Ron Paul: Cut Foreign Aid, Unshackle Israel, Leave Iran Alone

[Roger Bacon]

this is another ron paul supporter tactic, well they are like this b/c of something we did...

IT DOESNT FUCKING MATTER WHY THEY ARE LIKE THAT AT THIS POINT!!!!!!!!!

It absolutely matters, because we're still meddling in their affairs like we did when we created the Iranian problem.  Creating even bigger problems for ourselves down the road.

[Bindare_Dundat]

If we're an arrogant nation, they'll resent us; if we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll welcome us. And our nation stands alone right now in the world in terms of power, and that's why we've got to be humble, and yet project strength in a way that promotes freedom.

George Bush



Wow, we sure have gone the wrong way since then.

[Bindare_Dundat]

What happened? A total disaster once we strayed from this philosophy.

[tonymctones]

It absolutely matters, because we're still meddling in their affairs like we did when we created the Iranian problem.  Creating even bigger problems for ourselves down the road.

agreed, however the answer is not simply removing ourselves from the situation all together b/c as ive stated and youve side stepped, JUST LEAVING THEM ALONE DOESNT MEAN THEY WILL LEAVE US ALONE!!!

[tonymctones]

If we're an arrogant nation, they'll resent us; if we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll welcome us. And our nation stands alone right now in the world in terms of power, and that's why we've got to be humble, and yet project strength in a way that promotes freedom.

George Bush



Wow, we sure have gone the wrong way since then.

I agree with this, ron paul however believes in this and takes that one extra isolationist step passed it...that is the step that most ppl disagree with.

[Deicide]

I agree with this, ron paul however believes in this and takes that one extra isolationist step passed it...that is the step that most ppl disagree with.

So, what EXACTLY would you do as president with our foreign policy?

[tonymctones]

So, what EXACTLY would you do as president with our foreign policy?

exactly what i said small/surgical strikes to those who are threats and sanctions etc. for those who are longer term potential threats.

would not turn a blind eye to potential long term threats or be niave enough to think that if we leave them alone they will leave us alone.

[Deicide]

exactly what i said small/surgical strikes to those who are threats and sanctions etc. for those who are longer term potential threats.

would not turn a blind eye to potential long term threats or be niave enough to think that if we leave them alone they will leave us alone.

But you would end large scale occupations and deployment of thousands of troops?

[tonymctones]

But you would end large scale occupations and deployment of thousands of troops?

not unless it was thought that we could control those were fighting against with small/surgical strikes...

would you be ok with using said tactics against threats and not being letting potential threats turn into threats?

[Roger Bacon]

But you would end large scale occupations and deployment of thousands of troops?

Looks like we're all basically on the same page, and he doesn't even know it! lol

[Bindare_Dundat]

I agree with this, ron paul however believes in this and takes that one extra isolationist step passed it...that is the step that most ppl disagree with.

If you watch the clip, Bush wasnt saying anything differently then what Paul is saying now.

And it's not not isolationism, its non intervention that Paul advocates. Big distinction.

[Deicide]

not unless it was thought that we could control those were fighting against with small/surgical strikes...

would you be ok with using said tactics against threats and not being letting potential threats turn into threats?

I might be as long as civilians are not routinely killed.

[tonymctones]

Looks like we're all basically on the same page, and he doesn't even know it! lol

Ive said were basically on the same page since the beginning of this thread...hence why the first person to call me out ended up agreeing with the majority of my stances...

its ppl like you that feel that if i disagree with paul then im for all out war

[tonymctones]

If you watch the clip, Bush wasnt saying anything differently then what Paul is saying now.

And it's not not isolationism, its non intervention that Paul advocates. Big distinction.

I agree he is talking non intervention but fact of the matter is as far as potential threats and current threats its a distinction without much of a difference. Yes we are dealing with them but we arent dealing with them in a way that will be condusive to our long term security.

fact of the matter is intervening with potential threats before they are allowed to become actual threats is what needs to be done...

either that or go to all out war when they become a threat...you guys choose.

