• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

So, i just decided to give my support to Ron Paul...

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,660
3,138
126
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: teclis1023
Here's my issue with the Ron Paul stance ... it treats the government, its politicians and laws as the enemy.

Yes, it's true we began as a smaller nation founded on rebellion...but why in the world would we possibly imagine that the rules that once governed a small nation of people could hold up and properly scale as the country grew to be a massive powerhouse? Should we also return to the puritanical, racist, strictly religious roots of this nation?
You can stop right there. What makes you think that a nation of 300M is possible to rule with one set of laws? Did it ever occur to you that the reason there's so much partisanship is because Texans might prefer a different way of life than New Yorkers? The further government gets from the people it governs, the more it treats them like cattle: nameless masses that exist solely so they have someone to rule over. The city and county can be a pain in the ass to deal with. The state even moreso. The feds are entirely unforgiving. Why do people feel the need to keep shifting power up that ladder?

I just don't understand big government cheerleaders. Compuwiz1, you're just goddam schizophrenic in your views, and kookier than Paul could ever be. You bash Bush over the war constantly, but it's the vast powers that have been concentrated federally that allowed him to invade Iraq. If you keep giving more and more power to the feds, do you honestly think that they'll somehow become MORE responsible and accountable instead of less?

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

So the feds have fucked up the war on poverty, let's give them more money. The war on drugs? Let's give them even more power? They invade Iraq? I know, let's give them more power yet? Oh yeah, and here's our entire health care system to run. Surely giving them more power and money could only be a good thing, right? They do such a great job with everything else!

Damn, if Paul is a loon, what does that say about you freaks?
sounds to me like Compuwiz1 hit a button or 2.... :)
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,660
3,138
126
Originally posted by: Mavtek3100
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante
I like him too, but he can't win. That's the sad part.
One person at a time can change that.

Until I know people on WS that support him, he's a loon and won't get anywhere. Just a bunch of anti-establishment people right now.

There's a bunch in every crowd, just like white supremicists that seem to like RP also.
Finance
Bruce Bradshaw, Founder/CEO, Walworth Financial Group
Marko Budgyk, Chief Investment Officer, Diamond Wealth Advisors
Kenneth J. Gerbino, President, Kenneth J. Gerbino & Company, Investment Management
Jason Hommel, Investor; Author, Silver Stock Report
Lawrence Lepard, Managing Partner, Equity Management Associates, LLC
Michael J. McKay, President, Iowa Capital Management, Inc.
Tom Nguyen, Founder/CEO, Mecca Financial Network
Tom O?Neill, Managing Director, Exodus Capital Advisors
Jim Rogers, Investor, Author, Economic Commentator
Peter Schiff, President, Euro Pacific Capital, Inc.
Chris Weber, Editor, Weber Global Opportunities Report

Source

When having crow for dinner I always recommend humble pie for desert. Unless of course we're to believe that all these Wall Street people like Jim Rogers and Peter Schiff who have been major movers on the market for quite a while are insignificant compared to the great opinions of some guy named "LegendKiller" on Anandtech political forums.

Lets see your job title and your education, if you trump anyone of these people who have endorsed Ron Paul then we can discuss this further.
that has nothing to do with anything...for everyone of these people listed on that liost you have thousands of underage zealots who are quitr frankly the main reason people get turned of to this Ron dude...
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
^ No one takes your posts seriously when you post in Ron Paul threads. FYI.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Like I said before, he needs to start using the words "some" and "a few".... instead of "all" or "none"... maybe his own followers need to be the ones to bring him back down to Earth... but I honestly dont see that happening anytime soon...

So RP remains a loon.
Who said "all or none"? The only one I have seen is you say that.
Ron Paul uses those words every time he explains his loony ideas for closing all US bases on foreign soil, bringing all of our troops home from 130 countries, or cutting off all aid packages to foriegn countries, or dismantling all Federal intelligence agencies, etc etc...

