Ron Paul chooses Vice Pres running mate - Page 5 - Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum
 
Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum  

Go Back   Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum > Miscellaneous > General Chit-Chat
Notices

Reply
 
Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-21-2012, 08:13 AM   #101 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Member # 64421
Location: Dodging tornados
Posts: 8,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoCJ View Post
I disagree. I've read up on Paul's foreign policy and it reads like a chapter out of an isolationist manual.
BTW, you've never supported your view, all you've posted is your opinion(s) of what Paul stands for.
You read them where? From somebody doing a hit piece on him?

Here's the other end of the spectrum from his website:

Defense:
Quote:
* Make securing our borders the top national security priority.

* Avoid long and expensive land wars that bankrupt our country by using constitutional means to capture or kill terrorist leaders who helped attack the U.S. and continue to plot further attacks.

* Guarantee our intelligence community’s efforts are directed toward legitimate threats and not spying on innocent Americans through unconstitutional power grabs like the Patriot Act.

* End the nation-building that is draining troop morale, increasing our debt, and sacrificing lives with no end in sight.

* Follow the Constitution by asking Congress to declare war before one is waged.

* Only send our military into conflict with a clear mission and all the tools they need to complete the job – and then bring them home.

* Ensure our veterans receive the care, benefits, and honors they have earned when they return.

* Revitalize the military for the 21st century by eliminating waste in a trillion-dollar military budget.

* Prevent the TSA from forcing Americans to either be groped or ogled just to travel on an airplane and ultimately abolish the unconstitutional agency.

* Stop taking money from the middle class and the poor to give to rich dictators through foreign aid.
Oooh, cutting foreign aid, that sure sounds like isolationism.

Then there's that "let's cut out the nation building thing" that's about as close to isolationist as he seems to get. However, in the light of the utter failure of Iraq and Afghanistan to allow themselves to be "built" that sounds like a pretty good idea.

Are you really foolish enough to think that putting a base in every nation across the world is a good idea? You don't think that there would be resentment from the locals akin to if the French put a base in South Carolina? With our ability to project military power as needed, we don't need these cold war era forward bases, nor do we need to keep propping up South Korea while playing nice with North Korea.
TheRedHorseman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 08:14 AM   #102 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Member # 89191
Posts: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoCJ View Post
Facts ? Nice to see you look at history and come up with your conclusions and I come up with mine.
You've presented no facts, just your opinions as to why events happened.
Holy shit dude. Please, point out where I gave an opinion. I'll help you, by admitting the words 'disgusting' and maybe 'tyrant' are in fact opinions. The rest? Not so much. Please, at least disagree on those opinions! Good try at a typical duck and weave, though.
__________________
What are YOU doing for freedom? Be a doer. freestateproject.org
4xbrian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 08:57 AM   #103 (permalink)
A is A
 
Jamtoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Member # 146531
Location: Howland OH
Posts: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockota View Post
you seem to ignore that history also tells us that interventionalism leads to more war and more deaths. That shit hasn't been working. Explain why you support the last 80 years of interference, please. How has it made the US safer? How does it support COTUS?
See below.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRedHorseman View Post
How do you figure? Because the Nazis and Imperial Japan haven't reformed tried to take over the world again?

[COLOR="Red"]To some extent yes but the bigger picture was the soviet expansion. The Soviets would have easily pushed further west and into Asia had we not been there. In effect they would have stifled trade and been in a better position to dictate international policy. In todays world China's ambitions are only hampered by our positions in SE Asia and Korea.

It was our steadfast military expansion that led to the Soviet downfall. It was our presence in Korea, Japan that held off a further communist advance and chines aggression throughout the region.

