Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: howardroark on January 01, 2012, 09:06:11 PM
-
8)
-
what does he mean by saying Ron Paul is not an isolationist? Everyone keeps calling Paul that... Isn't that what he is? Is drinkingwithbob wrong?
-
woot woot! I just got stickied!
isolationist - doesn't want contact with outside world so avoids others at all costs (trade barriers, anti-diplomatic, autarky)
noninterventionist - doesn't want government intervening in others' affairs, unless absolutely necessary (free trade, pro-diplomacy, applies just war theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_war_theory), etc.)
-
woot woot! I just got stickied!
isolationist - doesn't want contact with outside world so avoids others at all costs (trade barriers, anti-diplomatic, autarky)
noninterventionist - doesn't want government intervening in others' affairs, unless absolutely necessary (free trade, pro-diplomacy, applies just war theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_war_theory), etc.)
I'm hoping HH6 can explain it to me in greater detail. I just don't get it. Paul must be an isolationist right... Everyone who hates him says so...
I also know Beach Bum will love this sticky. He has praised so many drinkingwithbob videos so I felt compelled to sticky this in his honor.
-
HH6 has admitted he believes that it is moral to pour over a trillion dollars down the drain and waste thousands of American lives in waging an aggressive war against third world countries in order to keep gasoline a few cents cheaper.
Beach Bum thinks it's our duty to protect Israel, even though doing so harms US interests.
Compare that theory of a just war (http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard20.html) to Ron Paul's: we should only wage defensive wars (e.g. killing Bin Laden and then getting the fuck out).
-
3333, your favorite buddy talking here..... What, no words? lol
BB, how often you praise drinkingwithbob... should I quote your praises? lol.. No words?
HH6, will you cross the famous drinkingwithbob with your wisdom of why he is wrong?
Ohhhhhh. happy day.... ;D
-
3333, your favorite buddy talking here..... What, no words? lol
BB, how often you praise drinkingwithbob... should I quote your praises? lol.. No words?
HH6, will you cross the famous drinkingwithbob with your wisdom of why he is wrong?
Ohhhhhh. happy days.... ;D
What? I am voting for RP in the primary and A B O in the GE. I don't think Paul is anti israel since he is saying we should not be paying for anyone or telling others what to do.
No candidate is perfect, RP certainly, but you have to go with who agrees with you the most on most things. Right now RP is that guy for me. Some of his statements on iran are bizarre though.
-
What? I am voting for RP in the primary and A B O in the GE. I don't think Paul is anti israel since he is saying we should not be paying for anyone or telling others what to do.
No candidate is perfect, RP certainly, but you have to go with who agrees with you the most on most things. Right now RP is that guy for me. Some of his statements on iran are bizarre though.
hey bubba, I just thought it was odd that you would not comment on a thread that involved your favorite youtube star. BB and HH have more to answer for than you lol.
But anyway, since you're now posting in the thread, I'll ask, do you agree with everything Bob said and if not what points?
-
What? I am voting for RP in the primary and A B O in the GE. I don't think Paul is anti israel since he is saying we should not be paying for anyone or telling others what to do.
No candidate is perfect, RP certainly, but you have to go with who agrees with you the most on most things. Right now RP is that guy for me. Some of his statements on iran are bizarre though.
What do you think is so bizarre regarding what Ron Paul has to say about Iran?
-
"there is only one person in this election looking out for your best interests, and that's RON PAUL"--drinkingwithbob!!!!!!
-
-
[ Invalid YouTube link ]
-
error 404
beach bum not found
-
Meh. He's wrong. If Israel goes to war with Iran you better believe it will not just involve just Israel and Iran. We'd be involved, along with a lot of other countries.
-
Meh. He's wrong. If Israel goes to war with Iran you better believe it will not just involve just Israel and Iran. We'd be involved, along with a lot of other countries.
Why? How would a regional war pull the US into it, if it were not for the US government's expansive and aggressive foreign policy?
-
Why? How would a regional war pull the US into it, if it were not for the US government's expansive and aggressive foreign policy?
How would our ally being involved in a war with an enemy in a region full of people who want to kill Americans pull the U.S. into it? That's your question?
-
I can't begin to decribe how much a retard old RP is.....and drinking with bob...really? I would burn half the middle east...to ensure that gas was 99%.
-
How would our ally being involved in a war with an enemy in a region full of people who want to kill Americans pull the U.S. into it? That's your question?
No - my question is that if Ron Paul were our President - and we stopped engaging in entangling alliances, how would a regional war halfway across the world bring our neutral country into the conflict?
