Ron Revere MF'ing Paul

[EmptyMan]

RIP America.

[whottt]

As usual, a lot of stuff he says makes sense and some of it makes only slightly more sense than Michael Moore.

It's not so much that he thinks he's right and both parties are wrong that I disagree on as it is that some of what he says has absolutely no practical application in reality and is historically proven to be the wrong path to take.


Furthermore, he typifies the worst aspect of the it's all about us and everybody else mindset held by most liberals that I find extremely repellent.

It no longer matters if it was legal, moral, or the smart thing to do with regards to invading Iraq(or Afghanistan for that matter), it is a moot point and an irrelevant debate to anyone other than historians and war theorists and has been since we went it. It has absolutely no bearing on the outcome of the war.

Once we go in...the debate about whether or not we should do it is then over and it then becomes a debate on the best course of action, and an automatic pullout, then, and now, is every bit as stupid as the decision to go in, in the first place. I don't care if these were the two most illegal and immoral wars in history, the decision to go in cannot be reversed by a pullout.

I'm sorry but you can't just pretend it never happened, and anyone that thinks an automatic pullout is going to make the situation better for us, or the countries we blew the living out of, is totally detatched from reality.

And people that feel this way have this huge detatchment from reality and they are completely oblivious to the reality of the situation.

I mean the neon example of what will happen is right there in Afghanistan calling themselves the Taliban. And I don't see how anyone can call themselves a human being, much less a liberal, if you can sleep at night knowing our country is part of the reason people will have to live in such conditions for the forseeable future.


Other than that the main I thing agree with him on 100% and I wasn't aware of it is his stance on sanctions. Sanctions are complete and never work to undermine the government they are imposed upon. They do the exact opposite, they weaken the resistance movements and strengthen the governments. They also directly punish the innocent and do absolutely nothing to the people we are trying to hurt except gain them more support.

[Wild Cobra]

I like Ron Paul until he talks about his thoughts on the military. I do not see him as presidential material.

I didn't bring my headphones down, so I'll have to listen to the YouTube later. However, I can imagine his thoughts. Wonder if I'm right or not.

[whottt]

He still has vacuum problems, doesn't believe in power va s, while simultaneously thinks a country in the position of the US can exist in a va apart from the rest of the world. History proves he's 100% wrong on both counts. Easily.

Power va es do exist and ignoring them is the quickest way to find yourself in a much bigger/deadlier war.

The rest of the world will not let us exist in a vacuum. And our past attempts to do so have lead to death rates exponentially greater than those of these two wars.


And I don't really understand how a man who has obviously studied history a great deal can be so oblivious to both of those historic trends.


If we do what Dr. Paul advocates there, if we had done so with regularity in the past, we might definitely not have the problems we do now, we also would not be America.

I've never heard anything close to a satisfactory answer from him on either of those issues, he simply goes into denial like the Democrats do, he might even go into denial more than they do.

When those questions are asked of him, he immediately stops sounding like an independent thinker, and starts sounding exactly like a politician, he starts giving stock, inaccurate political answers, that take only one view into account. He starts sounding more cliched than Michael Moore.

For instance, "they don't want us there"...that is a generalized statement that views all Iraqis, or Afghanis, as a collective group...and they most certainly aren't a collective group, that is the problem.

Sorry Ron Paul, but "they don't want us there" is not an accurate answer. You can get away with saying some of them don't want us there, you cannot get away with saying, "they" do not want us there.


It''s not true when he says they do not want us there, because I guarantee you the majority of women in Afghanistan most certainly do want us there and they do want our help.


There is a selfishness and ambivalence to that walk past the rape world view, and contrary to what Mr. Paul says, it runs contradictory to the principles of liberty this country was founded upon. This country was no founded to first and foremost, mind it's own business and ignore horrors.


One other issue I have is his stance on shutting down foreign military bases, especially during a down economy. That is not going to improve our employment situation, it's going to put a ton of people out of work, and it's not going to do anything to improve the global econonmy either. It's actually going to create more unemployment, particularly in America, and this is easily proven by the US making a similar decision during the Great Depression.

I'm no economist but I can easily see that people that were formerly employed by the military no longer being employed is going to increase our need for jobs. If there is any economic activity going on in those bases(even if it's a net loss) then it's better to leave them open than to shut them down.

And if you do need money, then first place you go to is our rich pro military segment. They want it, they can pay for it.



There are just aspects of Ron Paul's world view that would be accurate if this was 1776 and America was still a fledgling country that could choose to be a non-en iy on the global stage, but it's no longer true now. We are intrinsically linked to the rest of the world, and they to us, and that's not going to change until the world changes.


It's like the Yankees, Celtics, Lakers and Cowboys deciding to leave their respective leagues...in pretty much no time at all, they would have no one to play, they certainly wouldn't have as many people to play and it wouldn't be very entertaining, and they, and what they stand for, would be history.


If it wasn't for that part of his world view, I would easily vote for him because everything else he says makes total sense, and that part of what he says, makes absolutely no sense.

[Wild Cobra]

Wow, I gotta go, but listened to just over half of Paul's interview. I completely agree with the man, on what I heard so far.

[EmptyMan]

This country was no founded to first and foremost, mind it's own business and ignore horrors.

ehhhh, but let's try it.


Sheeeeeeeeeeit whott. If you are so worried about the military-economy connection, why half ass it? Half assing it is not how our fathers built this country, Patton did not half ass it. Let's declare war on some more countries to boost our revenue. A couple casualties is alright seeing as how we are at 10% unemployment. America has plenty right now to fill in the gaps.

"Can't call in the troops, the economy can't afford it" What the ?

[whottt]

ehhhh, but let's try it.

We already have.

[EmptyMan]

Who gives a if the afghan women DO want us there. Who are they? American lives are worth some stranger who was born into goats and rocks on the other side of the ing ocean?

If that's the case, again, why are we half-assing it. I'm sure there are a couple billion who could use a young American male guarding their hut.

[whottt]

ehhhh, but let's try it.


Sheeeeeeeeeeit whott. If you are so worried about the military-economy connection, why half ass it? Half assing it is not how our fathers built this country, Patton did not half ass it. Let's declare war on some more countries to boost our revenue. A couple casualties is alright seeing as how we are at 10% unemployment. America has plenty right now to fill in the gaps.

He's not just talking about Iraq and Afghanistan, and neither am I.

"Can't call in the troops, the economy can't afford it" What the ?

100% more accurate than his cry of bring them all home, the economy can't afford it, which you cheer.

[whottt]

Who gives a if the afghan women DO want us there.

I do. I give a . Besides, it serves our own self interest in the long run, that is what you and Ron Paul do not get, and you don't get it, even after September 11th.

Who are they?

They are human beings that had no control over the situation into which they were born, much like neither you or I had any say over being born Americans. And we are there, and we can do something about it, and make the world a better place, justify our position in the world, and serve our self interest.

American lives are worth some stranger who was born into goats and rocks on the other side of the ing ocean?

See what gets me, is that you guys aren't just advocating walking past the rape right in front of our eyes, you guys are actively against anyone else doing anything about it either.


A great idea until the rapist(s) that you ignore comes for your daughter, or wife...or buildings.

If that's the case, again, why are we half-assing it. I'm sure there are a couple billion who could use a young American male guarding their hut.

The at ude you have is one that I imagine is prevalent in places like Afghanistan and Pakistan, probably the A#1 reason those countries are the holes they are. People with your at ude are exactly why places turn into holes.

Ambivalence...


What gets me is how excited you are about it.

[clambake]

how do people decide?

i think i know.