You mean our intervention that led to the formation of groups like Al Qaeda?
This statement and premise proves just how stupid you are. Al Queda was formed in 1988 by veterans of the anti-soviet civil war. At it's start the intention was to usurp Arab governments with hard line Islamic rule. The United States dealings with Arab nations was strictly used an an excuse to justify the goal.
Places like Libya, Syria, Egypt and such should deal with crap on their own. Somehow I doubt that they are going to run out and amass an armada to make a huge D-Day like landing on the shore of New York.
Your ignorance continues. What you are going to find should you decide to crack a history book is that the Middle East is easily ruled by the one with the biggest fist. By ignoring that area you have now allowed what in time will be an Islamic league. The Islamic's could give two shits about where we are or if we take our toys and go home. The ultimate goal is world domination and yes they will have the ability one day to launch against us. Will they storm our shores? No, but they can and could easily, should Iran go unfettered, in time have ICBM's capable of reaching our shores as well as the ability to launch another 9/11 type scenario. Does anyone else remember that we as a nation are broke and living on credit?
Apparently you choose to ignore the reality and facts about military spending and the % of GDP that we spend on it. Our biggest dime is spent on social welfare entitlements. Military spending only accounts for 3-4% of GDP. Where is he claiming that he is going to reach out to an invading nation and claim "peace in our time?" This is more of the crap you hear on talk radio, taken from carefully selected clips of speeches.
He has said he would be attempt friendship with Iran, he believes despite facts to the contrary and an obvious mis-understanding of Islamic fascism that if we just let them be they will leave us alone, he makes false claims about the military budget breaking us when it is in fact minor compared to other spending, he claims the founders where non-interventionist(or the code Paul word for Isolationist) yet both Adams and Jefferson took us into undeclared wars. He has claimed our involvement in WWII was wrong despite the evidence of genocide and Germany's intention to expand it's war to our shores, not to mention that little thing the Japanese did. There are many other examples of Paul's ignorance of world events and historical failure's of isolationism.

There are many things I admire about him, his foreign policies and ideas are not one of them.
__________________
"The Founding Fathers knew a government can't control the economy without controlling people."

Ronald Reagan -October 27, 1964

Date added for moron proofing.
Jamtoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 10:31 AM   #104 (permalink)
Non-Lemming
 
SanDiegoCJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Member # 840
Location: Ramona, SoCal
Posts: 7,431
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamtoy View Post
See below.


He has said he would be attempt friendship with Iran, he believes despite facts to the contrary and an obvious mis-understanding of Islamic fascism that if we just let them be they will leave us alone, he makes false claims about the military budget breaking us when it is in fact minor compared to other spending, he claims the founders where non-interventionist(or the code Paul word for Isolationist) yet both Adams and Jefferson took us into undeclared wars. He has claimed our involvement in WWII was wrong despite the evidence of genocide and Germany's intention to expand it's war to our shores, not to mention that little thing the Japanese did. There are many other examples of Paul's ignorance of world events and historical failure's of isolationism.

There are many things I admire about him, his foreign policies and ideas are not one of them.
At least someone here sees through Paul's nonsense.
SanDiegoCJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 12:53 PM   #105 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Member # 5371
Location: TN
Posts: 3,421
Send a message via MSN to rockota
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoCJ View Post
At least someone here sees through Paul's nonsense.
still waiting on your facts. I'm guessing your curled up in the fetal position crying to your mommy that people are mean for asking you to support your claims (opinions) with fact

I'll continue to wait. You'll continue to duck and weave and call names.
rockota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 01:01 PM   #106 (permalink)
Non-Lemming
 
SanDiegoCJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Member # 840
Location: Ramona, SoCal
Posts: 7,431
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockota View Post
still waiting on your facts. I'm guessing your curled up in the fetal position crying to your mommy that people are mean for asking you to support your claims (opinions) with fact

I'll continue to wait. You'll continue to duck and weave and call names.


You really are laughable Brian. I've posted up my reasons for my statement about Paul's foreign policy. The fact that you refuse to accept them doesn't bother me in the least.
All you Paulbots have never shown any factual info refuting what I think of Paul's foreign policy. All I get from you are your opinions that you claim are facts.
SanDiegoCJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 01:11 PM   #107 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Member # 68805
Location: Cold ass Interior Alaska
Posts: 1,280
I'm less concerned about foreign policy than our own domestic issues right now. Foreign policy of pulling soldiers out of warzones and making even tenuous peace with aggressive nations is acceptable to me if it allows us to focus on getting the economy settled down and unemployment rates (real ones, not just reported ones) down.

The thing you have to think about is all presidential candidates have their pet projects. And all presidents work on their previous pet projects, but never really get everything they want.

If Ron Paul is president, you can assume that we won't be joining every worldwide conflict that arises. You can assume that he'll be very leery of green-lighting any foreign military action unless there's strong, direct provocation for it. I doubt even Ron Paul would have ignored 9/11. But I tend to think that Ron Paul would have used more reason and ordered an inquiry on the matter and had a better plan of action prior to pulling the proverbial trigger.

