Tired of the Ron Paul Bandwagon???

page: 7
40
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 



you summed it up...you don't give a f*ck. therefore you're biased and impossible to discuss this topic with.
No, I just don't care for your muscle flexing. I don't feel the need to make myself and my country feel manly and tough by talking about how many people we could kill and how we would destroy anybody who messed with us. That's just a bunch of testosterone fueled primitive caveman like chest pounding that doesn't mean anything to me.


so let me ask you, you believe that we should bring every troop home and vacate every foreign base and who cares what happens to other countries, weaker countries etc...let the chips fall as they may? is that where you stand?
Yep! We would save trillions of dollars, and soldiers could pump some money into the economy. Defend our own country, and let other nations do the same.
edit on 22-1-2012 by TupacShakur because: (no reason given)


have you ever served your country??




posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by squidboy
100 Replies and only 4 flags?

When it comes to the Anti-Paul crowd, why are you guys always in the minority in terms of support? And it's always a very small number compared to the Pro-Paul crowd? I see it here. I see it on almost every website I visit. Why is that?

Are people just getting sick of the MSM bandwagon perhaps? Maybe the Neo-Con bandwagon? Perhaps the Progressive bandwagon?



to be honest with you...this site has a lot of brilliant minds...real thinkers. everybody today is brainwashed and one-track minded for the most part. i think people just don't care. i don't have very man people talking right now that are anti-ron paul. why? maybe because everybody else on here already knows that it's a non-factor. Ron Paul won't win the republican nomination....it's not hard to see that. so why argue with all the ron paul lovers....i don't know...i guess i was in need of a verbal bashing..... it's funny, i put up at least 5 times that I didn't disagree with Ron Paul on all his policies and that my only fight with him was on his foreign policies. I've even had people agree to an extent with me regarding his foreign policies yet people are mentioning sh*t that makes no sense...bashing newt gingrich. I haven't decided who I will vote for....I've decided who I will not be voting for though. It's my opinion that his foreign policy is his weakness and if i had to bet, i would say at the end of all these elections, that will be one of the points made against him and why he hasn't won. foreign policy. so i'm not getting support because it's not needed...the people in 3 elections have already proven that they agree that his foreign policies are not what is in the best interest of this country. i'm all alone on this fight i picked



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 



This one is lacking both in facts and a clear understanding the Korean issue.
Is it not a fact that troops will with 100% certainty come home to America, and spend the money spent in those countries here at home? I'd say that's pretty factual, unless they move to another country or something. Please tell me how that statement is lacking facts.

Is it a fact that North Korea will invade South Korea with 100% certainty when we leave there? I wouldn't say so, and neither should you, unless your understanding of the Korean issue has provided you with quotes from several North Korean officials who have said "once America leaves South Korea, we will invade".
edit on 22-1-2012 by TupacShakur because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:31 PM
link   
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 



have you ever served your country??
No, and how is this relevant? But Ron Paul has!



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by SLAYER69
 



This one is lacking both in facts and a clear understanding the Korean issue.
Is it not a fact that troops will with 100% certainty come home to America, and spend the money spent in those countries here at home? I'd say that's pretty factual, unless they move to another country or something.

Is it a fact that North Korea will invade South Korea with 100% certainty when we leave there? I wouldn't say so. Someone could not even know that North and South Korea exist yet understand that there isn't absolute certainty that such a conflict will occur.



Given that we only have about 30K troops in S. Korea, I doubt we are "physically" much of an impediment. More likely it is a combination of China and American bombs that are the impediment.

After discussing this with some friends, I think S. Korea is relatively safe regardless of who is POTUS.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by TupacShakur
Is it not a fact that troops will with 100% certainty come home to America, and spend the money spent in those countries here at home? I'd say that's pretty factual, unless they move to another country or something.


While completely ignoring the overwhelming evidence that North Korea is a threat maybe not to the US mainland but Billions of dollars with of business that this country relies on.

Have you so quickly forgotten North Korea Shelling South Korea? Have you forgotten who keeps threatening whom on a monthly basis with "Total Destruction"? North Korean Missiles are soon to have range enough to reach Hawaii. Not to mention they already can reach Japan another Country ours relies on for Billions of dollars more worth of commerce.

Not only that, but look at the real history of the region. Having troops in place is a deterrent. It cost the lives of thousands of American soldiers back when the North first invaded, why? Because we didn't have enough and the ones that were available were poorly trained occupation troops stationed in Japan...


Is it a fact that North Korea will invade South Korea with 100% certainty when we leave there? I wouldn't say so. Someone could not even know that North and South Korea exist yet understand that there isn't absolute certainty that such a conflict will occur.