[Fury]

Uhm, I don't want social welfare; libertarian remember? I want neither war nor welfare. Like I said before, liberals want to spend endlessly on entitlements, conservatives (such as yourself) on warfare and we libertarians just don't want the spending period because both spending is bankrupting the country. It's not pseudo ethics; we don't have control over other countries' actions but we do have limited control over ours, that is why I am more concerned with what our government does more than say, Italy's or Australia's. You didn't answer my question by the way? were the 500,000+ children who died in Iraq worth the price of sanctions? were they terrorists as well or was it just necessary collateral damage? Fortunately for both liberals and conservatives I think the welfare/warfare state will continue for a while until we have hyperinflation or something of similar seriousness.

For someone that has spent their entire life in school, save for a few years gallivanting around East Asia teaching English for a meager monthly stipend (aka vacationing), you sure come off as pretty stupid.

First off, those were UN sanctions. Secondly, props for believing statistics put forth by Saddam Hussein. He was truly a master of truth.

[Roger Bacon]

Ive said were basically on the same page since the beginning of this thread...hence why the first person to call me out ended up agreeing with the majority of my stances...

its ppl like you that feel that if i disagree with paul then im for all out war

If you're now admitting that we're all basically on the same page, what the hell was the point of these last two pages of bullshit?

[Deicide]

For someone that has spent their entire life in school, save for a few years gallivanting around East Asia teaching English for a meager monthly stipend (aka vacationing), you sure come off as pretty stupid.

First off, those were UN sanctions. Secondly, props for believing statistics put forth by Saddam Hussein. He was truly a master of truth.

It always amazes me Nikolas, how you know more about my life than I do. Have you thought about selling your services as a mind reader or clairvoyant?

So, you claim those numbers are vastly exaggerated? The lowest estimates were at 170,000 and those were the lowest estimates. And who pushed the UN to impose sanctions? surely not the United States?, the US had clearly nothing to do with those sanctions.

Estimates of deaths during sanctions

Estimates of excess deaths during sanctions vary depending on the source. The estimates vary [30][37] due to differences in methodologies, and specific time-frames covered.[38] A short listing of estimates follows:

    Unicef: 500,000 children (including sanctions, collateral effects of war). "[As of 1999] [c]hildren under 5 years of age are dying at more than twice the rate they were ten years ago."[30][39]
    Former U.N. Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq Denis Halliday: "Two hundred thirty-nine thousand children 5 years old and under" as of 1998.[40]
    Iraqi Baathist government: 1.5 million.[28]
    Iraqi Cultural Minister Hammadi: 1.7 million (includes sanctions, bombs and other weapons, depleted uranium poisoning) [41]
    "probably ... 170,000 children", Project on Defense Alternatives, "The Wages of War", 20. October 2003[42]
    350,000 excess deaths among children "even using conservative estimates", Slate Explainer, "Are 1 Million Children Dying in Iraq?", 9. October 2001.[43]
    Economist Michael Spagat: "very likely to be [less than] than half a million children." He claims that these estimates are unable to isolate the effects of sanctions alone due to the lack of "anything resembling a controlled experiment".[44][44]
    "Richard Garfield, a Columbia University nursing professor ... cited the figures 345,000-530,000 for the entire 1990-2002 period"[45] for sanctions-related excess deaths.[46]
    Zaidi, S. and Fawzi, M. C. S., The Lancet (1995, estimate withdrawn in 1997):567,000 children.[44]
    Editor (then "associate editor and media columnist") Matt Welch,[47] Reason Magazine, 2002: "It seems awfully hard not to conclude that the embargo on Iraq has ... contributed to more than 100,000 deaths since 1990."[28][46]
    Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark: 1.5 million (includes sanctions, bombs and other weapons, depleted uranium poisoning).[48]
    British Member of Parliament George Galloway: "a million Iraqis, most of them children."[49]

[Roger Bacon]

I generally like your posts Tony, but this is dumb.  All you've done in this thread is made dumb accusations, been rebutted, than say how you agree "but..." with another bogus question or accusation.

[Roger Bacon]

It always amazes me Nikolas, how you know more about my life than I do. Have you thought about selling your services as a mind reader or clairvoyant?

So, you claim those numbers are vastly exaggerated? The lowest estimates were at 170,000 and those were the lowest estimates. And who pushed the UN to impose sanctions? surely not the United States?, the US had clearly nothing to do with those sanctions.

The innocent women and children being slaughtered are on the other side of the globe, out of sight out of mind...

