Tired of the Ron Paul Bandwagon???

page: 27
40
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by thepixelpusher
 


but you can not deny the verbal pounding that someone takes if they bring up an issue, just for discussion purposes that might rub Rp supporters wrong.. its no different than if someone wants to discuss Christianity in the religion section and the Atheists ect get on and start railing on the guy for believing a "fairy tale"




posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
The radical Left/Marxists/Leninists are backing him with hopes that he will destroy our nations defense if he would miraculously win the general election. Strange bedfellows those radicals and Ron Paul eh? Paul is a means to end for them...


Where did you hear that? Why would Marxists or Leninists support RP? That's insane. RP ideals are directly opposed to those of Marxist's. How could you confuse the two? Maybe you are purely uneducated as to what a marxist believes and to what RP believes and just looking to trash him? Who in their right minds thinks a President, in four years, could destroy a nations defense that took 50 years to build? People looking to push fear and stifle RP's campaign, that's who. Get real dude.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 


Maybe you should do some factual research before you start spouting idiotic statements




We would be out of South Korea which will allow North Korea to overtake by force, South Korea.


By agreement the US currently has only 28,500 troops in Korea, South Korea has an active military of 653,000 and an active reserve of 3,200,000. So clearly we are proping up the South Korean Military




Within the 1st year of office, Ron Paul would mind his own business and allow Iran to continue building or complete production of nuclear weapons. Paul would allow Israel to fend for themselves and we all know that Iran wants nothing more than to wipe Israel off the face of the planet. So in under 12 months, we would at a minimum see a war in Korea and one in Israel.


I'm sure an Iran with 1 nuclear weapon will scare the Israelis to death
Current estimates are that Israel has over 400 nuclear weapons. The fear mongers want you to believe that Iran will be a threat only so the US can invade for the big oil interests just like Iraq.



I offer you this though, there's people out there just like countries, North Korea, China, Japan, Iran to name a few, that are radical.


Japan ???????? They have enough problems of their own and are NOT a military power unless they're forming armored divisions out of Honda Accords


China ??? I haven't heard of any military buildups in China and besides why would they want to attack the country that is making them rich




Opinions are like A$$holes


This is the only statement that you made that i can agree with



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by PatriotAct
 



You claim that if we're true united statesians and enjoy our freedoms we shouldn't vote for Ronald Paul. Yet, we currently have the patriot act, national defence authority act, expatriate act, and I'm stuck in an economic slavery cycle. Some freedom that is. I doubt this current setup of government resembles any shred of the constitution and declaration of independence. Much less, does this government have the common man's interest as top priority. Of course, they pretend they do.


I agree with you and RP on these issues. I want American freedoms restored and I deplore NDAA and the patriot act. However, I do NOT falsely assume, as you do, that electing RP is the only way to do away with these things. Congress is the only body with the authority to change law…not the President.


I still don't get why it would bother anyone seeing Israel get liberated. Lol, liberated ... I also don't get how people are so fearful of a war breaking out between countries that has nothing to do with theirs. Oh, what about if they use nukes?! Lol, there's plenty of radioactive waste being dumped in various places around the country from nuclear plants. Why is the only thing people usually don't like about Ronald Paul his foreign policy? Is it because he's not a war monger? Is it because he wants to spare the family ache of their children's demise over some natural resources?


Because countries such as Nazi Germany (& Iran, N.Korea, Pakistan, etc), DO POSE A THREAT! It’s not a joke or a conspiracy theory. People like you thought Hitler was a joke too. How’d that work out? I don't advocate attacking them but I do what to maintain the ability to do so rapidly from bases and assets deployed abroad, which RP does not.

So your argument is that because there is nuclear waste dumped in America (source?) we shouldn’t worry about a nuclear attack?? WTF


That doesn’t make any sense, man.
edit on 23-1-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 



Because countries such as Nazi Germany DO POSE A THREAT!

Dude.... what decade are you living in?




posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
reply to post by LoonyConservative
 

I watched the video and I'm still wondering when he said that ``we deserved the 9/11 attacks``?

That's right....... he never said it.

edit on 23-1-2012 by Rockdisjoint because: (no reason given)


Though this is pretty sick, it will likely be a rally cry for some of you!


