2012 GOP Nomination

#577
#577
theFallGuy said:
So if a sovereign nation chooses to rape and kill children do you sit idly by and not get involved? Or is there not a moral obligation to put an end to it? Wasn't there a moral obligation to get involved in WWII?

I'm just posing hypotheticals here.

I guess my question here is, at what point do Ron Paul supporters decide America should get involved in foreign affairs? never? no matter what the extent? I just don't agree with a foreign policy that is that rigid. Not all circumstances are the same.
Click to expand...

We cleared out the Germans so that our allies in the USSR had no problem taking over eastern Europe. Stalin killed a lot more than Hitler did. Are you sure we did the right thing?

Our interventions are seemingly almost always counterproductive. We trained the Taliban so they could fight the Soviets...now we fight the Taliban that we trained. We armed Hussein to fight Iran....then we fought Hussein on two separate occasions over the next two decades. Our foreign policy is a calamity, and only a fool would think we have been helping ourselves.

And your last statement is why we are in perpetual war.
 
Last edited:
#578
#578
nbakerld said:
We cleared out the Germans so that our allies in the USSR had no problem taking over eastern Europe. Stalin killed a lot more than Hitler did. Are you sure we did the right thing?

Our interventions are seemingly almost always counterproductive. We trained the Taliban so they could fight the Soviets...now we fight the Taliban that we trained. We armed Hussein to fight Iran....then we fought Hussein on two separate occasions over the next two decades. Our foreign policy is a calamity, and only a fool would think we have been helping ourselves.

And your last statement is why we are in perpetual war.
Click to expand...

I agree all of that happened and I agree foreign policy is never 100% perfect. However, I'm still wondering at what point to Ron Paul supporters agree on foreign policy intervention? You haven't answered that. Never? No matter what is going on in the world do we absolutely 100% unequivocally never get involved? Even if nuclear bombs are raining down on other countries?
 
Last edited:
#579
#579
theFallGuy said:
I agree all of that happened and I agree foreign policy is never 100% perfect. However, I'm still wondering at what point to Ron Paul supporters agree on foreign policy intervention? You haven't answered that. Never? No matter what is going on in the world do we absolutely 100% unequivocally never get involved? Even if nuclear bombs are raining down on Israel or numerous other countries?
Click to expand...

It's kind of a tough question to answer. There are probably hypotheticals in which libertarians/Ron Paul would support intervention, but none of the hypotheticals are likely to happen, including the example you mentioned. Diplomacy is the answer until war is inevitable. Does that work?

As for nukes raining down on Israel....the reality is no nation has ever invaded a country with a nuke. Not only that, WE'RE the only country to ever use a nuke. I don't think we should be scared of anybody. Everybody should be scared of us.
 
#580
#580
More of Paul's nutball ideas getting some serious backup:

“History will judge that Paul had it right when it came to the Fed and its often misbegotten monetary policies.” - Steve Forbes
Click to expand...
 
#581
#581
I agree with almost all of his fiscal policies, I'm just not 100% sold on his foreign policy.
 
#583
#583
theFallGuy said:
I agree with almost all of his fiscal policies, I'm just not 100% sold on his foreign policy.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I used your "nutjob" quote, but it was for guys like Droski and other VN posters who act like Paul's stance against the Fed is utter lunacy.
 
#588
#588
theFallGuy said:
So if a sovereign nation chooses to rape and kill children do you sit idly by and not get involved? Or is there not a moral obligation to put an end to it? Wasn't there a moral obligation to get involved in WWII?

I'm just posing hypotheticals here.

I guess my question here is, at what point do Ron Paul supporters decide America should get involved in foreign affairs? never? no matter what the extent? I just don't agree with a foreign policy that is that rigid. Not all circumstances are the same.
Click to expand...

The only justifiable use of our military is in our own defense.

You aren't posting hypotheticals. The example you gave is happening today in Africa. Do you want us to waste american lives and treasure to put an end to it? If you say no, then you have answered why you should support Paul's foreign policy.
 
#589
#589
theFallGuy said:
I guess my question here is, at what point do Ron Paul supporters decide America should get involved in foreign affairs? never? no matter what the extent? I just don't agree with a foreign policy that is that rigid. Not all circumstances are the same.
Click to expand...

Honestly, if we just followed the constitution and only intervened when Congress declared war, this question wouldn't matter. We would rarely go to war.

Forget that...if we paid for war through direct taxation, we would NEVER have wars.
 
#590
#590
theFallGuy said:
Seriously, you are using semantics to apologize for the ayatollah. It's blantantly obvious what they are getting at.

So, you disagree with going into a sovereign country to kill Obama but you don't see the problem with an Iranian nutjob blowing up a sovereign country and killing millions of people. Gee that make sense.
Click to expand...

You may want to clean that up before the FBI gets wind of this. :blink:
 
#591
#591
theFallGuy said:
I agree with almost all of his fiscal policies, I'm just not 100% sold on his foreign policy.
Click to expand...
Whatever disagreements with Paul's foreign policy can easily be cleared up in Congress... if they declare war as the Constitution tells us.

Seems to me you guys lack faith in your GOP congressmen to seal the deal on getting a declaration of war through the Congress.
 
#592
#592
384193_254412654619827_165997416794685_718439_1608544687_n.jpg
 
#593
#593
Rasputin_Vol said:
Whatever disagreements with Paul's foreign policy can easily be cleared up in Congress... if they declare war as the Constitution tells us.

Seems to me you guys lack faith in your GOP congressmen to seal the deal on getting a declaration of war through the Congress.
Click to expand...

Seems to me that Ron Paul's foreign policy is flat out utopian.
 
#594
#594
GAVol said:
Seems to me that Ron Paul's foreign policy is flat out utopian.
Click to expand...

Really? In contrast with Bush's policy that we can defeat tyranny and spread democracy to all corners of the world, you think Paul's policy is utopian?
 
#595
#595
GAVol said:
Seems to me that Ron Paul's foreign policy is flat out utopian.
Click to expand...

Again, the Congress can easily overcome any of the anti-interventionists fears by simply declaring war in the proper manner that was laid out by the Constitution. In other words, there are checks and balances that are already in place. If Ron Paul is elected, you can still attack Iran or North Korea.
 
#596
#596
nbakerld said:
Really? In contrast with Bush's policy that we can defeat tyranny and spread democracy to all corners of the world, you think Paul's policy is utopian?
Click to expand...

Not sure I'd make a good neocon either . . . just saying I don't buy into Paul's foreign policy vision.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top