Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Dr. Paul's foreign Policy is Dangerous

page: 2
86
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by TDawgRex
 
That's where my concerns were. Every candidate has stated what their policies were. Specifically. Paul was always more general.

Would I like to see wars end?

You betcha!

Would I want to see our allies suffer?

Um, nope.




posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Dr. Paul's foreign Policy is Dangerous


I dunno' about that. I think the continued throwing away of US taxpayer monies on 'foreign aid' around the world is more dangerous than cutting it off and spending it at home. Seems to me if we dont' cut it off and spend it here on our infrastructure, then there won't be a home here for the government to have to tax anymore.



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Dr. Paul's foreign Policy is Dangerous


I dunno' about that. I think the continued throwing away of US taxpayer monies on 'foreign aid' around the world is more dangerous than cutting it off and spending it at home. Seems to me if we dont' cut it off and spend it here on our infrastructure, then there won't be a home here for the government to have to tax anymore.


I agree that we could stop sending money to Hamas, Pakistan, Egypt.

But I'd worry if we stopped supporting Israel, S Korea, Taiwan, Eastern European nations.



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 03:22 PM
link   
ron thinks iran has every right to have nukes

I'd say that is dangerous



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by TDawgRex

Originally posted by Kester
reply to post by Hendrix92TheUniverse
 


It's natural and healthy for people to want to defend their community. It isn't natural to obey orders.

It's natural to respect and perhaps follow wise leaders who've proven their capabilities. It isn't natural to accept characters whose history and capabilities aren't known to you personally as your 'superior officers'.

This is where the problem lies. There would be no need for the drilling and training that makes an obedient military unit if the true respect was there. They drum it into you that you don't think, you don't question, you just do what your told. Otherwise you would do what is right. Following orders that ultimately come from those who profit is wrong. So wrong the strain can lead to suicide.

Ron Paul is your Commander in Chief. You have chosen him.




I take exception to your way of thinking that US Servicemembers are taught not to think, but to blindly follow orders.

During my three decades of service, I questioned everything under the sun. I always tried to question intelligibly though, not emotionally. That is the way I was taught by very wise NCOs and Officers.

Sometimes I didn’t agree with the mission, but went anyway, just to try to keep my Joes alive. I could have been relieved of my duties and the responsibility would have been given to someone possibly less competent, but the mission would have gone on anyway.

By the way, I have brought everyone home intact. Everytime, and sometimes we were quite ruthless.

But you are right. People will follow those they respect…rather than appointed.

ETA: I have taken to calling those who follow blindly as lemmings, not sheeple.
edit on 15-1-2012 by TDawgRex because: (no reason given)


O.K. you've caught me out here. I don't know what I'm talking about. If I'd ever tried to join the military they'd have kicked me out the same day. I never follow orders and I always go my own way. I've no real idea what military training is.

I've had two attempts on my life because of my extreme publicity stunts bringing sensitive information to influential people. I've done my service. No one paid me anything. No one trained me or told me what to do. I didn't wear any kind of uniform but I think I'm standing on the same side as you. I'll try to be more tactful in the future.



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
ron thinks iran has every right to have nukes

I'd say that is dangerous


That is also a concern.

Well said!


+1 more 
posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Has it been dangerous for Russia, India, Israel, Pakistan, France, Great Brittain or any other country to have nukes? The only thing dangerous about Ron Paul is his threat to the military industrial complex, the bankers who finance war and the police state created to protect our freedom from people who supposedly hate us for our freedom.



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Ron Paul doesn't think its ok for Iran to have nukes, he has said he is against the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

Ron Paul just thinks that letting Iran have nukes is preferable to bombing it back to the stone age.

He wants to encourage strong trade relations with countries like Iran which will have 3 advantages

1. Countries like Iran are terrified of invasion by the US, which makes them all the more eager to develop nukes and other weapons as a deterrent. A non aggressive US would give Iran and other countries less perceived need to develop such weapons.

2. Strong trade relations between two countries make in harder for them to declare war on each other.

3. The populations of countries like Iran are repeatedly encouraged in to xenophobia and distrust of foreign nations as a tool for there elite to better control the masses. A America that is less prone to war would help weaken these extremists arguments and would lead to more moderate leaders being able to assume control.

At least that is my interpretation of what he has said



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by monkofmimir
reply to post by beezzer
 


Ron Paul doesn't think its ok for Iran to have nukes, he has said he is against the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

Ron Paul just thinks that letting Iran have nukes is preferable to bombing it back to the stone age.

He wants to encourage strong trade relations with countries like Iran which will have 3 advantages

1. Countries like Iran are terrified of invasion by the US, which makes them all the more eager to develop nukes and other weapons as a deterrent. A non aggressive US would give Iran and other countries less perceived need to develop such weapons.

2. Strong trade relations between two countries make in harder for them to declare war on each other.

3. The populations of countries like Iran are repeatedly encouraged in to xenophobia and distrust of foreign nations as a tool for there elite to better control the masses. A America that is less prone to war would help weaken these extremists arguments and would lead to more moderate leaders being able to assume control.

At least that is my interpretation of what he has said


Thank you,

I AGREE WHOLEHEARTEDLY.

You hit the nail on the head.