Maybe you're wearing earmuffs... ?

No he isn't a loon. Anyone in their right mind knows none of these things can't be changed instantaneously. *If* you think for one moment any other candidate will reduce the size of government, then you sir are the loon.
So, once again, we're to expect reality and "the system" to keep him in check? I'm sorry, but after what I've seen from the current President, and others, I'm not very confident in "the system's" ability to keep the Executive powers in check.

For all we know, Ron Paul would announce the end of all foreign aid, the closing of every base, and our complete withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, in his fvcking acceptance speech!!

Yes, I'm all but convinced that Ron Paul is that loony!
 

Capitalizt

Banned
Nov 28, 2004
1,513
0
0
Originally posted by: palehorse74
For all we know, Ron Paul would announce the end of all foreign aid, the closing of every base, and our complete withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, in his fvcking acceptance speech!!
Sounds GREAT to me! No more troop deaths...using our defense budget for DEFENSE...reducing the size of government and reducing the national debt.

What strange ideas!
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Originally posted by: Mavtek3100
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante
I like him too, but he can't win. That's the sad part.
One person at a time can change that.

Until I know people on WS that support him, he's a loon and won't get anywhere. Just a bunch of anti-establishment people right now.

There's a bunch in every crowd, just like white supremicists that seem to like RP also.
Finance
Bruce Bradshaw, Founder/CEO, Walworth Financial Group
Marko Budgyk, Chief Investment Officer, Diamond Wealth Advisors
Kenneth J. Gerbino, President, Kenneth J. Gerbino & Company, Investment Management
Jason Hommel, Investor; Author, Silver Stock Report
Lawrence Lepard, Managing Partner, Equity Management Associates, LLC
Michael J. McKay, President, Iowa Capital Management, Inc.
Tom Nguyen, Founder/CEO, Mecca Financial Network
Tom O?Neill, Managing Director, Exodus Capital Advisors
Jim Rogers, Investor, Author, Economic Commentator
Peter Schiff, President, Euro Pacific Capital, Inc.
Chris Weber, Editor, Weber Global Opportunities Report

Source

When having crow for dinner I always recommend humble pie for desert. Unless of course we're to believe that all these Wall Street people like Jim Rogers and Peter Schiff who have been major movers on the market for quite a while are insignificant compared to the great opinions of some guy named "LegendKiller" on Anandtech political forums.

Lets see your job title and your education, if you trump anyone of these people who have endorsed Ron Paul then we can discuss this further.
ROFL, yeah, big movers and shakers. LOL, I haven't seen one asset manager there that I know of. No FIG, CPIM, Blackrock, GSO? Where are the majors?

You have Mr. Doom and another guy who is head prognosticator of the doomers. All of them support a narrow view of the world, all of it saying that the US is doomed, all have been proven wrong. Ironically, all of them are rich bankers, the same ones you think control everything.

As for me, director of asset backed finance for one of the 10th largest banks in the world, MBA (finance concentration, suma cum laude, Beta Gamma Sigma, University President graduate researcher, consultant intern for one of the best consulting firms), and intern at the largest HDD manufacturer in the world) and CFA charterholder. Before my current job I worked at two large finance companies doing asset backed securitization issuance for more than 50bn in assets.

What are your qualifications? Real world finance experience? Capital markets experience?
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Capitalizt
Originally posted by: palehorse74
For all we know, Ron Paul would announce the end of all foreign aid, the closing of every base, and our complete withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, in his fvcking acceptance speech!!
Sounds GREAT to me! No more troop deaths...using our defense budget for DEFENSE...reducing the size of government and reducing the national debt.

What strange ideas!
All of which would be outweighed by the global chaos that would certainly follow.

Or, is it as I've theorized once before, and the truth is that most of his supporters simply don't care what happens beyond our borders?! Are you also too shortsighted to see the impact such chaos and global anarchy would have on our global businesses!?

