Tired of the Ron Paul Bandwagon???

page: 4
40
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrgregbusybee

Originally posted by hangedman13
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 


I agree there was more to Iraq then the wmd issue. I still am not convinced that there were not, if you recall Russian military "advisers" left Baghdad for Syria just ahead of the coalition invasion of the city. I think Paul's foreign policy is based on incorrect assumptions about foreign diplomacy.


Now that statement, I can agree with. Maybe he has based his policy on incorrect assumptions. But it doesn't take a genius to know that other countries will NEVER respect us and leave us alone if we leave them alone like Paul wants to implement. That's not speculation...that's a fact. No one here can argue what his foreign policy represents. That he believes that we should bring every troop back to the USA and stay out of the business of other countries, therefore other countries will leave us alone and maybe even like us. That's what he believes. We can't have that....!!!! We know at least 4 countries that will never adhere to that type of policy, north korea, china,japan and iraq


Can you remind us of what north Korea china and Iraq have done to threaten us?




posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 



However; his foreign policy alone is unacceptable.
I kind of like the idea of peace. I'm sure the people over there watching people get killed and their friends die, the soldiers committing suicide in record numbers, the family members of soldiers overseas, and the hundreds of thousands of civilians who have lost family members as a result of our military actions would agree.


We can't allow that to happen because we know what the other countries will do.
No we don't.


It's not speculation
Yes it is


it's fact.
No it's not.


If we fall under Paul's foreign policy, we will be vulnerable and weak.
Maybe you didn't read what I said earlier, twice, but cutting militarism is not the same as cutting defense. Can you explain to me what part of that statement you don't understand, because it's clear that you either didn't read it or fail to understand what I am saying and what Ron Pauls stance on defense is.
edit on 22-1-2012 by TupacShakur because: (no reason given)
edit on 22-1-2012 by TupacShakur because: (no reason given)


We do know what other countries will do....tell me what happens when we remove our troops from South Korea? You think North Korea says, stay there...it's okay. Hell NO. Tell me what happens when we take the pressure off of Iran. you think they will leave us alone, or Israel alone? NO....how do we know this...they've stated this!!!! this is not speculation.

Right or wrong.... Paul believes that if we stay to ourselves as a country and out of other countries land and out of their ability to run a country and basically out of their business all-together...that this is what our country needs to bring peace....?

As far war and soldiers dying and suicide...I spent the last 8 years of my life in afghanistan buddy. You don't get more patriotic than me. This is the entire reason for writing about Paul. We can't allow this policy to take place as a country. It's ignorant to think it would work....



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:40 PM
link   
reply to pen yoost by mrgregbusybee
 





We know and can predict the actions of other countries.


Like the WMD's in Iraq......DENY IGNORANCE!!!!

Open your mind and rethink your position....your 100% wrong



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by type0civ

Originally posted by mrgregbusybee

Originally posted by hangedman13
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 


I agree there was more to Iraq then the wmd issue. I still am not convinced that there were not, if you recall Russian military "advisers" left Baghdad for Syria just ahead of the coalition invasion of the city. I think Paul's foreign policy is based on incorrect assumptions about foreign diplomacy.


Now that statement, I can agree with. Maybe he has based his policy on incorrect assumptions. But it doesn't take a genius to know that other countries will NEVER respect us and leave us alone if we leave them alone like Paul wants to implement. That's not speculation...that's a fact. No one here can argue what his foreign policy represents. That he believes that we should bring every troop back to the USA and stay out of the business of other countries, therefore other countries will leave us alone and maybe even like us. That's what he believes. We can't have that....!!!! We know at least 4 countries that will never adhere to that type of policy, north korea, china,japan and iraq


Can you remind us of what north Korea china and Iraq have done to threaten us?


Really? lol. c'mon now. I have to believe that you aren't that ignorant....you are intelligent. Do you honestly not believe that any of those countries are not a threat to us as a country?



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 


So , a Long Winded Personal Opinion . Been there , Seen that , NEXT.............







RON PAUL 2012 !



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 





Can you remind us of what north Korea china and Iraq have done to threaten us?

Really? lol. c'mon now. I have to believe that you aren't that ignorant....you are intelligent. Do you honestly not believe that any of those countries are not a threat to us as a country?


Throttle back turbo...this is YOUR argument...please enlighten us....I will concede that every now and then chinese officials publically state their views on us militarily.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by type0civ
reply to pen yoost by mrgregbusybee
 





We know and can predict the actions of other countries.