"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations -- entangling alliances with none." - Thomas Jefferson
-
I can't begin to decribe how much a retard old RP is.....and drinking with bob...really? I would burn half the middle east...to ensure that gas was 99%.
Burning half of the Middle East would cause gas prices to skyrocket. Why do you think gas prices are so much higher now than they were in the late 90s?
-
No - my question is that if Ron Paul were our President - and we stopped engaging in entangling alliances, how would a regional war halfway across the world bring our neutral country into the conflict?
"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations -- entangling alliances with none." - Thomas Jefferson
Well, he's never going to be president.
Not sure what "entangling alliances" means, but to the extent it means we no longer have allies, I think that's patently absurd, and an extremely naive world view--which about sums up Ron Paul's foreign policy views.
Dealing with the real world, there is no way a war in the Middle East between Jews and Muslims would only involve Jews and Muslims. There almost certainly be other countries supporting one side or the other. There is no way we would sit on the sidelines eating popcorn while they wipe each other out.
-
Burning half of the Middle East would cause gas prices to skyrocket. Why do you think gas prices are so much higher now than they were in the late 90s?
I don't think you get it...I don't really care what we have to do ensure that oild flows and our standard of living remains the same. Your idiot would ensure that all the nutbags would continue to grow unchecked until they threaten us directly here. You really need to get out more. RP is as bad if not worse then Obama. He's a winiy psuedo liberal pansy.
-
Well, he's never going to be president.
Not sure what "entangling alliances" means, but to the extent it means we no longer have allies, I think that's patently absurd, and an extremely naive world view--which about sums up Ron Paul's foreign policy views.
Dealing with the real world, there is no way a war in the Middle East between Jews and Muslims would only involve Jews and Muslims. There almost certainly be other countries supporting one side or the other. There is no way we would sit on the sidelines eating popcorn while they wipe each other out.
Naive foreign policy? A naive foreign policy is going around the world and waging wars for causes that harm our interests.
If Israel and Iran wants to duke it out - which is doubtful if you understand the actual conditions present in the Middle East - then it shouldn't be the role of the US to pour billions (trillions?) of dollars down the drain and waste thousands of young American lives for someone else's war.
-
I don't think you get it...I don't really care what we have to do ensure that oild flows and our standard of living remains the same. Your idiot would ensure that all the nutbags would continue to grow unchecked until they threaten us directly here. You really need to get out more. RP is as bad if not worse then Obama. He's a winiy psuedo liberal pansy.
You would do anything to make sure oil flows into the United States? So you would spend the US into bankruptcy in order to make sure that oil was a few dollars a barrel cheaper?
Well guess what - you don't have to do anything. The economies of the Middle East are dependent on selling us oil. No matter how much they hate us, they'll sell us oil, unless they want to starve to death.
-
Naive foreign policy? A naive foreign policy is going around the world and waging wars for causes that harm our interests.
If Israel and Iran wants to duke it out - which is doubtful if you understand the actual conditions present in the Middle East - then it shouldn't be the role of the US to pour billions (trillions?) of dollars down the drain and waste thousands of young American lives for someone else's war.
Absolutely naive. He's about the only person on either side of the aisle, outside of that idiot Kucinich, who thinks if we just leave Iran alone and let them get nukes they will play nice and not attack anyone. If he actually educated himself on what drives radical Islam, he'd know that boots on the ground is only a part of the reason why they hate us. We could pull every Soldier out of the region and they'd still be trying to kill us. His views are dangerous. He should not be in charge of the military.
And no life is wasted. Every single one of them volunteered to serve, and many volunteered while we were at war.
-
Howard if you happy to be associated with far left wing nuts, when you vote for RP be my guest. We do not agree on this or anything else as regards American foreign policy.
-
Howard if you happy to be associated with far left wing nuts, when you vote for RP be my guest. We do not agree on this or anything else as regards American foreign policy.
You're the one who believes in a far-left foreign policy. The US spent over $1.5 trillion on keeping oil prices down, and yet they have gone up. That sounds like a failed socialistic policy to me.
Absolutely naive. He's about the only person on either side of the aisle, outside of that idiot Kucinich, who thinks if we just leave Iran alone and let them get nukes they will play nice and not attack anyone. If he actually educated himself on what drives radical Islam, he'd know that boots on the ground is only a part of the reason why they hate us. We could pull every Soldier out of the region and they'd still be trying to kill us. His views are dangerous. He should not be in charge of the military.
