Ron Paul PWNS! Wolf And Giuliani On CNN

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ron Paul said:
Over the past month I have introduced several bills designed to address terrorism and make Americans feel more secure.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, where else have I heard this recently..... Oh Yea!!

Larry Hincker said:
I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus.
Click to expand...
I knew that had a familiar ring to it.

Paul buried himself in the debate. In politics perception is reality and he was perceived as blaming the US for 9/11.
 
So Kaylee why don't the radical Muslim's who hate our freedoms attack other nations in Europe? Hong Kong? Russia? Japan? Sweden? Or other nations that have freedoms and lots of sex on TV? Eastern Europe is filled with prostitution and sexuality is a huge business there. Or the Phillipines where there is a large sex trade?

Other nations such as Canada and most of Europe have a free press and elected governments, sex on tv, and other things the Muslim extremists hate, and yet they are not the object of an intense hatred by fanatics. Please explain that.
 
Yes mons, appeasement is absolutely the answer.

I need to rethink boxing..."I'd better not punch my opponent; it might make him mad."
 
The concept is that you don't let your enemies dictate your foreign policy, no matter if you're Russian or Atreidean.

Right?

It's ugly name is appeasement. Cheer for it if you want, but at least have the intellectual honesty to embrace the word.

Speaking of words, let's hear it for triumphalism. I like that one. I embrace it, by the way. If you don't, more's the pity. Pick a side.
 
Um, I was merely trying to use a Socratic approach to further the discussion. But I'm now intellectually dishonest? This thread is not one of our best efforts at furthering each other's understanding. Let me try again.

Beslan was completely on the Chechnyan terrorists. That blood is on their hands, no doubt.

That being said...would they have resorted to such brutality if the Russians hadn't insisted on the occupation and/or pacification of Grozny? I don't know the answer, personally, but isn't that the right question?
 
I hope every gunowner who doesn't vote for Dr. Ron Paul remembers their choice.

Because I don't want to hear one word from them ever again complaining about dishonest politicians and gun control. They'll have abdicated their right to complain due to their being presented an honest man, who deeply believes in the RKBA, and they themselves picked a third rate "pretty boy".
 
I wasn't referring specifically to you, mons. There are many here that take the dangerously oversimplified view that "leaving them alone" would somehow be the best course of action. Such a view is horribly shortsighted and more than a little naive.
 
No harm, no foul, Thumper. :) I was just trying to make the point that Beslan doesn't make for a good example, because the Russian/Chechnyan conflict since the days of Stalin contains many, many examples of *real* reasons for the two groups to despise each other. Blood on all their hands, and all that.

While the reasons AQ and affiliated groups give for waging jihad on America aren't always coherent or rational, I still think there's a need to recognize "blowback" when it happens, and for us as a nation to learn to be more consistent in our implementation of foreign policy, e.g. sending troops to address legitimate, direct security threats to the US.
 
We have a choice.

We can kill everyone that disagrees with us

or

We can learn to get along.

- Getting along means not overthrowing democraticly elected leaders and installing dictators friendly to us (Iran, Chile, others) and then acting surprised when the people overthrow the dictators and then hate us.

- Also means not training and supplying terrorists and drug dealers and then acting surprised when they turn on us. (Bin Laden, Noreiga, others).

Means a lot of other thing too but just this would be a good start.
 
Yes mons, appeasement is absolutely the answer.

I need to rethink boxing..."I'd better not punch my opponent; it might make him mad."
Click to expand...

No what you don't do is climb into the ring without a damn good reason first. No they don't hate us for our freedoms, that is B.S spewed from the mouths of far right talkshow hosts. They hate us because we have been mucking about in their affairs since the 1950's, and dropping bombs on them daily since the early 90's. Are there religious nutjobs in the islamic world that hate us because of our freedoms? Yes there are, there are also religious nut jobs in the christian world that hate Americas freedoms as well. In both cases they are not the majority. The majority of folks in the middle east just want to live their lives in peace without us invading them, and their neighbors at the drop of a hat.

The U.S has foriegn policy that is just as FUBAR as anything the USSR practiced during the cold war. The difference today however is we are the sole superpower so we now get 100% of the heat from other nations.
 
Glad you brought up the Cold War. We "mucked about in" Soviet foreign affairs since the 1950's, also. Good thing, too.

I remember the naysayers back during the Cold War days. You're banging that same, worn out drum. "Leave them alone, it's our fault." Nope. It's not.
 
Ron Paul....."It's because we're there". Yea, right.

Let's leave and watch what happens. There will be peace everywhere, right? Ha! We'll still have an enemy in the *******. What other country rescued an Arab/heavily Muslim country? I know we did in Kuwait. You can't change what radical Muslims believe and want, our death, period. I guess it's just all our fault. Maybe if we were just more like them.
Click to expand...
Are you being sarcastic here? There was more peace in Iraq before we got there.

We greenlighted (actually, our State Dept/ambassadors - we used to be on very friendly terms with Sadam) the Kuwait invasion; told Sadam no problemo. It was only when Sadam had his eye on Saudi we were invited to "take care of the problem" and "fight agression".

We bombed a lot of Orthodox Christians, on Easter, during Clinton's moronic Serbian escapade, and help the poor distraught KLA (freshly removed from the terrorist lists a month before the bombs fell).

BinLaden must not have had a problem with us supplying the Paki's, Pushtuns, and Mujahedeen during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, because he didn't attack us then/there. He waited 'till later, and didn't let his "appreciation" of our help in Afghanistan slow him down.

Just how much cachet has all this "foreign policy" (whether you think it helped or hurt Muslims) garnered for the USA?

How much has it helped us to be kind?
How much has it helped us to be the big kid pushing others around?

About the same, I'd say... which means "not a whole hell of a lot, in fact, we always seem to get hurt." The cost, however, in both our treasure, lives, and our liberty, is far too high.

People get angry when Putin "only looks out for Russian interests", or the French "only care about themselves", as if we're all ordained to meddle in each others affairs (after consulting the UN, of course) and "fix all the worlds problems". If you haven't figured out fedgov can't even fix the simplest of our own problems, with budgets running near a $trillion, you have real, serious mental issues. America should care about America and Americans, and let everybody else sort out their own issues, using their own politics, their own soldiers, and their own money.

As little as we want to do the bidding of others, thats how little others want to do our bidding. So lets just stop pretending that any foreign aid/policy ever works in our favor, and take care of ourselves, and let the rest of the planet sort it out for themselves.
 
Last edited:
Although, to be honest, after reading The Pirate Coast, it's hard to deny we've been meddling in Arab politics for over 200 years. Interestingly, appeasement of the Barbary states was the norm for most European powers who didn't have the Royal Navy to back them up. Jefferson decided not to go that route, obviously, and now "to the shores of Tripoli" is part of the Marines' Hymn. :)
 
Glad you brought up the Cold War. We "mucked about in" Soviet foreign affairs since the 1950's, also. Good thing, too.

I remember the naysayers back during the Cold War days. You're banging that same, worn out drum. "Leave them alone, it's our fault." Nope. It's not.
Click to expand...

Actually it was partialy our fault. We blew any shot we had at friendly relations with the USSR in 1918 when the U.S sent in troops to support the Czar. If you bothered to learn the history of the October Revolution you would know that Lenin sought friendly relations with the U.S. We instead chose to back a monarch, we should have stayed out all together. Please tell me where we had any right supporting a dictator (the czar) when the Russian people wanted a change. It was not our fight. Korea was not our fight, Vietnam was not our fight, those people choose their government and America had no more right deciding their fate than they would in deciding ours.
 
Either way, he has no chance now.
Click to expand...
says who I wonder.....
where do you get your info???

That was strong.

The fact that Guliani is being touted by the media as the "acceptable conservative" ought to be enough to make anyone take a look at the alternatives.
Click to expand...

just like McCain!!! Amazing the voters that are still in the GOP cant see this....
wake up guys....

Rudy's one claim to fame is that he showed up after something horrible and gave a speech. Whoop de fricking do. I hate the man.
Click to expand...
Big Time!!!
even Bill Clinton was jealous of Bush on that one!!
what has Rudy done that he is so great.
(lot of GOP voters are very afraid of principle....amazing)
GOP= the party of image
 
Actually it was partialy our fault. We blew any shot we had at friendly relations with the USSR in 1918 when the U.S sent in troops to support the Czar. If you bothered to learn the history of the October Revolution you would know that Lenin sought friendly relations with the U.S. We instead chose to back a monarch, we should have stayed out all together. Please tell me where we had any right supporting a dictator (the czar) when the Russian people wanted a change. It was not our fight. Korea was not our fight, Vietnam was not our fight, those people choose their government and America had no more right deciding their fate than they would in deciding ours.
Click to expand...

"If you bothered to learn..." :) If you're going to be so blatantly sophomoric in your condescension, it's almost vitaly important to make sure you spell 'altogether' correctly.

So backing Lenin would have been your proactive choice to avoid the Soviet problem?

I understand that you might find avoiding conflict at all costs attractive there, Neville, but there are some things uglier than war.
 
Thumper said: So backing Lenin would have been your proactive choice to avoid the Soviet problem?

I understand that you might find avoiding conflict at all costs attractive there, Neville, but there are some things uglier than war.
Click to expand...


Witholding my remarks regarding your reading comprehension you will see I never said we should have backed Lenin.

Glockfan.45 said: We instead chose to back a monarch, we should have stayed out all together.
Click to expand...

Thumper said: I understand that you might find avoiding conflict at all costs attractive there, Neville, but there are some things uglier than war.
Click to expand...

Once again pay attention to what I type before you comment on it. Neville failed to respond to a direct threat. The Bolshevik revolution in 1917 was no threat to the U.S so your comparison is flawed.

Glockfan.45 said: No what you don't do is climb into the ring without a damn good reason first.
Click to expand...

Sometimes conflict cannot be avoided. In the case of the Russian Civil war it could have been. Please tell me how we had a dog in that fight.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
Giuliani's Theory That he made New York Safer with his take on Gun Law
Replies
1
Views
576
geekWithA.45
G
S
  • Locked
Ron Paul Tops McCain in Cash on Hand!
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
Art Eatman
A
D
  • Locked
Ron Paul fundraising in NH update
Replies
1
Views
2K
308nato
3
N
  • Locked
It's not just gun control... Rudy Giuliani is Vehemently Pro Illegal Immigration!
Replies
24
Views
1K
Art Eatman
A
T
  • Locked
MI GOP Leader Wants to BAN Ron Paul from Debates
2 3 4 5
Replies
105
Views
3K
eric_t12
E
Back
Top