Ron Paul Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It’s real easy to be pro-war when it is an all-volunteer army.
If the draft was reinstated and it was their kids going to fight on the desert sands, attitudes would change dramatically.
 
I admit to having serious reservations about Mr. Paul. I also admit to having serious reservations about the entire republican field. But on the question on Mr. Paul, his affection for the libertarian ideology, which includes the Austrian model on economics and the social ideologies of the Ayn Rand types, concerns me greatly. Wrapping oneself up in the constitution as a cover for true beliefs is a bit disengenuous, but hey, when has a politician not pandered to a certain group in order to get elected.
I really am having trouble as to who to vote for in our (SC) upcomming primary. Looking more like Santorum.
 
kubark said:
Do you deny that Operation Ajax was authorized by President Eisenhower? Do you deny that the purpose of this covert action was the overthrow of the democratically elected government, which was subsequently replaced with an authoritarian one that relied heavily on United States support to hold on to power until this US backed government was overthrown in February 1979? Do you realize that the founding fathers warned against this kind of meddling?
Click to expand...
Other countries have been meddling in U.S. affairs since before 1800. And we “meddle back”.

That’s the way it is.

You don’t have to like it.

That’s just the way it is.

Secondly, removing the PM from Iran was hardly overthrowing a democratically-elected government.

These people, Persians and Babylonians and the rest have been killing off their leaders for thousands of years. And the PM, in this case, wasn’t killed.

Please read the post I reposted with the history of the Persian people and the fatal outcomes of most of the shahs over the past several thousand years.

The activities of the United States have been far more benign than most.
 
JustaServant said:
It’s real easy to be pro-war when it is an all-volunteer army.
If the draft was reinstated and it was their kids going to fight on the desert sands, attitudes would change dramatically.
Click to expand...
This post includes one contradiction and one semi-falsehood.

The contradiction is that with an all-volunteer army, if you don’t like the leadership or the direction of the military, when you have served your enlistment, you can quit. OR, you don’t join up to start with. Not an issue at all, that it’s easy to be pro-war when it is an all-volunteer army. In fact, the anti-war protests were at a peak when the draft was in place. After the draft ended, the protests stopped.

Second, politicians’ children DO volunteer for the military and in large numbers. It may seem counterintuitive to some, but there are occasional articles to that effect.

usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-01-22-iraq-congress_x.htm
 
kubark said:
But you didn’t refute the argument that Buchanan made based on facts that he “selected” from Hoover’s Freedom Betrayed.
Click to expand...
There are powerful few refutations around here, mostly assertions.

However, Buchanan doesn’t pick and choose from a wide selection of available literature. He only picks and chooses the points he wants to make. And none from sources that contradict the point he wants to make.

Buchanan quotes from Herbert Hoover.

Herbert Hoover was, frankly, a meddler and a micro-managing nit picker. He earned his reputation for exemplary relief work he did as Secretary of Commerce and that ultimately won him the presidency. The problem was that as a mining engineer, he HAD to be extremely detail-oriented. But he was basically a micro-manager. Similar in orientation to Jimmy Carter. When Hoover was president, he tried to micro-manage the U.S. economy and created a major economic collapse.

Franklin Roosevelt ran in opposition to Hoover’s nit picking approach and won. And then Roosevelt promptly became a BIGGER nitpicker and WORSE micro-manager than Hoover.

Roosevelt could have used the technique employed by Harding/Coolidge to end the 1920 recession, but went the other way and expanded government. Which made the situation worse.

canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/8856

Hoover’s report focuses on details but omits the big picture. He has the same basic fault as Carter. Japan was hell-bent on invasion. Hoover cherry picked his comments but omitted the fundamental problem of Japan’s on-going insistence on conquest.

Hoover omitted Japan’s expansion completely. Carter omitted Jihad-quest [for the lack of a better term] completely.

So Hoover blamed the United States for Japan’s misplaced expansion-energy expenditure.

Carter got rid of a semi-stable government in Iran under the Shah, who we could work with and gave us something far far worse. By far the theocratic regime in Iran is worse than anything the Shah could have come up with.

Carter was worried about some issues he had with the Shah. But in getting rid of the Shah, he may have caused the complete loss of the West and of Christianity, perhaps for hundreds of years. The last time, it went this badly, it took something like 300 or 800 years for Christianity to recover. *

So, because he was busy counting the dimes in parking meters and editing the punctuation in someone else’s report, Carter may very well have given an unstable regime the nuclear bomb with which to crater his own people.