AGAIN

That's a myopic point of view.

They don't have to invade. They have ten thousand cannons aimed at South Korea's capital and can rain death and destruction on Seoul. The US combined with the South Korean military are the only thing standing in their way. They have said and threatened repeatedly over the years/decades that a forced unification is something they would not take off the table.

edit on 22-1-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 





and like i've told you...ridding our foreign bases is the beginning to the end. tell me what happens when we pull our troops out of south korea? just answer me that 1 question.


Nothing....nothing happens. We certainly do not become weak and vulverable....All you have done is repeat verbatim what the MSM says.....no logic of your own at all. YOU started the thread== you tell us what happens and how it affects my country.

You keep saying his policy is naive and will leave us weak and open to attack. But you use hypothetical attacks on other countries as the example....you dont have your own opinion, you are repeated what you heard with no logical conclusion of your own.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by TupacShakur


Is it a fact that North Korea will invade South Korea with 100% certainty when we leave there? I wouldn't say so.



Sorry Pac,I disagree with that.



More than 11,000 DPRK artillery weapons are pointed at over 10 million citizens in Seoul. North Korea’s 1.2 million-man Army is the world’s fourth largest fighting force. Two-thirds of those soldiers are stationed within 60 miles of the De-Militarized Zone (DMZ), along with thousands of tanks and armored personnel carriers.



North Korea might try to gain diplomatic bargaining power through a limited operation intended to seize Seoul and adjacent areas, or the regime might still attempt a full-scale campaign intended to reunify the Peninsula by force under DPRK rule.



While Perry and his advisers believed in 1994 that any attack on Yongbyon would have limited physical effects, they also believed that any attack on the North’s flagship nuclear facility would probably have triggered the North to attack South Korea across the DMZ. North Korea has maintained much of its large standing Army in positions north of the DMZ, poised to attack the South, since the armistice that ended the Korean War in 1953. Seventy percent of DPRK ground forces are deployed south of a line between Pyongyang and Wonsan, an estimated 645,000 personnel.33 These personnel are so arranged that an attack could be made upon South Korea with little warning and no advance troop movements. There might be less than 24- hours’ warning.


LINK.PDF


They have been waiting 50+ years,for the US to walk away.Maybe their handlers in China would have a say, and then again,its North Korea.
edit on 22-1-2012 by sonnny1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 


Thanks for the reply. I can tell you are genuine person and that means a lot, however I can't disagree more with your fp ideals. I could go on for days as to why I believe non-intervention is the strongest foreign policy but that is not neccessary.

Here's the thing. We are broke!! This is not some hyperbole. Every day our fate becomes more sealed. In saying that no amount of money is too much for the protection of Americans, therefore I also believe non-intervention makes us stronger and safer more than fiscally. I have so many reasons for doing so, but simply if someone killed my child or my mother I would spend the rest of my life exacting revenge. As for your views on protection of the likes of South Korea, I simply believe the life of an American is more important than the life of a South Korean.

As for what caused 9-11, look up khaleeji.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 



have you ever served your country??
No, and how is this relevant? But Ron Paul has!


so you don't know what patriotism is... you don't understand sacrifice and you haven't seen sacrifice first hand. the reason i ask and it's relevence is because of your comment, "IDGAF" ... you would give a f*ck if you served.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by type0civ
Nothing....nothing happens. We certainly do not become weak and vulverable....All you have done is repeat verbatim what the MSM says.....



I rely on history.

Not the MSM. Do you?

edit on 22-1-2012 by SLAYER69 because:




posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ping9
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 


Thanks for the reply. I can tell you are genuine person and that means a lot, however I can't disagree more with your fp ideals. I could go on for days as to why I believe non-intervention is the strongest foreign policy but that is not neccessary.

Here's the thing. We are broke!! This is not some hyperbole. Every day our fate becomes more sealed. In saying that no amount of money is too much for the protection of Americans, therefore I also believe non-intervention makes us stronger and safer more than fiscally. I have so many reasons for doing so, but simply if someone killed my child or my mother I would spend the rest of my life exacting revenge. As for your views on protection of the likes of South Korea, I simply believe the life of an American is more important than the life of a South Korean.

As for what caused 9-11, look up khaleeji.


I agree we are broke and our fate is sealed my friend. I believe Ron Paul and his ideals and policies and what he wants to do for America is too late in the game and he would've been better for this country prior to WWII and in-turn, maybe even better for the world at that point. Who knows. There was that radical extremist Hitler who was attempting to take over the world so at some point, we would've had to fight, with Paul, the fight would've been on our own soil I'm afraid.