Like the WMD's in Iraq......DENY IGNORANCE!!!!

Open your mind and rethink your position....your 100% wrong


You've obviously not read the entire thread. Of course there were never weapons of mass destruction. I'm by no means ignorant. Ignorance is believing that Paul's foreign policy is acceptable and commendable. That's what this thread is about.. I like some of the things he says and believes in. You can't have a foreign policy that believes in let others be and they will let us be. Not possible and we as a country would be ignorant and naive to believe that this is even possible. But it's not even worth having a conversation with any of you biased Paul lovers....it's a non-issue anyway....Enough realists and Patriots to our country agree and it won't be too long before Paul drops out of the race....although he may be of character to stay in as an independent to take votes away from whatever republican wins...thus putting obama back in office. i can see that happen....let's hope not



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 



We do know what other countries will do....tell me what happens when we remove our troops from South Korea? You think North Korea says, stay there...it's okay. Hell NO.
Opinions are not facts dude. Get that through your head.


Tell me what happens when we take the pressure off of Iran. you think they will leave us alone, or Israel alone? NO....how do we know this...they've stated this!!!! this is not speculation.
Iran leave us alone? Let me remind you of some facts buddy, something that you've shown you aren't too capable of understanding. WE'RE the ones putting sanctions on Iran. WE'RE the ones threatening to bomb them for trying to develop weapons that we've had for decades. WE'RE the ones going into waters right near their countries.

What would we do if Iranian warships were in the Gulf of Mexico? What would we do if Iran put sanctions on us, and threatened to bomb us and go to war if OUR government decided what to do and not do for themselves? How would WE feel if in that situation, Iran was calling US the agressor?


Right or wrong.... Paul believes that if we stay to ourselves as a country and out of other countries land and out of their ability to run a country and basically out of their business all-together...that this is what our country needs to bring peace....?
Yes, America not fighting wars and occupying other countries would amount to peace for America. Is that not correct?


As far war and soldiers dying and suicide...I spent the last 8 years of my life in afghanistan buddy.
Good for you. Were you one of the soldiers protecting the poppyseed fields?


You don't get more patriotic than me.
Then read the Constitution Mr. Patriot.
edit on 22-1-2012 by TupacShakur because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:49 PM
link   
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 





You've obviously not read the entire thread. Of course there were never weapons of mass destruction. I'm by no means ignorant. Ignorance is believing that Paul's foreign policy is acceptable and commendable. That's what this thread is about.. I like some of the things he says and believes in. You can't have a foreign policy that believes in let others be and they will let us be. Not possible and we as a country would be ignorant and naive to believe that this is even possible. But it's not even worth having a conversation with any of you biased Paul lovers....it's a non-issue anyway....Enough realists and Patriots to our country agree and it won't be too long before Paul drops out of the race....although he may be of character to stay in as an independent to take votes away from whatever republican wins...thus putting obama back in office. i can see that happen....let's hope not


I've read the entire thread and you are unable to see your stupidity..you say we can predict and know what they will do....but don't count iraq cuz that screws up your fantasy....right?



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrgregbusybee
His foreign policy is well known. He believes that we should mind our own business and the other countries will do the same, thus causing peace and harmony. That would be a great policy if the other countries would respect us the same. It will never happen. WE know what the other countries think and feel. I'm not misguiding anyone, I simply can't stand that everyone wants Paul and makes up excuses as to why he isn't winning and why he should be. I do like some of the things he believes in...but his foreign policy leaves us weak and open. We can't afford to remain out of other countries business, it will ultimately be our demise. Think about it, pull out of South Korea, North Korea immediately invades and takes over south korea. We stay out of Irans business, they will wipe Israel off the face of the planet. those are facts...not speculation.

What do you want further facts on, that he believes America deserved 9/11. type it in google, there's a bunch of information to follow. It's been brought up many times to him. I can get that information for you if you'd like tho.

These people think I'm a Paul hater....not the case. I'm an obama hater...but for the safety and perseverance of our country, his foreign policy will never work



Kinda answering both your current point and the one you made on page 2 in one fell swoop. Simply put, you cannot live in fear.

Yes, North Korea is unstable and unpredictable. Iran is as well, to a degree. There are a lot of rogue powers out there. I don't deny that and neither does Dr. Paul. We can waste all our time, money, and youth trying to "do unto others before they do unto us" or we can spend our time and money strengthening our borders and defense to prevent them from even considering doing unto us.