I mean, just the other day, he sent the new dictator of North Korea his well wishes.

Be careful what you wish for.*
 
For all the misplaced, mis-attributed good will to certain Japanese politicians, in fact, the Imperial Japanese Army invaded all the way BEYOND China … all the way through what is now Vietnam, Thailand and Laos and continued on all the way through Burma into India … well, what is now called Bangladesh.

[Yes, there have been a lot of changes over the years. Even in / with Burma.]

That is a lot more than a minor miscalculation by Japan.

India had some “issues” with England.

And India was about to rebel/revolt … choose your own word … against British rule and against the British Commonwealth.

MEANWHILE, Germany had a huge number of troops in North Africa. [How did THAT happen?] Anyway, Germany was driving eastward, aiming to capture Egypt … and link up with … THE ARAB LEAGUE … which was an ally of … GERMANY.

All Germany had to do was very simple … cross the Suez Canal. Just a VERY short distance from Benghazi.

[Maybe one of our computer folks could post a map here. I love maps.]

Anyway, so there you have it.

Japan is in the suburbs of New Delhi. Almost. The people of India … actually, Hindustan … kick out the British and make nice with the Japanese Army.

And then the Arab League … allies of the Germans … link up with the Japanese Army … and voila. And THAT would have been a walk in the park, with India/Hindustan hostile to England.

The Japanese and Germans win World War II.

Japan gets all the oil it needs from the Arab League … Iran, remember Iran?

[Hey, that’s where Japan gets its oil from TODAY … funny about that!]

Voila.

We lose.

They win.

So, yeah, we meddle.

Good thing, too.

[The ONLY thing that stopped Axis world domination egged on by the Soviet Union (hey, the USSR started out as ALLIES of GERMANY!) … was terrible fighting in India/Burma and in North Africa.] [And some distractions by Jimmy Doolittle and a miracle at Midway and a bunch of other “lucky breaks”.][And a pretty please promise by Britain to give independence to India.]

[Almost as miraculous as the Battle of Lepanto.]
 
smndtupidisaftr said:
The hostage crisis was the rebellion against the government the US set up in Iran.
Click to expand...
When a country does not want diplomatic relations with another country the rule is you ask them to leave. I repeat…the actions of Iran’s revolutionary leaders was an act of war and unprecedented. We certainly propped up the Shaw’s rule but we did not set it up. Words mean things. As with all dictatorships there were many Iranian supporters and support from other countries also.
 
** There are many things about Ron Paul that disturb me**, so that I could never vote for him for US president.

** Having said that, I find myself somewhat sympathetic to his view re Iran**. Yes, Iran has an extremist government. But consider these points, briefly summarized - and behind each is a long story.

** 1. We were tricked into invading Iraq by false reports**, largely promoted by necons and what Eisenhower warned against - the military-industrial complex. There are those who have always loved war because they are great money-makers for some. After 9 years in Iraq, so many lives lost and maimed (US and Iraqi lives), a trillion and more spent (you have to consider continuing expenses caring for the maimed, etc), we seem to still have a mess in Iraq. We took our eyes off the ball in Afghanistan - a victory for Al Qaeda. Saddam and Al Qaeda were archenemies. Al Qaeda denounced him as an infidel! Yes, he was a villain but posed no threat to the US.
Code: 
**2. Iran saw what happened to Saddam without the bomb,** and more recently to Ghaddafi, who had agreed not to make such a bomb. Quite naturally Iran would want to have the bomb to ward off attack.
** 3. Israel has many of those n-bombs and will not permit inspection**. The Israel lobby is pushing the USA hard to attack Iran. Tragically, there are forces and politicians in the US who appear to place Israel’s welfare above our national interests. Gingrich’s choice of Bolton as Secretary of State, by the way, would be a disaster.

** 4. Iran is a huge nation with many fanatical Shiites**, who would gladly die to go to the Islamic heaven. To attack Iran would be absolutely foolish and lead to yet another war, much more costly than in Iraq or Afghanistan (and Afghanistan isn’t over yet).

** 5. Attacking Iran might be applauded by Israel, but the rest of the world would condemn such an absurd**, irreponsible US action. Many Israelis would also object as it would bring war to them again. It’s easy to forget that a large proportion of Israelis object to that present regime. And - by the way - a friend of mine who knows Farsi stated that the Iranian leader actually said that the Israeli regime should be swept away rather than that Israel should be wiped off the map.