And no life is wasted. Every single one of them volunteered to serve, and many volunteered while we were at war.
If you actually educated yourself about the Islamic world, you'd realize that hardly anyone wants to blow themselves up over a country halfway across the world allowing women in the workplace. Honestly, your worldview is downright laughable. Don't you think that if THAT was the reason why they really hated us, that they would focus their attacks on countries with a large alienated Muslim minority, such as France, Sweden, and Germany (how many of the 9/11 attackers were from Germany anyway?), instead of focusing on the two countries that have intervened in the Middle East the most - the US and the UK?
-
You're the one who believes in a far-left foreign policy. The US spent over $1.5 trillion on keeping oil prices down, and yet they have gone up. That sounds like a failed socialistic policy to me.
If you actually educated yourself about the Islamic world, you'd realize that hardly anyone wants to blow themselves up over a country halfway across the world allowing women in the workplace. Honestly, your worldview is downright laughable. Don't you think that if THAT was the reason why they really hated us, that they would focus their attacks on countries with a large alienated Muslim minority, such as France, Sweden, and Germany (how many of the 9/11 attackers were from Germany anyway?), instead of focusing on the two countries that have intervened in the Middle East the most - the US and the UK?
I have educated myself about the Islamic world. Quite a bit actually. Sounds like you haven't. I'm also pretty comfortable with my worldview. But what we're talking about is Ron Paul's worldview. Not mine. Or yours.
-
I have educated myself about the Islamic world. Quite a bit actually. Sounds like you haven't. I'm also pretty comfortable with my worldview. But what we're talking about is Ron Paul's worldview. Not mine. Or yours.
So YOU think that Ron Paul's worldview is naive because he thinks that if the US government weren't involved in imperialistic ventures in the Middle East, then we wouldn't have been attacked on 9/11. You disagree with him, because you think that the Muslim terrorists hate us because we have freedoms that they don't have... that's why they left other countries with freedoms like ours (i.e. Germany) in order to bomb us, right? And that's why the world's Muslim terrorist attacks have been focused on the US and the UK, but not on any other Western country with expansive freedoms, right?
-
These people (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamburg_cell) left Germany, a country with more social liberties than the United States, in order to attack the United States for being too free, right??
-
So YOU think that Ron Paul's worldview is naive because he thinks that if the US government weren't involved in imperialistic ventures in the Middle East, then we wouldn't have been attacked on 9/11. You disagree with him, because you think that the Muslim terrorists hate us because we have freedoms that they don't have... that's why they left other countries with freedoms like ours (i.e. Germany) in order to bomb us, right? And that's why the world's Muslim terrorist attacks have been focused on the US and the UK, but not on any other Western country with expansive freedoms, right?
We have not been involved in "imperialistic ventures," so the entire premise is dumb.
-
We have not been involved in "imperialistic ventures," so the entire premise is dumb.
Propping up Muslim oil tycoons as tyrants in the Islamic world is not imperialistic?
-
Open your eyes people...
Pentagon says that Iran is seeking nukes in order to deter invasion - and also that Iran doesn't have the logistical capability to bomb much beyond its borders or confront regional powers such as Turkey and Israel. http://milwaukeestory.com/index.php/2011/12/19/pentagon-says-iran-concerned-primarily-with-deterring-an-attack-344/ (http://milwaukeestory.com/index.php/2011/12/19/pentagon-says-iran-concerned-primarily-with-deterring-an-attack-344/)
-
Also, Beach Bum, do you care to explain why Russia has also been a major target of Muslim terrorist attacks? It seems that if Islamic terrorists were concerned more about attacking free people, they'd ignore Russia and the United States in favor of countries like Sweden or Portugal, where same-sex marriage is legal. But instead, they target countries that are viewed as foreign oppressors by Muslims: Russia in Chechnya, and the US and the UK for their support of dictators in the Muslim world (e.g. the Shah, the Saudi monarchy, Musharraf, Hosni Mubarak before we turned our backs on him).
-
Also, Beach Bum, do you care to explain why Russia has also been a major target of Muslim terrorist attacks? It seems that if Islamic terrorists were concerned more about attacking free people, they'd ignore Russia and the United States in favor of countries like Sweden or Portugal, where same-sex marriage is legal. But instead, they target countries that are viewed as foreign oppressors by Muslims: Russia in Chechnya, and the US and the UK for their support of dictators in the Muslim world (e.g. the Shah, the Saudi monarchy, Musharraf, Hosni Mubarak before we turned our backs on him).