Last edited by TJVigilante; 02-21-2012 at 01:15 PM.
TJVigilante is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 01:31 PM   #108 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Member # 5371
Location: TN
Posts: 3,421
Send a message via MSN to rockota
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoCJ View Post


You really are laughable Brian. I've posted up my reasons for my statement about Paul's foreign policy. The fact that you refuse to accept them doesn't bother me in the least.
All you Paulbots have never shown any factual info refuting what I think of Paul's foreign policy. All I get from you are your opinions that you claim are facts.
you mailed:Gary: perfectly! Well done! Now answer my questions
rockota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 01:36 PM   #109 (permalink)
Non-Lemming
 
SanDiegoCJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Member # 840
Location: Ramona, SoCal
Posts: 7,431
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockota View Post
you mailed:Gary: perfectly! Well done! Now answer my questions
As expected. You didn't get an answer you liked so you accuse me of not answering. Typical liberal tactic.
SanDiegoCJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 01:39 PM   #110 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Member # 5371
Location: TN
Posts: 3,421
Send a message via MSN to rockota
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoCJ View Post
As expected. You didn't get an answer you liked so you accuse me of not answering. Typical liberal tactic.
here. I'll help. Is Pauls foreign policy ideas in line with COTUS or not?
rockota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 02:28 PM   #111 (permalink)
Wheeler
 
RedPurdueYJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Member # 94825
Location: I'm sexy and I know it!
Posts: 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockota View Post
here. I'll help. Is Pauls foreign policy ideas in line with COTUS or not?
Ask again later.

The SCOTUS hasn't ruled on that yet.
RedPurdueYJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 02:45 PM   #112 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Member # 5670
Location: Modesto, CA
Posts: 1,719
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoCJ View Post
I see you've learned nothing from history except for the small parts that fit your isolationist agenda.
You're a left-over person from a left-over time. The world is a much different place today than it was when this country was founded.
So do you feel the same way about the COTUS then? The US and the World are different places than 200 years ago, is COTUS meaningless now and needs an overhaul?

Also, you seem to have one issue with Ron Paul, his "isolationist" views as you put it. How many issues do you with the other candidates or the Big O himself? Just one issue with those guys, or more than one?

No candidate is ever going to be 100% of what anyone person wants in a President. However, that candidate can be 80% or more of what people want for a significant portion of the populace. I agree with most of Ron Paul's views. Does this make him perfect, not at all, but it still makes him, in my opinion, the best of the options we have and far better than Obama ever was or will be.
Pavemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 02:54 PM   #113 (permalink)
Non-Lemming
 
SanDiegoCJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Member # 840
Location: Ramona, SoCal
Posts: 7,431
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavemen View Post
So do you feel the same way about the COTUS then? The US and the World are different places than 200 years ago, is COTUS meaningless now and needs an overhaul?

Also, you seem to have one issue with Ron Paul, his "isolationist" views as you put it. How many issues do you with the other candidates or the Big O himself? Just one issue with those guys, or more than one?

No candidate is ever going to be 100% of what anyone person wants in a President. However, that candidate can be 80% or more of what people want for a significant portion of the populace. I agree with most of Ron Paul's views. Does this make him perfect, not at all, but it still makes him, in my opinion, the best of the options we have and far better than Obama ever was or will be.
Wow, lots and lots of wild ASSumptions there with nothing to back them up except your own prejudices.
SanDiegoCJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 03:21 PM   #114 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Member # 5670
Location: Modesto, CA
Posts: 1,719
First line, I was just asking a simple question based on your commentary about the world being a different place and that previous ideologies are or may no longer be valid.

My second comment was based on the fact that you have not presented many other concerns you have r.e. Paul in thie thread. Yes that was an assumption but based on your only argument agasint Paul in this thread (that I recalled reading). I only asked another simple set of questions that made zero assumptions.

The third line is my opinion and has nothing to do with you

Last edited by Pavemen; 02-21-2012 at 03:45 PM.
Pavemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 03:43 PM   #115 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Member # 5371
Location: TN
Posts: 3,421
Send a message via MSN to rockota
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoCJ View Post
Wow, lots and lots of wild ASSumptions there with nothing to back them up except your own prejudices.
still can't answer questions.
rockota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 03:44 PM   #116 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Member # 5371
Location: TN
Posts: 3,421
Send a message via MSN to rockota
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedPurdueYJ View Post
Ask again later.

The SCOTUS hasn't ruled on that yet.
all net!
rockota is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.