This strange obsession with Israel really throws me for a loop. Despite the fact that they are NOT a colony of the USA, we have gone to extraordinary measures to get deeply involved in their day to day affairs to the point of endangering their national sovereignty. They really CAN look after themselves, if we let them.

And finally, as for the nuclear Iran thing.

1) They are a NNPT signatory. This means they are barred from the actual construction of a nuclear weapon.
2) Because they are an NNPT signatory, the construction, testing, or military use of a nuclear weapon is cause for immediate invasion.
3) Does anyone really think that Iran wll spend countless amounts of money and time to build a weapon and then *somehow* get it to Israel without testing it in the vain hopes that it will work?

Iran having a nuclear weapon is not the slightest of concerns. They are most likely NOT building one and if they are they will TEST it before attacking anyone with it. At that point, they are in violation of the NNPT and the whole world will come down on their heads.

At some point, we all have to take a collective deep breath and realize that the sky is NOT falling and the best course of action is a measured, patient, mature, and diplomatic approach to foreign policy.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by type0civ
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 





Can you remind us of what north Korea china and Iraq have done to threaten us?

Really? lol. c'mon now. I have to believe that you aren't that ignorant....you are intelligent. Do you honestly not believe that any of those countries are not a threat to us as a country?


Throttle back turbo...this is YOUR argument...please enlighten us....I will concede that every now and then chinese officials publically state their views on us militarily.


Sorry, getting bashed by biased Paul lovers here. Again, I will say that I don't disagree with some of the things Paul stands for and believes in. Hell everyone can say that about any candidate. What my point here is that allowing his foreign policy into the white house is naive and ignorant for us as americans. As nice as it would be...in a perfect world, yes, i'll leave you alone, you leave me alone (that's his stance on foreign policy) but it's naive to believe that will work because we know the stance on other countries. China, as you stated has publicly stated they despise us as a country. Our sanctions and current foreign policy keeps them at bay and away from having a navy because we know they'd float their asses over here. North Korea threatens war every other day. They too are crippled with lack of a navy, not by accident mind you. But if we pull our troops out of South Korea, we sign a death certificate for every South Korean there. No questions, no arguments to that. Take Iran, they just stated a couple weeks ago they would wipe Israel completely off the map if and when they could. Israel's our ally. Are we going to mind our business and let them fend for themselves after all these years of protection? these are all things that will happen without a doubt. so i don't know why it's an argument with everyone...his foreign policy is substandard, naive and dangerous for us as americans.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by g146541
 


I never called anyone a dbag. Putting words in someone's mouth does not help your argument.

To address your question, I think people calling MLK "Dr" is silly. Just as with Paul, it did not elevate King or make him any better. It is quite obvious that Paul supporters use the term to make Paul more than what he is. Other politicians have PhDs, but you never hear people referring to them as "Dr."

All this said, I actually agree with Paul's foreign policy. America's enemies (and really, there are just a few) are enemies because of what America does around the world and, at times, who she stands with.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
reply to post by g146541
 


I never called anyone a dbag. Putting words in someone's mouth does not help your argument.

To address your question, I think people calling MLK "Dr" is silly. Just as with Paul, it did not elevate King or make him any better. It is quite obvious that Paul supporters use the term to make Paul more than what he is. Other politicians have PhDs, but you never hear people referring to them as "Dr."

All this said, I actually agree with Paul's foreign policy. America's enemies (and really, there are just a few) are enemies because of what America does around the world and, at times, who she stands with.


Actually, I call him Dr. because he has an MD and practiced medicine for many years. This, by ANY normal social standard, typically grants him the honor of being referred to as Dr. It has nothing to do with "elevating" him.. it is a sign of respect on my part.

After all, my doctor's first name is Gabrielle. I don't around referring to her as such.
edit on 1-22-2012 by rogerstigers because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:58 PM
link   
reply to post by rogerstigers
 


And as I pointed out, honorifics are not used for any other politician. There must be a reason why. I have no real problem with Paul, I just think some of his followers are funny.

To address your edit: politicians are typically only referred to by their last names. Except for Dr Paul of course.
edit on 22-1-2012 by InvisibleAlbatross because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
reply to post by rogerstigers
 


And as I pointed out, honorifics are not used for any other politician. There must be a reason why. I have no real problem with Paul, I just think some of his followers are funny.