** 6. Now, who in their right mind, thinks that Iran will attack Israel or anyone else, even with a bomb,** when it knows that we (and probably Israel) have the power and the bombs to blow that entire nation to ‘kingdom come’? The government of Iran may seem extreme but it hardly is suicidal and stupid.

** 7. An attack on Iran would succeed in uniting those in that nation who want reform,** just as Pearl Harbor and 9-11 united Americans of all political persuasions.

** 8. The Pope condemned the US invasion of Iraq. He will do the same if we attack Iran.** Besides, as in Iraq, Christians in Iran would suffer enormously if we are so foolish as to attack that nation. Look at what has happened to Christians in Iraq.

** 9. We just celebrated the birth of the Prince of Peace**. Jesus said: " Blessed are the peacemakers." I go with Christ rather than eager war-makers any day.
**10. Happy New Year** - and may 2012 and years to come bring peace and joy to you and to all our war-weary world.
 
Dirt said:
I admit to having serious reservations about Mr. Paul. I also admit to having serious reservations about the entire republican field. But on the question on Mr. Paul, his affection for the libertarian ideology, which includes the Austrian model on economics and the social ideologies of the Ayn Rand types, concerns me greatly. Wrapping oneself up in the constitution as a cover for true beliefs is a bit disengenuous, but hey, when has a politician not pandered to a certain group in order to get elected.
I really am having trouble as to who to vote for in our (SC) upcomming primary. Looking more like Santorum.
Click to expand...
He wraps himself in those beliefs because they’re pretty much in line with his economic beliefs. The founding fathers were classical liberals, after all.
 
pismopal said:
When a country does not want diplomatic relations with another country the rule is you ask them to leave. I repeat…the actions of Iran’s revolutionary leaders was an act of war and unprecedented. We certainly propped up the Shaw’s rule but we did not set it up. Words mean things. As with all dictatorships there were many Iranian supporters and support from other countries also.
Click to expand...
So when China comes over here and takes out the president, we just ask them to leave the country? Wouldn’t you expect just a little bit of animosity?
 
You will never guess in a millyun years what happens a year or so after the EMP attack on the United States.

Never guess.
 
Roy5 said:
…
** 3. Israel has many of those n-bombs and will not permit inspection**. The Israel lobby is pushing the USA hard to attack Iran. Tragically, there are forces and politicians in the US who appear to place Israel’s welfare above our national interests. Gingrich’s choice of Bolton as Secretary of State, by the way, would be a disaster.
…
Click to expand...
The LORD had said to Abram, “Leave your country, your people and your father’s household and go to the land I will show you.
“I will make you into a great nation
and I will bless you;
I will make your name great,
and you will be a blessing.
I will bless those who bless you,
and whoever curses you I will curse;
and all peoples on earth
will be blessed through you.”
(Genesis 12:1-3)
 
Pitcharan said:
The LORD had said to Abram, “Leave your country, your people and your father’s household and go to the land I will show you.
“I will make you into a great nation
and I will bless you;
I will make your name great,
and you will be a blessing.
I will bless those who bless you,
and whoever curses you I will curse;
and all peoples on earth
will be blessed through you.”
(Genesis 12:1-3)
Click to expand...
You think that’s strong?

Read Joshua.

Yikes!
 
**If other Christians want to believe that God has a chosen people **and the rest are less favored by our Lord, that God ordered Joshua to murder all the inhabitants of Jericho (except Rahab and her family), that God commanded Saul to kill every living Amalekite, and that God demanded various other such genocides - well, go ahead. My God would never give such instructions. And how does this go along with a pro-life position? Think of all the babies in the womb who must have been among those exterminated, together with babies and other innocents.

** The writers of the Old Testament were influenced by nationalism**, just as we are today. Do you really think Christ would shout joyully with the crowd that “Saul has killed his thousands but David has killed his ten thousands!”? Give me a break. I believe in genuine Christianity - yes, even love your enemy - and not such a hateful, bloody war cry!
Code: 
 **Christians need to distinguish between ancient Hebrew arrogance** and patriotism on the one hand and great Hebrew prophets and the Sermon on the Mount on the other. I go with the prophets and especially with Jesus.
** If this is heresy, so be it. I view fundamentalism as ‘heresy’** - whether in its Catholic or Protestant form. It’s an insult to the gospel and contradictory to the message of love. It misrepresents God as vengeful, vicious, and ethnocentric. My God loves people of every creed, color, country and culture and surely would not demand that they be exterminated.

