Jump to content

Michigan Republican Presidential Primary


Recommended Posts

How do people who think Paul's foreign policy is bad propose to keep paying for all the bases and military "adventures" that people like Obama and Bush love so much? This is not a rhetorical question. How do we afford it?

 

We have to keep bases in Japan. You never know when they will bomb Pearl Harbor again. :rolleyes:

 

I am for pulling out of these countries. But if that does not happen at the very least the countries we are protecting should pay for that protection. Look at some of the countries we have bases. Germany and Japan are two that have a very strong economy. They can do that by using the money they save on military to subsidize their manufacturing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

some of the places already do pay us... Australia for instance. To me, that is all besides the point of foreign policy. China takes direct offense at our troops in Japan, Korea, Diego Garcia, and Australia. Militarily, those are Strategic Forces. And just why the hell do we even need two full divisions in Germany? Um... Last time I checked the Russians weren't about to invade the Eastern Bloc. We can deploy ready brigades in 48 hours, of which there is always one on standby at Bragg or Campbell. We have 7 Fleets worldwide. We have B2s, B52s, B1bs, Tomahawks, MOABs...besides that, Iran is Iraq all over again. I know history repeats itself but the possibility of the same colossal mistake within a decade at the costs of another trillion dollars and untold amounts of human suffering, American (and allies) and Iranian civilians alike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you are 100% correct, I confused my middle-eastern whacked-out countries

 

That's funny! I was just mocking people like you to my girlfriend. :lolu: Like people who dern't know the differ'nce between Eye-Rack and Eye-Ran, you know?

 

Ron Paul: "There really is no evidence Iran is making nuclear weapons."

whacked hears: "I will let Iran get nuclear weapons so they can attack Israel."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do people who think Paul's foreign policy is bad propose to keep paying for all the bases and military "adventures" that people like Obama and Bush love so much? This is not a rhetorical question. How do we afford it?

 

We can't but right now where do all those people work if not there ? People upset with Obama forget he is just a guy with ideas at the top if Congress and the Senate don't except those ideas they mean nothing . Same with the Justice Dept. etc . I don't think he meant to let down the medical cannabis community as much as he has been afraid taking it to task now will further divide people he is trying to get working together . I don't like it but I am wiling to give him more time . He has done allot and maintained his composure . His administration gets points for taking out Bin Laden and burying him at sea . He accomplished phasing in Gay Rights in the military and getting us out of Iraq on time . He tried to get all citizens covered by health care stopping families from having to file bankruptcy because of it and though he fell short it was progress . He is moderate on all issues with the Republicans . I have to think he inherited all this banking mess and debt . Our country hasn't fragmented like the Soviet Union . I really believe he deserves a second term without having to cater to groups worried about reelection - to try to effect the change the country was behind in 2008 .

 

If you believed in a honest attempt at change 4 years ago you should not flip flop on him now . He was right about our democracy being a tangled group of voices that has to be sorted out overtime to fill in the framework . The issues he is problem solving and working on have been around decades even centuries . If his rhetoric represents his personage he deserves his full 8 years . I pretty much lean Republican but given the harshness of their platform and recent attutudes towards the sick and poor I am willing to bridge the gap of partisanship again in 2012 .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's funny! I was just mocking people like you to my girlfriend. :lolu: Like people who dern't know the differ'nce between Eye-Rack and Eye-Ran, you know?

 

Ron Paul: "There really is no evidence Iran is making nuclear weapons."

whacked hears: "I will let Iran get nuclear weapons so they can attack Israel."

 

well, I am sorry. "people like me" do make mistakes. I wish I was perfect but I am not

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you also might be making a mistake about whether aggressive worldwide military policies increase or decrease the security of average Americans.

 

That is the more important point. Of course the question of funding remains as well. When the government borrows money it has to be paid back - with interest. Notice it's not getting paid though. It just keeps going up. If we keep adding more it will soon be clear to all that the government is bankrupt. Then what will become of our country? Sold piecemeal to the highest bidder I suppose. "Defended" right out of existence. :(

 

Wouldn't it be better to scale back the military madness and rock out some mega hemp fields and medical grows everywhere with Ron Paul? :thumbsu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you also might be making a mistake about whether aggressive worldwide military policies increase or decrease the security of average Americans.

 

It just blows me away that people still believe that our aggressive posture has made us more safe. Security is about lowering your risk. Being aggressive does not lower ones risk. It does make you a target though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It just blows me away that people still believe that our aggressive posture has made us more safe. Security is about lowering your risk. Being aggressive does not lower ones risk. It does make you a target though.

 

I call bullcrap. Being the biggest, baddest kid on the block means you are more likely to be attacked? Really?

 

Now if the big kid is a bully and pushes all the other kids around you have a pretty good point.

 

So can we all agree that we still need to be the biggest, toughest kid around but we just don't need to be involved in the internal affairs of so many countries?

 

On the fellow posting about our intervention in Iran- yes I know: Do YOU know the difference between Shiites and Sunni?

 

Al Quaeda is a Suuni organization. We intervened in Iran (not bombed but definitely intervened) which is SHIITE country. Al Quaeda did not attack us because of the Iranian intervention. You could argue Iran has ample reason to hate us (as Dr. Paul does so elegantly) but let's not confuse that with 911.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I call bullcrap. Being the biggest, baddest kid on the block means you are more likely to be attacked? Really?

 

Now if the big kid is a bully and pushes all the other kids around you have a pretty good point.

 

So can we all agree that we still need to be the biggest, toughest kid around but we just don't need to be involved in the internal affairs of so many countries?

 

On the fellow posting about our intervention in Iran- yes I know: Do YOU know the difference between Shiites and Sunni?

 

Al Quaeda is a Suuni organization. We intervened in Iran (not bombed but definitely intervened) which is SHIITE country. Al Quaeda did not attack us because of the Iranian intervention. You could argue Iran has ample reason to hate us (as Dr. Paul does so elegantly) but let's not confuse that with 911.

al-Qaeda explicitly cited three motives for its activities against Western countries: the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, U.S. support of Israel, and sanctions against Iraq. After the 9-11 attacks, bin Laden and al-Zawahiri released additional video tapes and audio tapes, which repeated those reasons for the attacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

al-Qaeda explicitly cited three motives for its activities against Western countries: the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, U.S. support of Israel, and sanctions against Iraq. After the 9-11 attacks, bin Laden and al-Zawahiri released additional video tapes and audio tapes, which repeated those reasons for the attacks.

EXACTLY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“stresses grievances against the United States widely shared in the Muslim world. He inveighed against the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, the home of Islam’s holiest sites. He spoke of the suffering of the Iraqi people as a result of sanctions imposed after the Gulf War, and he protested U.S. support of Israel.” 9/11 Commission Report on Bin Laden's motivation for attacking the US.

 

Reagan said it was US policy that caused the Marine barracks to become a target as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...