To address your edit: politicians are typically only referred to by their last names. Except for Dr Paul of course.
edit on 22-1-2012 by InvisibleAlbatross because: (no reason given)


Point understood.. I don't know of any other politician with an MD.. but to be fair, I sometimes just call him Paul as well... just sounds a bit odd and familiar, since his last name is a first name.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrgregbusybee


Newt Gingrich - The absolute smartest man in the campaign. There's no doubt he would turn our country around and no doubt that he would clean house in washington dc. Newts downfall is he is a one tracked man that is too narcissistic and doesn't know how to express himself in a manner that doesn't make him come off as an A$$hole. I don't think he would be bad for our country in any way. I don't think he would take any countries BS and he would make sure we once again become the #1 country in the world.


Sorry I dont buy this ONE bit...........

Thats like saying Obama has created more Private sector Jobs then Bush,in all his 8 years............

Check out the flip flops....................




You might as well keep Obama in there........which is SCARY.

Come on man.

Madness??, Madness???.............THIS IS NEWT !!!!



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogerstigers

Originally posted by mrgregbusybee
His foreign policy is well known. He believes that we should mind our own business and the other countries will do the same, thus causing peace and harmony. That would be a great policy if the other countries would respect us the same. It will never happen. WE know what the other countries think and feel. I'm not misguiding anyone, I simply can't stand that everyone wants Paul and makes up excuses as to why he isn't winning and why he should be. I do like some of the things he believes in...but his foreign policy leaves us weak and open. We can't afford to remain out of other countries business, it will ultimately be our demise. Think about it, pull out of South Korea, North Korea immediately invades and takes over south korea. We stay out of Irans business, they will wipe Israel off the face of the planet. those are facts...not speculation.

What do you want further facts on, that he believes America deserved 9/11. type it in google, there's a bunch of information to follow. It's been brought up many times to him. I can get that information for you if you'd like tho.

These people think I'm a Paul hater....not the case. I'm an obama hater...but for the safety and perseverance of our country, his foreign policy will never work



Kinda answering both your current point and the one you made on page 2 in one fell swoop. Simply put, you cannot live in fear.

Yes, North Korea is unstable and unpredictable. Iran is as well, to a degree. There are a lot of rogue powers out there. I don't deny that and neither does Dr. Paul. We can waste all our time, money, and youth trying to "do unto others before they do unto us" or we can spend our time and money strengthening our borders and defense to prevent them from even considering doing unto us.

This strange obsession with Israel really throws me for a loop. Despite the fact that they are NOT a colony of the USA, we have gone to extraordinary measures to get deeply involved in their day to day affairs to the point of endangering their national sovereignty. They really CAN look after themselves, if we let them.

And finally, as for the nuclear Iran thing.

1) They are a NNPT signatory. This means they are barred from the actual construction of a nuclear weapon.
2) Because they are an NNPT signatory, the construction, testing, or military use of a nuclear weapon is cause for immediate invasion.
3) Does anyone really think that Iran wll spend countless amounts of money and time to build a weapon and then *somehow* get it to Israel without testing it in the vain hopes that it will work?

Iran having a nuclear weapon is not the slightest of concerns. They are most likely NOT building one and if they are they will TEST it before attacking anyone with it. At that point, they are in violation of the NNPT and the whole world will come down on their heads.

At some point, we all have to take a collective deep breath and realize that the sky is NOT falling and the best course of action is a measured, patient, mature, and diplomatic approach to foreign policy.


Probably one of the best responses I've read. Very well thought out and informative. I can agree to a degree. What I can't agree with is the naive thinking that this is even possible with some of the countries we are discussing. So Paul wants to strengthen our borders and basically...fall back and protect ourselves. Okay. What about South Korea who we've been protecting for decades now? We pull out troops we sign their death certificates within a day of departure if I was a gambling man. We benefit from China probably more than they do with us...so cutting off trading with them is not plausible in my opinion. What concerns me would be North Korea, China and Japan all gaining steam and valuable "time" because we are off minding our own business. As far as Iran, even though they are NNPT (very nice response on Iran) how much do we really know on them? We've already confirmed they are less than a year of producing the rods (i believe rods) required to have a functioning nuclear weapon. I don't think it's a coincidence they've had 2 of their physicists killed.