Ex-Paul staffer comes clean:


Based on countless “arguments/discussions” with Paul over the years, Dondero claims that no matter how hard the candidate denies it “Ron Paul is most assuredly an isolationist.”

“For example, he strenuously does not believe the United States had any business getting involved in fighting Hitler in WWII. He expressed to me countless times, that ‘saving the Jews,’ was absolutely none of our business. When pressed, he often times brings up conspiracy theories like FDR knew about the attacks of Pearl Harbor weeks before hand, or that WWII was just ‘blowback,’ for Woodrow Wilson’s foreign policy errors, and such.”

“He wishes the Israeli state did not exist at all. He expressed this to me numerous times in our private conversations. His view is that Israel is more trouble than it is worth, specifically to the America taxpayer. He sides with the Palestinians, and supports their calls for the abolishment of the Jewish state, and the return of Israel, all of it, to the Arabs.”

Moving to more contemporary subjects, Dondero states “with absolute certainty” that Paul was opposed to the War in Afghanistan and to any military reaction to the 9/11 attacks.

“He immediately stated to us staffers, me in particular, that Bush/Cheney were going to use the attacks as a precursor for ‘invading’ Iraq. He engaged in conspiracy theories including perhaps the attacks were coordinated with the CIA, and that the Bush administration might have known about the attacks ahead of time. He expressed no sympathies whatsoever for those who died on 9/11, and pretty much forbade us staffers from engaging in any sort of memorial expressions, or openly asserting pro-military statements in support of the Bush administration.”
link

Ron Paul is NO COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF.
edit on 23-1-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockdisjoint
 


you must think that because of the U.N and technology that the world is light years past anything like the holocaust from happening again.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
reply to post by seabag
 



Because countries such as Nazi Germany DO POSE A THREAT!

Dude.... what decade are you living in?



Dude, pull your head out and look around!!




posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by LoonyConservative
reply to post by Rockdisjoint
 


you must think that because of the U.N and technology that the world is light years past anything like the holocaust from happening again.


Darfur or Serbia ring a bell?

The U.S having troops all over the world didn't stop those massacres!
edit on 23-1-2012 by Rockdisjoint because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 

Dude, I swear I'm looking and I DON'T SEE ANY NAZIS!!




posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
reply to post by seabag
 

Dude, I swear I'm looking and I DON'T SEE ANY NAZIS!!



So USA is beloved around the world and no country wishes the US harm? I think RP would disagree.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
reply to post by seabag
 

Dude, I swear I'm looking and I DON'T SEE ANY NAZIS!!



So USA is beloved around the world and no country wishes the US harm? I think RP would disagree.

I never said anything like that.

What are you talking about?

I'm just saying that Nazi Germany no longer exist.
edit on 23-1-2012 by Rockdisjoint because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:44 PM
link   
I'm a little surprised that everyone seems to think Paul would make immediate withdrawls in the first place? Although he has publicly stated he wants to close foreign bases and bring troops home, He's never said this is something he'd do over night. If memory serves me correctly he's stated that this would be a gradual process.

Does anyone actually think he's that naive? Even if he wanted to, he'd have to play ball with congress and make the process a gradual one. Paul is not stupid enough to think that an immediate withdraw of U.S troops from South Korea wouldn't leave a power vacuum that the DPRK would be more than happy to fill. Just because he's a non interventionist doesn't mean he wouldn't leave certain bases where prudent.

This thread fails right off the bat by making assumptions that can't be validated in any way shape or form.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by L00kingGlass
reply to post by gabbermatt
 




I only have about 4 people I truely call friends because everyone else thinks Pot is OK.


They are not harming anyone, that is for them to decide good sir.
edit on 23-1-2012 by L00kingGlass because: (no reason given)


I'm not saying it's not. But, it's also my decision to not consider them good friends.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 

They are not interested in a rational foreign policy that doesn't include hundreds of bases around the world. Supposedly, if we didn't have them, the darkies would destroy each other and us as well...or something along those lines.
(See, I can be irrational too!)
All kidding aside, if people are so afraid of the world that they have to post military in every country to ensure the safety of our corporations there...oh wait, I don't think they understand that THAT is the reason we are there! They believe it is for OUR safety. What a clueless bunch they are!



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by rogerstigers
 


What I don't understand is why there is this apparent perception that "if the status quo changes" the world will end in a tyranical nuclear armageddon takeover by china, russia, north korea, iran, alCIAda, casto, chavez, drug lords, etc etc etc....

Where does the fear stop? When do we see all the above nonsense for what it is? Fearmongering that has been conditioned into you, so you will fight within an inch of your life to protect the status quo from change.

Admit its conditioning...

Because none of us here have talked to Iran or China...we HEAR stuff, we SEE stuff from media (oh how trustworthy they are) but what the F*** do we really know? OP are you some kind of military analyst with access to top secret satellite info and insider spook information that is 100% legitimate? If not can I ask you, what the F*** do you really know??? NOTHING....

since you are so concerned with "the bottom line" try this one on for size...

what the F*** do you know??? NOTHING!!!!

stop preaching on here like a military analyst whos "in the know"...and knows exactly how events pan out and what other countries true intentions are, and MAYBE people will start taking you seriously.

so far everything you said was a vile regurgitation of MSM talking points and diluded paranoid patriotic warmongers...You have taught me nothing new...just how limited and predictable your "world view" is.
edit on 23-1-2012 by Sly1one because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by 6Eyengineer

Originally posted by jibeho
The radical Left/Marxists/Leninists are backing him with hopes that he will destroy our nations defense if he would miraculously win the general election. Strange bedfellows those radicals and Ron Paul eh? Paul is a means to end for them...


Where did you hear that? Why would Marxists or Leninists support RP? That's insane. RP ideals are directly opposed to those of Marxist's. How could you confuse the two? Maybe you are purely uneducated as to what a marxist believes and to what RP believes and just looking to trash him? Who in their right minds thinks a President, in four years, could destroy a nations defense that took 50 years to build? People looking to push fear and stifle RP's campaign, that's who. Get real dude.


Do you homework Junior and read about Paul's involvement with The Sustainable Defense Task Force then study the names of those on the Task Force and Which groups they ascribe to.
www.keywiki.org...

Study the movements from the far left and you will learn that will use Paul and the Libertarian movement to advance their own agenda to destroy America’s military superiority, and with it, US national sovereignty. This is the means to end crowd. Please remember that.

Ron Paul was right in the middle of this and surrounded by the radical element. Paul thinks he can work with this group to achieve his libertarian goals and they are in turn playing him like a cheap tuba.

Don't believe everything that you read or are told about Paul. Do your own homework. I did which is why I could never vote for the man for POTUS. He's best suited for another roll. Perhaps Geithner's old job.

Here is a sample of the Task Force's recommendations

• Roll back the size of the Army and Marine Corps as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan wind down. The U.S. could save $147 billion over the next decade by reducing the Army’s end strength from 547,400 to 482,400 and the Corps’ from 202,000 to 175,000, the task force says.

• Reduce the number of maneuver units in the Army and Marine Corps. The task force suggests reducing the number of Army brigades from 45 to 42 and the number of Marine infantry battalions from 27 to 24. Doing so would contribute to the $147 billion in savings as the services reduce their end strengths.

• Delay or cancel development of Navy variants of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The U.S. could save $9.85 billion from 2011 to 2020 by canceling the purchase of JSF jets for the Navy and Marine Corps and buying more affordable F/A-18 jets instead. Doing so would leave the Corps without jump jets once the AV-8 Harrier leaves the service, but the task force argues that capability “has not proved critical to operations in recent wars.”

• End the fielding of new MV-22 Ospreys. The Corps could save $10 billion to $12 billion over the next 10 years by buying new MH-60S and CH-53K helicopters, analysts say. The K variant of the CH-53 is not expected to hit the fleet until at least 2015, but the Navy began replacing outdated CH-46 helicopters early this century with the MH-60 on amphibious assault ships.


www.marinecorpstimes.com...

If you really feel like educating yourself
www.comw.org...

Sorry for the reality check!!


edit on 23-1-2012 by jibeho because: ooops
edit on 23-1-2012 by jibeho because: fix link



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   
This blind following of Ron Paul is starting to disturb me. Much like the blind following of Candidate Obama in the time leading up to the 2008 election. What gives?? There is a price to pay for everything involved in Ron Pauls stance on Foreign Policy and his views on American Defense.





new topics
 
40
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join