The negative repercussions, worldwide, are entirely unacceptable -- which is what makes RP's extremely unrealistic plans, and those who buy into them, so damn "loony"!!
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
Originally posted by: Mavtek3100
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante
I like him too, but he can't win. That's the sad part.
One person at a time can change that.

Until I know people on WS that support him, he's a loon and won't get anywhere. Just a bunch of anti-establishment people right now.

There's a bunch in every crowd, just like white supremicists that seem to like RP also.
Finance
Bruce Bradshaw, Founder/CEO, Walworth Financial Group
Marko Budgyk, Chief Investment Officer, Diamond Wealth Advisors
Kenneth J. Gerbino, President, Kenneth J. Gerbino & Company, Investment Management
Jason Hommel, Investor; Author, Silver Stock Report
Lawrence Lepard, Managing Partner, Equity Management Associates, LLC
Michael J. McKay, President, Iowa Capital Management, Inc.
Tom Nguyen, Founder/CEO, Mecca Financial Network
Tom O?Neill, Managing Director, Exodus Capital Advisors
Jim Rogers, Investor, Author, Economic Commentator
Peter Schiff, President, Euro Pacific Capital, Inc.
Chris Weber, Editor, Weber Global Opportunities Report

Source

When having crow for dinner I always recommend humble pie for desert. Unless of course we're to believe that all these Wall Street people like Jim Rogers and Peter Schiff who have been major movers on the market for quite a while are insignificant compared to the great opinions of some guy named "LegendKiller" on Anandtech political forums.

Lets see your job title and your education, if you trump anyone of these people who have endorsed Ron Paul then we can discuss this further.
Uhh... any chance you can dig up the list of guys that don't support his ideas, or would that be longer than the max post length allowed on Anandtech?
 

teclis1023

Golden Member
Jan 19, 2007
1,452
0
71
Originally posted by: BoberFett
You can stop right there. What makes you think that a nation of 300M is possible to rule with one set of laws? Did it ever occur to you that the reason there's so much partisanship is because Texans might prefer a different way of life than New Yorkers? The further government gets from the people it governs, the more it treats them like cattle: nameless masses that exist solely so they have someone to rule over. The city and county can be a pain in the ass to deal with. The state even moreso. The feds are entirely unforgiving. Why do people feel the need to keep shifting power up that ladder?

I just don't understand big government cheerleaders. Compuwiz1, you're just goddam schizophrenic in your views, and kookier than Paul could ever be. You bash Bush over the war constantly, but it's the vast powers that have been concentrated federally that allowed him to invade Iraq. If you keep giving more and more power to the feds, do you honestly think that they'll somehow become MORE responsible and accountable instead of less?

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

So the feds have fucked up the war on poverty, let's give them more money. The war on drugs? Let's give them even more power? They invade Iraq? I know, let's give them more power yet? Oh yeah, and here's our entire health care system to run. Surely giving them more power and money could only be a good thing, right? They do such a great job with everything else!

Damn, if Paul is a loon, what does that say about you freaks?
By stopping me right there, you conveniently exonerated yourself from having to actually respond to my post. How interesting.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
1
61
Originally posted by: Capitalizt
Originally posted by: palehorse74
For all we know, Ron Paul would announce the end of all foreign aid, the closing of every base, and our complete withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, in his fvcking acceptance speech!!
Sounds GREAT to me! No more troop deaths...using our defense budget for DEFENSE...reducing the size of government and reducing the national debt.

What strange ideas!
I think it sounds beautiful. :thumbsup:
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,563
9
81
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

that has nothing to do with anything...for everyone of these people listed on that liost you have thousands of underage zealots who are quitr frankly the main reason people get turned of to this Ron dude...
Here he goes with the canned "giving their allowance" response again.