"Freedom doesn't divide us, it unites us". - Dr. Paul

"We should be friends with nations, and trade with them". - Dr. Paul.

"We should follow the advice of our founders, and not get involved with entangling alliances." - Ron Paul.

"We should not be the policemen of the world" - Dr. Ron Paul.



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Hendrix92TheUniverse
 


Yeah his foreign policy is dangerous all right.... to the profits of the military industrial complex that is! The attacks are only going to get worse from here on out...



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 04:44 PM
link   
If we would not be the policemen of the world then it'd leave a vacuum.

Someone would step in.

Would that be preferable?



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


There are some who find that preferable.

But they are those who would not fight, in the the long run.

People (Mainly western) who think if we could just all get along...
Ain't gonna happen.

I tell people all the time (for decades) that you cannot apply the western mindset to a eastern or Islamist mindset.



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


how much does it cost America every year in blood, money and reputation to play policeman. Yes the military industrial complex and the oil companies make a killing off of it but everyone else in America looses. It is in Americas own best interests to stop being the policemen of the world.

If you are worried that a successor to America will rise to the position of policeman of the world and harass the US, look at China. China despite having horrible politics it has 2 things going for it.

1. While its military doesn't have much reach (there is little concern that it could successfully invade the US for example) but it is powerful enough that no one considers China a soft touch ripe for invasion.

2. China trades, its goods are everywhere. Probably half the things I own were made in China. Most countries just aren't willing to upset china because they don't want to lose out on trade with it.

If the US can take these two lessons from China, it will become more prosperous and less threatened by potentially hostile countries.
edit on 15-1-2012 by monkofmimir because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 07:35 PM
link   
Yawn another Paul is the Messiah thread as to suicide:

The 4 leaders of suicide in this country are dentists,physicians,veterinarians oh and air traffic controllers.

Propaganda is dangerous 3 world wars that all came about from isolationist's because people just keeping thinking happy happy thoughts that no one wants to kill them.

As long as borders exist as long as resources exist as long as religion exists there will be war in 10,000 years of mankind what the hell does make people think 2012 is any different than any other period man?

Go ahead and try to lie say the next guy will be different 10,000 years track record proves otherwise.
edit on 15-1-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96


As long as borders exist as long as resources exist as long as religion exists there will be war in 20,000 years of mankind what the hell does make people think 2012 is any different than any other period man?

Seems I've heard this type of reasoning before, .... now where was it.

O Ya, George Orwell's 1984

Were at war , we've always been at war.



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 07:53 PM
link   
If you look at the current state of affairs, it is like the US has a giant heroin addiction and Ron Paul represents rehab or getting clean. The addict will lie, steal, manipulate, and give you a million reasons why or avoid the real issue or problem. Addicts will bankrupt themselves and everyone around them. They will manipulate and seek out those who will enable them. They will flock together with like minded addicts. They will turn violent to get what they want. They will borrow and get fronts with no concern where the owed money will come from to pay back. They won't go down without a fight. Poor Ron has his work cut out for him.



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 08:20 PM
link   
when good people from good homes and good families are lied to, naive enough or genuinely with a sincere heart believe they are protecting their country from evil, only to find themselves becoming the invaders against a people that couldn't even afford to attack the next town over, it messes with your head.

there are no enemies in iraq or afghanistan, they are either dead or left a long time ago. now they are fighting and killing ordinary citizens exercising their God given right to defend their homes against invaders.

americans are committing murder, not self-defence. regardless of what you see on t.v., murder destroys your mind and your soul.



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 08:36 PM
link   
Woooo.... RP 2012... Although I do have a certain feeling that American elections are all rigged... I'll vote for him regardless.



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by sparrowstail
If you look at the current state of affairs, it is like the US has a giant heroin addiction and Ron Paul represents rehab or getting clean. The addict will lie, steal, manipulate, and give you a million reasons why or avoid the real issue or problem. Addicts will bankrupt themselves and everyone around them. They will manipulate and seek out those who will enable them. They will flock together with like minded addicts. They will turn violent to get what they want. They will borrow and get fronts with no concern where the owed money will come from to pay back. They won't go down without a fight. Poor Ron has his work cut out for him.


Also,
It's better to offer a drug addict treatment,
Then to force treatment upon them (usually doesn't work)

And honestly, i think Israel is a huge issue for the US.
I think there is far more going on than we're led to believe.

I also believe that any country should be allowed to harness means to power themselves.
They've already said nuclear weapons are not on the table, they want nuclear power.

I swear this is the same thing that happened with saddam, "OMG NUKES" "Oh wait, no nukes.",
How does one justify military action in well over 6 countries now? It almost seems like a hostile takeover.

Oh, i wonder why the 'libyan rebels' instantly set up a central bank after taking down the big bad dictator. You know, the central banks controlled by the elite ruling class? Is it just me? or is anyone else connecting the dots here. Resources: check, rebuilding contracts: check, start enslaving the population into debt: check.

How many more countries are we going to do this to, until we finally realize "Hey, this isn't in our best interest, this is in the interests of profiteers. And the ruling class that plays games with our lives, our economy, and world affairs.



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by rogerstigers
 


very well put- words of wisdom for both individuals and nations to live by.

Persuade by setting a good example to others, but defend yourself with tooth and claw if attacked.





new topics

top topics



 
86
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join