our economy but slashing the military budget in half. The only way to do that is to leave and let other nations take care of themselves for a while. Preferably we'd leave Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and Uganda alone, as well. We've killed enough of their citizens.

/TOA



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:41 PM
link   
reply to post by The GUT
 


No.

And terrorism isn't necessarily my number one concern. In many cases it is the other big players in the room that fund such endeavors.

Pakistan funded 9/11. We were told by bin Laden that is was because we had bases in Saudi Arabia.

That's pretty convoluted don't you think? This game isn't as simple as Ron Paul makes it out to be. If anything he is guilty of oversimplifying these problems.



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by The Old American
 


Come on man there need to be cuts across the board cut Defense and the same amount will be spent on entitlements.

We all know that hell entitlement spending all spending across the boards have gone up drastically.



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyJethro

Originally posted by tHEpROGRESSIVE
reply to post by KrazyJethro
 


Its not my job to back it up. I was just repeating what Ron Paul has said. He has said we need to stop policing the world and that we cant afford entitlements. So maybe you should ask him to defend what he has said.


Oh it is. You affirm someone or something is wrong. We disagree, but there isn't much to discuss and you are easily dismissed because there is no meat to your opinions.

Yes, the programs need to go on the Federal level. What, exactly, is the problem with that?


I find your post to be degrading of me. I simply repeated what Ron Paul has said but somehow you are mad at me for what he said but you love him for what he said. Maybe you do not really like him as much as you think. The problem with the programs going is that it means we are purely in a defensive mode. So we are only protected at the edge of our borders. His answer to Iran is let them have a nuke, because we have more nukes. So it seems his answer is let them get a nuke, then when they nuke us, we will nuke them more so we win. But if millions of US citizens die in a nuke attack and tens of millions die in Iran then what kind of win is that.

Then add to it that he is going to eliminate programs that aid the elderly and poor without replacing them with anything.

Is that meaty enough for you?



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


That reality has been in the making since 1960 and for 2000 years in the middle east it is a ideological war against the infidels.

They want one united Islamic world they kill infidels for stepping in their lands where as they are welcome with open arms to ours and Fox news was created in the 90s.

Your math doesn't add up.
edit on 22-10-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 

What, "ohnoes teh crazy muslims is gonna take over the world!!!!"

No, that's not actually something you'll ever have to worry about. I guess maybe it's fun for you to pretend this is an imminent threat, I dunno. But it's not going to happen. They simply lack the capability.

it's a lie that was fed to you to justify two unwarranted wars and several pseudo-wars, with further propaganda thrusted by fundamentalists from another faith who want to see all "competition" literally killed off.

Afghanistan's a # plavce and the peopel running it are crazy, that's no doubt. But they're not exactly Genghis Khan, y'know?



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by muse7
 



Why is everyone on the Ron Paul bandwagon?


Because Ron Paul is the only one who is not Lying.

(Second Line)



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by The Old American
 


Come on man there need to be cuts across the board cut Defense and the same amount will be spent on entitlements.

We all know that hell entitlement spending all spending across the boards have gone up drastically.


Sure entitlements need to be cut, excised, gouged, and beaten to death. But our #1 priority needs to be to stop murdering the citizens of sovereign nations for their oil.

/TOA



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:49 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by The Old American
 


That's total BS.

If we were doing it for the oil we would have received most of the contracts to develop oil fields in Iraq. We didn't.



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by projectvxn
 

What, "ohnoes teh crazy muslims is gonna take over the world!!!!"

No, that's not actually something you'll ever have to worry about. I guess maybe it's fun for you to pretend this is an imminent threat, I dunno. But it's not going to happen. They simply lack the capability.

it's a lie that was fed to you to justify two unwarranted wars and several pseudo-wars, with further propaganda thrusted by fundamentalists from another faith who want to see all "competition" literally killed off.

Afghanistan's a # plavce and the peopel running it are crazy, that's no doubt. But they're not exactly Genghis Khan, y'know?


Not capable? What, do you think they aren't smart enough to do it? Are they just goat herders to you? They couldn't possibly have the intelligence or wit to be a threat to anyone? That's a pretty discriminatory thought process you have there about the culture that invented algebra.

They are more than capable of being a threat to anyone, particularly America as we have people like you in charge.

9/11 what?

/TOA



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:53 PM
link   
For those who think any president needs the house or senate to get things done look up excutive orders a president can cancel/void or nullify executive orders from past presidents or add to them, and they can write new ones..
Ron Paul knows how the government works and how corrupt it is.
He will either fall in line like past presidents or make the changes nessessary the best way he can.
My money is on Ron Paul , win or lose .
edit on 22-10-2011 by OLD HIPPY DUDE because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


That reality has been in the making since 1960


The current state of the middle east goes back to roughly 1917, actually, when the colonial powers carved up the former ottoman empire.


and for 2000 years in the middle east it is a ideological war against the infidels.


Not really. I'd suggest reading a little history. it's a fascinating subject. The modern brand of violent islamic fundamentalism? Dates from the mid-80's.


They want one united Islamic word they kill infidels for stepping in their lands


While some wall-eyed cretins over there might honestly think this, it's not going to happen. They lack the ability to impose that sort of thing, even if a majority over there wanted it. They don't, though - "infidel" money is still money, after all.


where as they are welcome with open arms to ours


Despite the efforts of certain corpse-worshipper factions.


and Fox news was created in the 90s.


And has been inundating us with bull# from day one.


Your math doesn't add up.


If we're using this metaphor, then I'll further it - you can't criticize my adding if you don't even know what math is. Again. History books. Read them.

Habool Adbel-Raziz Muhammalammadingdong and his exploding sport cup are not going to take over hte damn world. Stop being a child, there isn't a monster in your closet.



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 



No its just called outsourcing. Its what we do best. Our citizens see no need to do hard labor in an oil field. We can simply have another country do the work and we write them a check for it. Its like we do with the Mexicans. We let them come over so we don't have to do a bunch of dirty work. Then it is win-win. They get to come to America and make a better life and we don't have to work jobs that are not good.



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by tHEpROGRESSIVE
 


That makes no sense at all.

Just another ignorant and economically illiterate comment by you.



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by The Old American
 


That's total BS.

If we were doing it for the oil we would have received most of the contracts to develop oil fields in Iraq. We didn't.



We are attacking oil-producing countries. We certainly aren't over there for humanitarian reasons. Why aren't we ousting Hugo Chavez? Why is Castro still in charge? Why does the Mexican military get to cross our borders every other day? Did I mention that millions of North Koreans are starving? Oh, we don't get oil from them, so it's not our problem.

/TOA





new topics
top topics
 
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join