ANTIPAULPOT NODE JEDIYODA ACTIVATED
MESSAGE #14638
ANTIPAULPOT NODE JEDIYODA WAITING
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,563
9
81
Originally posted by: palehorse74
For all we know, Ron Paul would announce the end of all foreign aid, the closing of every base, and our complete withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, in his fvcking acceptance speech!!
Ummmm, that's the whole point. That's why a million or more people support him.

Wow, you're slow. I think now you may be telling the truth. You are in military intelligence. Nobody else could be so dim.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,563
9
81
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: Capitalizt
Originally posted by: palehorse74
For all we know, Ron Paul would announce the end of all foreign aid, the closing of every base, and our complete withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, in his fvcking acceptance speech!!
Sounds GREAT to me! No more troop deaths...using our defense budget for DEFENSE...reducing the size of government and reducing the national debt.

What strange ideas!
All of which would be outweighed by the global chaos that would certainly follow.

Or, is it as I've theorized once before, and the truth is that most of his supporters simply don't care what happens beyond our borders?! Are you also too shortsighted to see the impact such chaos and global anarchy would have on our global businesses!?

The negative repercussions, worldwide, are entirely unacceptable -- which is what makes RP's extremely unrealistic plans, and those who buy into them, so damn "loony"!!
Why is the US and US alone responsible for the world? We can't even take care of ourselves.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,563
9
81
Originally posted by: teclis1023

By stopping me right there, you conveniently exonerated yourself from having to actually respond to my post. How interesting.
There was no need to read further, you may it completely clear that you believe the answer to our problems is more government, more laws, more regulation. Why bother countering you point for point? We simply disagree on a fundamental level.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: palehorse74
For all we know, Ron Paul would announce the end of all foreign aid, the closing of every base, and our complete withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, in his fvcking acceptance speech!!
Ummmm, that's the whole point. That's why a million or more people support him.

Wow, you're slow. I think now you may be telling the truth. You are in military intelligence. Nobody else could be so dim.
I thought "the whole point" was to head in a particular "direction" through the discussion of his ideas, and to not necessarily implement RP's plans literally... so which is it!?

make up your damn minds already!

RP's grand "all and nothing" plans, implemented literally and completely, are pure lunacy -- and the result of doing any single one of them would be total chaos and global turmoil.

no thank you.

On another note, given your personal attacks, I'm curious... what do you do for a living?
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
1
61
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Why is the US and US alone responsible for the world? We can't even take care of ourselves.
Palehorse seems to believe that we can and should continue to be a world's policeman.

There are three big reasons why we can't and shouldn't try to play that roll.

1. We should not put our men and women in uniform in harm's way when they are not doing service for the American people, but serving other's needs. Sending them into Afghanistan to hunt down AQ is a service to the American people, as they attacked us. Sending them into Iraq was a slap in the face.

2. We cannot play a world's policeman roll overseas, because we act only to suit our own selfish reasons. We may act to promote peace and freedom in some places, but we also support the opposite in other areas. Supporting a dictator or totalitarian when it suits our needs. Thus we are seen by many not as a world's policeman, but a hypocritical tyrant.

3. We can't afford it. And there's no way around it. We are in a position which calls for cutting military spending. Domestic expenditures, especially SS and medicare, will be increasing greatly in the coming years.
 

teclis1023

Golden Member
Jan 19, 2007
1,452
0
71
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: teclis1023

By stopping me right there, you conveniently exonerated yourself from having to actually respond to my post. How interesting.
There was no need to read further, you may it completely clear that you believe the answer to our problems is more government, more laws, more regulation. Why bother countering you point for point? We simply disagree on a fundamental level.
Did I? Nope, nope I didn't. Try reading my post again, or, apparently, for the first time.

Actually, don't bother - seems that you're pretty well content on making decisions and judgments without reading the full story.
 