** God bless everybody **- and may they all have a blessed New Year filled with happiness, faith, peace, and love. We should be working toward that goal instead of embracing hostility, arrogance and violence.
 
I thought that G*d was the author of the Old Testament.

silly me.

[Read the WHOLE Old Testament.]

my goodness
 
However, Buchanan doesn’t pick and choose from a wide selection of available literature. He only picks and chooses the points he wants to make. And none from sources that contradict the point he wants to make.
Click to expand...
But you haven’t demonstrated the facts to be incorrect nor have you demonstrated that Buchanan’s argument based on those facts to be flawed.
Herbert Hoover was, frankly, a meddler and a micro-managing nit picker…
Click to expand...
Again, you need to demonstrate either that Hoover has his facts wrong or that his argument based on those facts is fallacious. Responding with ad hominems is not a logically valid or very Christian response.
Japan was hell-bent on invasion.
Click to expand...
Utterly false. Hoover demonstrates with primary source material the communications between the US and Japan prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor. The historical record that Hoover documents proves that in the months leading up to Pearl Harbor, Konoye was hell-bent on AVOIDING a conflict.
Hoover omitted Japan’s expansion completely.
Click to expand...
Every nation “expands” their search for natural resources. Japan was an island nation with limited resources. Of course she would “expand.” She was doing what every western nation had done before her.
So Hoover blamed the United States for Japan’s misplaced expansion-energy expenditure.
Click to expand...
Hoover told the truth. Sometimes the truth hurts.
 
Monte_RCMS said:
You will never guess in a millyun years what happens a year or so after the EMP attack on the United States.

Never guess.
Click to expand...
I watched Jericho, I know what will happen. 😉

In case of an EMP attack, other countries will be the least of our worries. Better focus on those who are unable to fend for themselves. They will form gangs and the strong will take from the weak. Civilization is a very thin veneer.
 
Roy5 said:
**If other Christians want to believe that God has a chosen people **and the rest are less favored by our Lord, that God ordered Joshua to murder all the inhabitants of Jericho (except Rahab and her family), that God commanded Saul to kill every living Amalekite, and that God demanded various other such genocides - well, go ahead. My God would never give such instructions. And how does this go along with a pro-life position? Think of all the babies in the womb who must have been among those exterminated, together with babies and other innocents.

** The writers of the Old Testament were influenced by nationalism**, just as we are today. Do you really think Christ would shout joyully with the crowd that “Saul has killed his thousands but David has killed his ten thousands!”? Give me a break. I believe in genuine Christianity - yes, even love your enemy - and not such a hateful, bloody war cry!
Code: 
 **Christians need to distinguish between ancient Hebrew arrogance** and patriotism on the one hand and great Hebrew prophets and the Sermon on the Mount on the other. I go with the prophets and especially with Jesus.
** If this is heresy, so be it. I view fundamentalism as ‘heresy’** - whether in its Catholic or Protestant form. It’s an insult to the gospel and contradictory to the message of love. It misrepresents God as vengeful, vicious, and ethnocentric. My God loves people of every creed, color, country and culture and surely would not demand that they be exterminated.

** God bless everybody **- and may they all have a blessed New Year filled with happiness, faith, peace, and love. We should be working toward that goal instead of embracing hostility, arrogance and violence.
Click to expand...
“Ancient Hebrew arrogance” Wow… do you practice “replacement theology”? Did you forget the God of Israel is the Father of Jesus/Yeshua the Messiah? Are you trying to replace our Heavenly Father with only Jesus? You know it doesn’t work like that, right? No one here wants war; no one wants death and destruction. I wish these Muslim countries surrounding Israel played nice, but they don’t. It clearly states that when Jesus returns, he will return in Jerusalem. This is why it is crucial for us to pray for Israel, for Zion and for peace over Jerusalem. This is our Father’s Holy Land of Israel, may no one forget that. And no, God does not favor Jews above the rest; however, they were chosen to give the world the Word and Laws of God. We are all God’s children, we all have an important role and mission in life. The Jews were to give the nations of the world, the knowledge of the living God of Israel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top