Ron Paul

[raptor10]

Let me clarify, I'm not saying we could put birds together as fast as we put together bombers in WWII, I am saying that defense projects could be completed quicker and cheaper if manufacturing was not spread across the country, and we did not have to rely on parts shipped in from overseas.

 

[mmx1]

Those arguments against Paul would all be fantastic in a Monarchy.However, because we live in the 3-branch political system, really extremist tendencies are going to be naturally cancelled out by the "checks and balances" portion of our Republic.Personally, I'm looking for the guy driving the boat to at least understand the design of the boat and the reasons it was built the way it is, NOT only be concerned with where it is going. Ron Paul has at least READ the blueprints and SHOWN that he comprehends them in his policies and voting record. I can't say the same for the vast majority of the other candidates.

Actually, to use a military analogy, it's the CO's responsibility to know where the damn boat's going. It's the XO and SNCOIC who keep the damned boat running. Accepting a nut because others'll keep him in check is a stupid gamble.

 

[HH-60H]

However, you conveniently seem to forget that he has served in Congress for more than 30 years, and its likely that he's picked some things up since then. In fact, he may have learned a thing or two as a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. I don't know, just a thought.:sleep_125

I don't see how he has served in Congress for more than 30 years. According to this his time served barely adds up to 17 years.

 

[scoober78]

I don't see how he has served in Congress for more than 30 years. According to this his time served barely adds up to 17 years.

Right you are...misread a bio. His initial election was 30 years ago and his Congressional service has not been continuous.

Don't get me wrong everyone, I'm not on here stumping for Ron Paul, although I do think that he has some good things to say. My comments were just a response to what I felt was some unfair criticism.

While his views are outside the mainstream, that alone isn't a sufficient reason to reject them, and his foreign policy experience is certainly better than some, less than others. He is clearly not, however, a wet behind the ears nobody.

 

[statesman]

I am curious, those of you who claim to be internationalist and interventionalist: What would youre reaction be if China, started expeditionary missions here to instill some sort of Communist state? To make the world safe for Communism?

You might say they dont have the power, and thats not really the point. The point is to illustrate how intereferring in peoples country usually makes them upset. Sometimes it does not and they welcome the aid, but I would submit that usually its best to remain out of entangling alliances.

It was afterall entangling alliances which brought all of Europe into war within a week of the arch duke being killed.

 

[Brett327]

I am curious, those of you who claim to be internationalist and interventionalist: What would youre reaction be if China, started expeditionary missions here to instill some sort of Communist state? To make the world safe for Communism?

You might say they dont have the power, and thats not really the point. The point is to illustrate how intereferring in peoples country usually makes them upset. Sometimes it does not and they welcome the aid, but I would submit that usually its best to remain out of entangling alliances.

It was afterall entangling alliances which brought all of Europe into war within a week of the arch duke being killed.

But they're also the same kind of alliances that kept Europe from being overrun by Hitler and the Soviets (or Australia from the Japanese). Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Alliances are an important tool in international relations, but like anything else, they don't always work exactly as we expect or need them to.

Brett

 

[blur]

We didn't have an alliance with France/Britain before WWII broke out. It was 2-3 years before we entered that war for the simple reason we weren't in an alliance that predetermined if we entered or not. We had the luxury of observing and seeing if it was something we wanted to get involved in; if it was in our best interest. As far as the Pacific theater goes, we were dragged into that...no alliance caused us to enter that one either. Actually, I believe you could make an argument that alliances only escalate wars (WWI), for better or worse.

I think what Ron Paul is against are alliances that get us stuck in wars we might not want to be in or should be in. I think there is a difference.

With all that said, I would say I'm highly suspicious of alliances, but not necessarily against them.

 

[Brett327]

I believe you could make an argument that alliances only escalate wars (WWI), for better or worse.

You could make an equally valid argument that alliances prevent wars - NATO vs. Warsaw Pact. My point is that alliances are neither inherently good nor bad.

Brett

 

[blur]

You could make an equally valid argument that alliances prevent wars - NATO vs. Warsaw Pact. My point is that alliances are neither inherently good nor bad.

Brett

Or was it the ~20,000 nukes pointed at each other?

 

[Brett327]

Or was it the ~20,000 nukes pointed at each other?

Completely incidental. If we had said in 1960 that NATO (or the US) no longer had any interest in a mutual defense agreement with Germany (or Greece or Turkey), it would have been on like Donkey Kong. Believe it!

Brett

 

[winger]

As I read the earlier parts of this post, I thought I'd throw in another good tool to make an informed decision:

http://www.vote-smart.org/

Project Vote Smart is simply easy-to-use access to the voting records of candidates for public office... to include the Presidential candidates. It provides nothing but cold, hard facts and the history of each candidate's activities while in office.

Actions speak louder than words.

 

[blur]

Completely incidental. If we had said in 1960 that NATO (or the US) no longer had any interest in a mutual defense agreement with Germany (or Greece or Turkey), it would have been on like Donkey Kong. Believe it!

Brett

I BELIEVE!!

haha

You make valid points though...I'll file them away somewhere...

 

[blur]

Timely..pretty good...http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZWIzYWI4NTBjYTc3NGE1OGEwYWMyZjE1NDZjOWVmMDQ=

 

[raptor10]

Timely..pretty good...http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZWIzYWI4NTBjYTc3NGE1OGEwYWMyZjE1NDZjOWVmMDQ=

What I am seeking is an anti-JFK — a candidate who will transform our nation’s capital from a city of hope for middle-class intellectuals, into a city of despair for them.

That's a pretty accurate prediction of what will become our country if Ron Paul is elected...

And if I remember correctly those "middle class intellectuals" advised JFK pretty well during the Cuban Missile Crisis...

 

[mmx1]

Anyone see Ron Paul on Meet the Press Sunday?