SleepWalkerX

Platinum Member
Jun 29, 2004
2,649
0
0
Originally posted by: teclis1023
Here's my issue with the Ron Paul stance ... it treats the government, its politicians and laws as the enemy.
Government is the enemy of the individualist and freedom. Why? Government is essentially a monopoly on force. When you have a monopoly on force then you have power over other individuals. It is an institution where a select number of individuals come up with rules that everyone has to follow. Luckily, the people have a check on this power by the power of voting representatives. Unfortunately, its the minorities that suffer because the majority tends to get representatives that represent them instead of everyone. Thank god for the Bill of Rights though.

What happens when the majority (or just the people in power) view the minority as a threat? This is what happened in Nazi Germany. When you disarm the minority and maintain that monopoly on force then its easy to push others around for whatever reason.

Want to know the scary thing? We, the US, had a similar situation during WW2 that not a lot of people pay attention to.

http://classes.maxwell.syr.edu...48/JapaneseIntern.html

I could then argue not only how government tends to trample over rights, but steals money, involves the people in unnecessary wars, etc.

The point is government is enemy to the individual and individual freedom. "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely." Unfortunately, its a necessary evil in many, many, many ways (unless Dissipate wants to argue the fundamentals of anarcho-capitalism. where is he? I loved his posts. :)).

Originally posted by: teclis1023
Yes, it's true we began as a smaller nation founded on rebellion...but why in the world would we possibly imagine that the rules that once governed a small nation of people could hold up and properly scale as the country grew to be a massive powerhouse?
Because we keep the same ideals before as we do today. Live life, be happy, and do your business while expecting the same from and to others. One reason for the existence of the government is the protection it provides for its participates.

Originally posted by: teclis1023
Should we also return to the puritanical, racist, strictly religious roots of this nation?
I don't think so. We didn't fully appreciate and respect every other individuals right to life, liberty, and happiness back then (at least imho). If we did, we wouldn't have had slaves. Or at least we might've, but it would've been voluntary slavery and nothing would be forced. The zeitgeist is different in today's world then it was before. Btw, slavery was sanctioned under the government so it really wasn't a problem with government, but rather the mentality of the people at the time.

Originally posted by: teclis1023
You treat laws as if they have served only to disintegrate this nation...what about those which have afforded equal treatment and protection to blacks and Jews? You mention the EPA - do you truly believe that we should abandon our attempts to regulate our impact on the environment? Perhaps unchecked rampant pollution better represents your idea of true freedom, but I believe that a responsible nation must sometimes check itself in order to assess its contribution to the global community.
What about those laws that kept minorities from obtaining equal rights? What about the majority that was ok with that? Its a double-edged sword. What we need to do is start with mentalities and promote the concept of TRUE equal rights. And that doesn't mean government checks to certain people just because of the color of their skin.

As far as wild life is concerned. Ron Paul would abolish the EPA because the environment is related to property and not a federal issue, but a state issue and should be treated as such.

What sounds better to you? Getting the good results or just fining people? The EPA seems to take a similar approach that the police around my college campus do about underage drinking. Please read the link below. (I read up on a lot of Anarcho-Capitalism so I'm playing devil's advocate here in a lot of responses here. Forgive me. These aren't 100% Ron Paul's views. ;))

http://www.hoover.org/publicat...icyreview/3572787.html

Originally posted by: teclis1023
Nobody will argue that the US government is perfect. Nobody will argue that we don't need reform in many areas, or perhaps need to rebuild entire sectors of the government. But the idea that our government is inherently bad and that its laws and governing statutes are inherently bad posits, in fact, that the people of this nation are bad. You can treat the government like the Borg, or you can realize that the government is made up of people - both good and bad - just trying to get through the day.
Agreed. The government is not perfect. It does, however, serve as a threat to individual liberty and freedom. That's just how government works. The people are subject by force to do certain things for the idea of the public good.

Originally posted by: teclis1023
Find me a perfect nation. Please. Build an argument that the original Union was perfect, and I'll find you a way to rip apart your argument piece-by-piece. It's because, quite simply put, there is NO perfect government.
Agreed. There's just way too much philosophy involved in government for this idea of 'perfection' to be valid.