[Dos Equis]

This topic is why "Decide" makes my skin crawl and even though I like Emmortal, I feel like smashing his head through a concrete wall.

This idiotic and false assumption that Islamist fanatics will lay down their arms and embrace freedom if we merely stop "occupying" Muslim land is so stupid it defies explanation.

Do you morons know anything about Islam or world history?

We are at war against an ideology that has more than 1 billion adherents-- The supposed battleground between primitive cockroaches and the civilized world rests in Israel right? Can any of you that support Ron Paul piece together a coherent argument that rationally articulates how or why America abandoning its interests/ allies in the region will put an end to Al Queda/ the numerous warped off-springs that threaten our national security on a daily basis?

There is not a single shred of evidence that appeasement will work with these animals. Not one. You Ron Paul supporters that applaud his foreign policy are merely useful idiots. You  are no different than Hugo Chavez, Sean Penn or any other mindless liberal stooge that hates America.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.- Winston Churchill

I agree with your comments about war against an ideology.  That's exactly what it is. 

[Fury]

It always amazes me Nikolas, how you know more about my life than I do. Have you thought about selling your services as a mind reader or clairvoyant?

So, you claim those numbers are vastly exaggerated? The lowest estimates were at 170,000 and those were the lowest estimates. And who pushed the UN to impose sanctions? surely not the United States?, the US had clearly nothing to do with those sanctions.

Saddam Hussein was a misunderstood angel who never killed his own people. He isn't at all responsible for said sanctions. Or something like that.  

It's not at all surprising that a 35-year-old man who has spent 30+ of those years in some form of school has no grasp on reality.

[Deicide]

Saddam Hussein was a misunderstood angel who never killed his own people. He isn't at all responsible for said sanctions. Or something like that.  

It's not at all surprising that a 35-year-old man who has spent 30+ of those years in some form of school has no grasp on reality.

Did we sell him the weapons that he used to kill his own people? Of course not...

[headhuntersix]

We didn't.....the gas used by him was sold by the Europeans and Egyptians. The aircraft used were French. I've been to Halabja and actually talked to people who fought against Saddam during the Anfal. U really fall for every anti-American thing you can find.

[tu_holmes]

We didn't.....the gas used by him was sold by the Europeans and Egyptians. The aircraft used were French. I've been to Halabja and actually talked to people who fought against Saddam during the Anfal. U really fall for every anti-American thing you can find.

So you disagree with this statement?


"Reports by the US Senate's committee on banking, housing and urban affairs -- which oversees American exports policy -- reveal that the US, under the successive administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Bush Sr, sold materials including anthrax, VX nerve gas, West Nile fever germs and botulism to Iraq right up until March 1992, as well as germs similar to tuberculosis and pneumonia. Other bacteria sold included brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene.

Classified US Defense Department documents also seen by the Sunday Herald show that Britain sold Iraq the drug pralidoxine, an antidote to nerve gas, in March 1992, after the end of the Gulf war. Pralidoxine can be reverse engineered to create nerve gas.

The Senate committee's reports on 'US Chemical and Biological Warfare-Related Dual-Use Exports to Iraq', undertaken in 1992 in the wake of the Gulf war, give the date and destination of all US exports. The reports show, for example, that on May 2, 1986, two batches of bacillus anthracis -- the micro-organism that causes anthrax -- were shipped to the Iraqi Ministry of Higher Education, along with two batches of the bacterium clostridium botulinum, the agent that causes deadly botulism poisoning.

One batch each of salmonella and E coli were shipped to the Iraqi State Company for Drug Industries on August 31, 1987. Other shipments went from the US to the Iraq Atomic Energy Commission on July 11, 1988; the Department of Biology at the University of Basrah in November 1989; the Department of Microbiology at Baghdad University in June 1985; the Ministry of Health in April 1985 and Officers' City, a military complex in Baghdad, in March and April 1986.

The shipments to Iraq went on even after Saddam Hussein ordered the gassing of the Kurdish town of Halabja, in which at least 5000 men, women and children died. The atrocity, which shocked the world, took place in March 1988, but a month later the components and materials of weapons of mass destruction were continuing to arrive in Baghdad from the US."

[headhuntersix]

Yep......did my post confuse you.