No, I don't care to explain it, because I don't know why they have have attacked Russia (assuming that is true). Never thought about it. And I really don't care. What I have studied is why they want to kill Americans.
-
No, I don't care to explain it, because I don't know why they have have attacked Russia (assuming that is true). Never thought about it. And I really don't care. What I have studied is why they want to kill Americans.
You're not even aware of the terrorist attacks on Russia yet you claim to know about the motivations of the same group of people who attacked the United States?
Russia has been attacked repeatedly by Muslim terrorists because of their actions in Chechnya...
REGARDLESS, why do you think the United States has been attacked by Muslim terrorists who were in Germany? If they truly hated the West for our freedoms, don't you think it would make more sense to attack Germany, which would have been easier to attack given their location AND has more personal freedoms than the United States?
-
You're not even aware of the terrorist attacks on Russia yet you claim to know about the motivations of the same group of people who attacked the United States?
Russia has been attacked repeatedly by Muslim terrorists because of their actions in Chechnya...
REGARDLESS, why do you think the United States has been attacked by Muslim terrorists who were in Germany? If they truly hated the West for our freedoms, don't you think it would make more sense to attack Germany, which would have been easier to attack given their location AND has more personal freedoms than the United States?
Don't know and don't care. What the heck does that have to do with why they want to kill Americans? Have you read anything on this subject? Have you been there? Talked to people who have been there? Talked to people who have lived there?
-
Don't know and don't care. What the heck does that have to do with why they want to kill Americans? Have you read anything on this subject? Have you been there? Talked to people who have been there? Talked to people who have lived there?
Evasion, evasion, evasion. Do you ever answer the questions?
And no, I've never been there, but yes, I have read extensively and not just from the neoconservative propaganda literature, and yes, I know many people from the Muslim world - India (not part of a Muslim world, but I do know Muslims from there), Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon. I live in the largest Muslim community inside the United States.
-
Also, Beach Bum, do you care to explain why Russia has also been a major target of Muslim terrorist attacks? It seems that if Islamic terrorists were concerned more about attacking free people, they'd ignore Russia and the United States in favor of countries like Sweden or Portugal, where same-sex marriage is legal. But instead, they target countries that are viewed as foreign oppressors by Muslims: Russia in Chechnya, and the US and the UK for their support of dictators in the Muslim world (e.g. the Shah, the Saudi monarchy, Musharraf, Hosni Mubarak before we turned our backs on him).
This is a ridiculous oversimplification and you come across as clueless.
Sweden has serious problems with terrorism, a lot of it due, much like Denmark to fucking cartoons of all things. Of course culture is an issue.
And even if we accept your premise at face value, Portugal and Sweden supported OEF. So two countries who are "intervening" and you're claiming they're not targets.
And you keep bringing up the Hamburg cell. Hell, the 9/11 hijackers were not even going to attack us initially. We didn't even become a target until Osama's peeps convinced them otherwise. But how can this be? According to you it's all about intervention. Surely we would have been target #1! Wrong, we were not.
Terrorists kill and choose their targets for many different reasons. Of course intervention plays a role. But it's by no means the only one. Cultural factors, social factors, hell even economic factors play a role as some terrorists are just doing it to get money for their families.
And grossly attempting to oversimplify the problem and claim it's just intervention is pure nonsense.
-
Evasion, evasion, evasion. Do you ever answer the questions?
And no, I've never been there, but yes, I have read extensively and not just from the neoconservative propaganda literature, and yes, I know many people from the Muslim world - India (not part of a Muslim world, but I do know Muslims from there), Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon. I live in the largest Muslim community inside the United States.
All the time. :)
What is "neoconservative propaganda literature"? And what have you read?
-
This is a ridiculous oversimplification and you come across as clueless.
Sweden has serious problems with terrorism, a lot of it due, much like Denmark to fucking cartoons of all things. Of course culture is an issue.
And even if we accept your premise at face value, Portugal and Sweden supported OEF. So two countries who are "intervening" and you're claiming they're not targets.
And you keep bringing up the Hamburg cell. Hell, the 9/11 hijackers were not even going to attack us initially. We didn't even become a target until Osama's peeps convinced them otherwise. But how can this be? According to you it's all about intervention. Surely we would have been target #1! Wrong, we were not.
Terrorists kill and choose their targets for many different reasons. Of course intervention plays a role. But it's by no means the only one. Cultural factors, social factors, hell even economic factors play a role as some terrorists are just doing it to get money for their families.
And grossly attempting to oversimplify the problem and claim it's just intervention is pure nonsense.
Yes. ^^^ This.