Originally posted by: teclis1023
Treating laws as if they are a bad thing works under the idea that the majority of laws passed degrade our nation, bit-by-bit. I'm willing to make a bet that of the thousands of laws passed per year, we'd probably all agree on a collective level that the majority of them are warranted. Sure, there will be ones that we don't agree with...but is that truly reason to abandon the infrastructure that runs this country? No, I don't think so.
Ron Paul is not arguing for the abolishment of the government. But he is arguing for more rights and less government intervention when its not needed. You're treating him like he is wanting the abolishment of the government when that's clearly not the case at all. The main thing is reducing the size of our unmanageably large, beaurocratical federal government.

Originally posted by: teclis1023
RP has some really appealing short-term solutions, but they're not realistic - not for the way that this nation actually operates. I agree with some of what he says, but the unspoken consequences of his intended policies are massively detrimental.
Like what? And how does this country "actually operate?"
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Like I said before, he needs to start using the words "some" and "a few".... instead of "all" or "none"... maybe his own followers need to be the ones to bring him back down to Earth... but I honestly dont see that happening anytime soon...

So RP remains a loon.
Who said "all or none"? The only one I have seen is you say that.
Ron Paul uses those words every time he explains his loony ideas for closing all US bases on foreign soil, bringing all of our troops home from 130 countries, or cutting off all aid packages to foriegn countries, or dismantling all Federal intelligence agencies, etc etc...

Maybe you're wearing earmuffs... ?

No he isn't a loon. Anyone in their right mind knows none of these things can't be changed instantaneously. *If* you think for one moment any other candidate will reduce the size of government, then you sir are the loon.
So, once again, we're to expect reality and "the system" to keep him in check? I'm sorry, but after what I've seen from the current President, and others, I'm not very confident in "the system's" ability to keep the Executive powers in check.


For all we know, Ron Paul would announce the end of all foreign aid, the closing of every base, and our complete withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, in his fvcking acceptance speech!!

Yes, I'm all but convinced that Ron Paul is that loony!
He says he wants to bring all our troops home from Iraq. The rest, like closing bases and such would take some legislation. So wise up and stop spewing BS.

Sorry but your "conspiracy theory" about Paul being anything like bush holds no water. 20 yrs in congressional legislation to prove it. Rock solid on his views that haven't changed. Is there ANY OTHER candidate with integrity like Ron Paul? No. Not a one.

Yet I'm sure you will go and vote for some dipshit that will increase size of government at the expense of the taxpayer. How you want more government is beyond me. That to me is loony.
 

teclis1023

Golden Member
Jan 19, 2007
1,452
0
71
SleepWalker,

Thanks for taking the time to respond to my post. I don't agree with your take on a lot of things, but at least you were willing to take the time. Clearly we DO have different ideas of responsibility and freedom.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Why is the US and US alone responsible for the world? We can't even take care of ourselves.
Palehorse seems to believe that we can and should continue to be a world's policeman.
I've never said, or otherwise condoned, any such thing. I do, however, believe that we must continue to maintain a strategic deployment of US troops and equipment throughout the world for many reasons -- mostly concerning the protection of our own global interests and the projection of power as a stabalizing factor throughout the world.

It may be beneficicial to examine the deployment matrix in order to determine which of the ~700 bases may be unnecessary, or redundant. Only then would I consider the closing or moving of those strategic assets.

1. We should not put our men and women in uniform in harm's way when they are not doing service for the American people, but serving other's needs. Sending them into Afghanistan to hunt down AQ is a service to the American people, as they attacked us. Sending them into Iraq was a slap in the face.
I agree. That said, my major point of contention is not the potential withdrawal of troops from Iraq. My problem is with RP's unrealistic and detrimental plan to withdraw all our troops from everywhere on the globe!

One is reasonable, while the other borders on strategic catastrophe. (ie, it's "loony"!)