I would love to have a country that's at peace where our men and women are not dying. I've seen it first hand my friend. I"m not arguing that. I think Paul has some great ideas. I just believe his foreign policy leaves us vulnerable as a country and our future. That's all.....nothing more bad against Paul. I do get tired of seeing excuses for Paul and blaming other things....but i understand everyone's passion for a candidate....and truth is there's not just 1 that stands out and has everything required to turn this country around. it's a choice to who you think can best turn us around immediately. that sucks. and no, i'm not for romney either. i don't know yet between santorium or the asshole new



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 




Ron Paul's view on foreign policy is as follows; If we aren't there causing problems, they won't have a reason to hate us or I want a policy of non-intervention, neutrality, & independence. As an American, here's how I perceive this man's statement. Listen Iran, I'm pretty sure I'm a nice guy and I think that if I take all our troops out of the Middle East and from every country in the world, I think you will actually respect us and never want to cause us problems because I'm not going to monitor you or bother you anymore. I'm really sorry for how we are such bullies in the past, but for the next 4 years, I cross my heart that we will not invade a single country in any shape for form so pretty pretty please don't fight with us.


No.. it's more like.. let the World fight with one another if they really want to .. it's not our job to settle their squabbles. If we are not occupying the ME it's unlikely they would try to attack us. If they do attack us, we destroy them, reduce them to the stone age and go home. Don't nation build. Don't occupy. Destroy and move on. Poke the giant, the giant will break your face.



Ron Paul believes that we, as a country, deserved...listen to me DESERVED the 9/11 attacks. If this man was president, here's what would happen within 1 year of office. We would be out of South Korea which will allow North Korea to overtake by force, South Korea. North Korea has NO desire to unite with South Korea in any form other than North Korea ruling entire Korea. Which will lead to China gaining a head of steam against us and we mind as well throw Japan back in the mix. I think between those 3 countries alone, it's safe to say their governments despise us and would attack if they had support, which they would now have in the form of Korea, Japan and China. 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.


We did deserve 9/11 assuming it was a few uneducated terrorist from Saudi Arabia who managed to magically fly airplanes into buildings without leaving any evidence. Oh I digress.

Yeah we should leave South Korea. North Korea might attack them. Not our deal, last I checked South Korea was not a State of the United States and did not pay for our protection. Iran might get nukes. Israel has nukes. Pakistan has nukes. The World didn't end.



How long do you think it will be before we have trouble knocking on our front door or better still, how long before you're in your front yard one day and see a rocket trail over head that is headed for a big city somewhere near you?? By that point our military will be so reduced and weak, we won't be able to protect our own coast lines. WAKE-UP people. Ron Paul is absolutely the worst candidate you can put in the white house, hell Obama is better left there than Ron Paul and that makes me puke to even think about Obama in office 4 more years.


LMFAO .. Fox news did a number on you man..



Rick Santorium - Out of all the candidates, I think Rick would make the best all-around president.

Annnnnnd what credibility you had just went out the _ It wasn't much.. but there it goes.

0 respect for Santorum supporters.
edit on 1/22/2012 by Rockpuck because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 





Sorry, getting bashed by biased Paul lovers here. Again, I will say that I don't disagree with some of the things Paul stands for and believes in. Hell everyone can say that about any candidate. What my point here is that allowing his foreign policy into the white house is naive and ignorant for us as americans. As nice as it would be...in a perfect world, yes, i'll leave you alone, you leave me alone (that's his stance on foreign policy) but it's naive to believe that will work because we know the stance on other countries. China, as you stated has publicly stated they despise us as a country. Our sanctions and current foreign policy keeps them at bay and away from having a navy because we know they'd float their asses over here. North Korea threatens war every other day. They too are crippled with lack of a navy, not by accident mind you. But if we pull our troops out of South Korea, we sign a death certificate for every South Korean there. No questions, no arguments to that. Take Iran, they just stated a couple weeks ago they would wipe Israel completely off the map if and when they could. Israel's our ally. Are we going to mind our business and let them fend for themselves after all these years of protection? these are all things that will happen without a doubt. so i don't know why it's an argument with everyone...his foreign policy is substandard, naive and dangerous for us as americans.


NONE of the above has anything to do with OUR national security..ZIP, ZERO. And yes let them provide for their own defense....we can always sell them arms built right here...by us...when RP gets us back to work.

Are yo even paying attention to your argument....you are stating that his foreign policy may not be good for OTHER countries....not ours. DENY IGNORANCE....what's your stance? World police or the common defence of we the people.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by rogerstigers
 


You make a good point there. It hadn't even registered that it is a first name also


Edit: I had to wiki politicians with PhDs. There are just a few, though no MDs, other than Paul.
en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 22-1-2012 by InvisibleAlbatross because: (no reason given)



new topics
top topics
 
40
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join