I understand that an American life is valued to an american more than a south korean. I don't agree with the fact we have bases and troops in places they shouldn't be. But the fact is they are there and were put there for foreign diplomacy, whether for our own benefits or because we promised troops on the ground. That's the past and it sucks. i can agree with that. they are there and for us to all of a sudden remove them 2 days after Paul takes office....man i can't even wrap my mind around that. the effects of that at this point would be horrible. I do believe we'd see attacks on american soil at some point in his 4 year term.

i just can't agree with the golden rule as many has used here....i'll be nice to you and you be nice to me rule. i think we are past the point of return right now and allowing other countries all around us to defend their selves, after our intervention, protection, whatever you want to call it would make us vulnerable for future attacks. I could be wrong...but I just can't agree to his stance ... not right now.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrgregbusybee

Ron Paul's view on foreign policy is as follows; ...

Ron Paul believes that we, as a country, deserved...listen to me DESERVED the 9/11 attacks.



I stopped reading there.

Obviously you've been watching too much television. Do some research. If you did, you'd realize that Ron Paul has never said that.

And until you do some research and stopped gobbling down everything the talking heads on television tell you, I can't read any more of your nonsense.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:59 PM
link   
South Korea is a civil war we need to get out and and stay out! The cold war is dead there is no more " if you are red, you need to be dead" if they can not fend off the North or China gets in the mix so be it, not the US problem, as far as the other guy get the to be the pres not a chance, Newt is it get used to it. Ron did his best, but he is to weak to do any good, Mit Rom well get real no way no how. the only bad thing about Newt is he will give Israel all they want, delaying the end.
edit on 23-1-2012 by bekod because: editting



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Poor Neville...................................



Appeasing the enemy will get you annexed to BTS..........................


careful........




posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Many South Korean citizens actually do not fear North Korea--at least they did not before the dead of Kim Jong Il. They simply saw Kim as a brat. This comes from my 10 years of working with South Koreans, so I do not have links. It's funny, when the North first tested its nuclear bomb, I immediately emailed a close friend in South Korea, believing the media's portrayal of imminent war. I was laughed at and told that South Koreans for the most part were not really paying attention. It is important to note, however, that most of my contacts were with the younger generation. They have not seen war, so that may very well influence their opinions.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by bekod
South Korea is a civil war we need to get out and and stay out!


One leaves and another one who doesn't fully understand the situation shows up squawking erroneous beliefs...


The cold war is dead there is no more " if you are red, you need to be dead"


Yes for the rest of the world it is. But not for North Korea.


if they can not fend off the North or China gets in the mix so be it, not the US problem,


There you have it Ladies and Gentlemen.

Turn our backs on one of our closest allies because it doesn't fit into their Paradigm of rainbows, sunshine and unicorns.
edit on 23-1-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   
ok, ive been reading alot of this, and you keep saying that if we pull our troops out of other countrys it would make us weaker... now how does that work exactly? wouldn't bringing our troops back to OUR country make US stronger. how is leaving south Korea going to make OUR country weaker? how is South Korea getting invaded going to harm OUR country.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 12:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by type0civ
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 





and like i've told you...ridding our foreign bases is the beginning to the end. tell me what happens when we pull our troops out of south korea? just answer me that 1 question.


Nothing....nothing happens. We certainly do not become weak and vulverable....All you have done is repeat verbatim what the MSM says.....no logic of your own at all. YOU started the thread== you tell us what happens and how it affects my country.

You keep saying his policy is naive and will leave us weak and open to attack. But you use hypothetical attacks on other countries as the example....you dont have your own opinion, you are repeated what you heard with no logical conclusion of your own.


THIS IS MY LOGIC FROM READING AND LISTENING AND BEING IN THE MILITARY AND PREPARING FOR NORTH KOREA AND OTHER POTENTIAL THREATS...ETC...I OFFERED MY OPINION AS YOU DO. If we remove our troops and use RP's golden rule, North Korea will kill all the South Koreans. This affects you because now you have Korea, Japan and China all working together on taking away your ability to argue with me here on this wonderful site. You are the naive to believe that this golden rule is even possible. Do you not read about our enemies? Do you think China, if given the opportunity, would attempt to f*ck us up? Do you think Japan wouldn't love some revenge for what we did to them? What about Korea? By taking away our troops and our foreign bases in these strategic points absolutely would make us vulnerable to future attacks, 100%.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 12:10 AM
link   
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
 


30k American soldiers are stopping 1 million North Korean soldiers?





top topics
 
40
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join