2. We cannot play a world's policeman role overseas, because we act only to suit our own selfish reasons. We may act to promote peace and freedom in some places, but we also support the opposite in other areas. Supporting a dictator or totalitarian when it suits our needs. Thus we are seen by many not as a world's policeman, but a hypocritical tyrant.
Once again, each set of deployed US forces must be examined individually and measured for their effective strategic purpose(s). If, after extensive studies, many of the forces could/should be removed from certain specific areas, then it would be reasonable to promote their removal -- all on a case-by-case basis, done after a very thorough analysis. As I've mentioned before, this would be similar to a global BRAC analysis.

Ron Paul, on the other hand, only wants to talk about withdrawing all troops from the entire globe.

One plan is reasonable, the other is not...

3. We can't afford it. And there's no way around it. We are in a position which calls for cutting military spending. Domestic expenditures, especially SS and medicare, will be increasing greatly in the coming years.
If we cut enough domestic programs, and trim enough domestic spending, I believe we'd even be able to increase military spending, and yet still come out ahead.

Remember, it's the "all" and "nothing" plans that make RP appear crazy. If he toned each of them down, and made them sound more realistic, he'd garner much more respect.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,563
9
81
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: palehorse74
For all we know, Ron Paul would announce the end of all foreign aid, the closing of every base, and our complete withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, in his fvcking acceptance speech!!
Ummmm, that's the whole point. That's why a million or more people support him.

Wow, you're slow. I think now you may be telling the truth. You are in military intelligence. Nobody else could be so dim.
I thought "the whole point" was to head in a particular "direction" through the discussion of his ideas, and to not necessarily implement RP's plans literally... so which is it!?

make up your damn minds already!

RP's grand "all and nothing" plans, implemented literally and completely, are pure lunacy -- and the result of doing any single one of them would be total chaos and global turmoil.

no thank you.

On another note, given your personal attacks, I'm curious... what do you do for a living?
I live with mommy and daddy and ride a skateboard. Just ask JediYoda.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: palehorse74
For all we know, Ron Paul would announce the end of all foreign aid, the closing of every base, and our complete withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, in his fvcking acceptance speech!!
Ummmm, that's the whole point. That's why a million or more people support him.

Wow, you're slow. I think now you may be telling the truth. You are in military intelligence. Nobody else could be so dim.
I thought "the whole point" was to head in a particular "direction" through the discussion of his ideas, and to not necessarily implement RP's plans literally... so which is it!?

make up your damn minds already!

RP's grand "all and nothing" plans, implemented literally and completely, are pure lunacy -- and the result of doing any single one of them would be total chaos and global turmoil.

no thank you.

On another note, given your personal attacks, I'm curious... what do you do for a living?
I live with mommy and daddy and ride a skateboard. Just ask JediYoda.
well, is he correct when he says so, or do you actually hold a real job and title? I'm just curious...
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,563
9
81
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: palehorse74
For all we know, Ron Paul would announce the end of all foreign aid, the closing of every base, and our complete withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, in his fvcking acceptance speech!!
Ummmm, that's the whole point. That's why a million or more people support him.

Wow, you're slow. I think now you may be telling the truth. You are in military intelligence. Nobody else could be so dim.
I thought "the whole point" was to head in a particular "direction" through the discussion of his ideas, and to not necessarily implement RP's plans literally... so which is it!?

make up your damn minds already!

RP's grand "all and nothing" plans, implemented literally and completely, are pure lunacy -- and the result of doing any single one of them would be total chaos and global turmoil.

no thank you.

On another note, given your personal attacks, I'm curious... what do you do for a living?
I live with mommy and daddy and ride a skateboard. Just ask JediYoda.
well, is he correct when he says so, or do you actually hold a real job and title? I'm just curious...
No, of course he's not correct. I'm only eight and I get $2 a week for keeping my room clean, just like the rest of Ron Paul's supporters.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY