Thread: Who will you vote for?

Originally Posted by jaasum

In order to agree with Ron Pauls other points you have to firstly agree with his foreign policy. Because if you want the funding and the lower taxes to truly create the society we all want we can't have such an expensive stake in the world. It's a trillion....a TRILLION that is a huge number that is spent on keeping our military presence around the world.

There are plenty of other programs to cut. We need our military activity. However, once we do enough nation building in the Middle East, we will be able to greatly relax our military activity. I don't think we have much left to do. I think that once we get Iraq and Afghanistan to where they can take care of themselves, they will probably evolve into incredible democratic countries. It will take a while, but I think it will happen. They are just going to have a Wild West phase like we did. When they are highly civilized and prosperous, they will be able to handle the rotten countries in the area.

Originally Posted by jaasum

Here is my main problem with your logic on this. You think that in order to stop terrorism we must fight it on all levels by overthrowing corrupted governments and getting into nation building. For one, we can't afford it financially or morally. Two, you can't really fight terrorism with the very thing that incites it. The terrorists are saying "we hate you for doing X to us FIRST." and then we say "Well since you did X to us, we will do X to you until you stop." Then they turn around and say "Since you are doing X we will continue to do X" You can't fight terrorism with the very policy that created it, that is only what fuels it.

That is where our confusion is. We are not hated just because we do X, which is the understandable and necessary act of protecting democracy in the Middle East. We are hated because we do X, Y, Z, A, B, and C and because the haters are cuckoo, loonie, evil, brainwashed, illogical, irrational, bonkers, and fruit nut salad.

Originally Posted by Omnius Deus

Actually Um he would keep us in a perpetual state of war with governments that aren't even funding terrorists to the point where they will start to seriously think about it. He will drain our economy so that international bankers can makie billions of dollars from money borrowed from the federal reserve. He will ignore intel about actual terrorist locations and real terrorists threats.

Wow, you should make up some more bizarre accusations while you were at it. Is it my turn yet? You would have sex with water buffalo and walk around town wearing nothing but socks and beat up old ladies at the circus. It's your turn again.

Originally Posted by Alric

What you are basicly saying is we should keep attacking countries out of spite and not because its in our best interest.

Oh, you haven't read my posts yet. Read them, and then make up stuff about what I am saying. But make sure you take your turn after Omnius Deus has his.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

There are plenty of other programs to cut. We need our military activity. However, once we do enough nation building in the Middle East, we will be able to greatly relax our military activity. I don't think we have much left to do. I think that once we get Iraq and Afghanistan to where they can take care of themselves, they will probably evolve into incredible democratic countries. It will take a while, but I think it will happen. They are just going to have a Wild West phase like we did. When they are highly civilized and prosperous, they will be able to handle the rotten countries in the area.



That is where our confusion is. We are not hated just because we do X, which is the understandable and necessary act of protecting democracy in the Middle East. We are hated because we do X, Y, Z, A, B, and C and because the haters are cuckoo, loonie, evil, brainwashed, illogical, irrational, bonkers, and fruit nut salad.

It's not like we nation-build and then we pull the plug of our financial and military support from the country. We are building the largest embassy of any country in the world right now in Iraq (I heard that but haven't fact checked) I know we are building numerous PERMANENT army bases in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is not going to "ease our military" it is simply spreading it more thin.

Sure, the terrorists hate us for more reasons. But I feel the only reason that gave them the motivation and the justification to carry out terrorist attacks is X our meddling in their affairs. The things they hate us for, and especially those that gave them the reason to attack us are things I feel we should have no interest in. The united states forcing democracy to all corners of the earth isn't in my interest because it destroys the democracy and prosperity we are supposed to have here. No, I don't have it bad, but it could be a lot better and there are nations a lot smaller than us that have it a lot better, because they aren't overspending warmongers.

Originally Posted by jaasum

It's not like we nation-build and then we pull the plug of our financial and military support from the country. We are building the largest embassy of any country in the world right now in Iraq (I heard that but haven't fact checked) I know we are building numerous PERMANENT army bases in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is not going to "ease our military" it is simply spreading it more thin.

That is not the same as fighting a war.

Originally Posted by jaasum

Sure, the terrorists hate us for more reasons. But I feel the only reason that gave them the motivation and the justification to carry out terrorist attacks is X our meddling in their affairs. The things they hate us for, and especially those that gave them the reason to attack us are things I feel we should have no interest in. The united states forcing democracy to all corners of the earth isn't in my interest because it destroys the democracy and prosperity we are supposed to have here. No, I don't have it bad, but it could be a lot better and there are nations a lot smaller than us that have it a lot better, because they aren't overspending warmongers.

We were meddling in their affairs because the Palestinians were meddling in the affairs of Israel, a democracy, and because the Hussein regime invaded and took over Kuwait for purely selfish reasons. We did not start the conflict.

When the entire world is democratic, there will be no more wars.

If the entire world was run by Hitler there would no wars either.

Who made Saddam powerful enough to try and invate Kuwait? And those stupid bastards, how dare they meddle in the affairs of another country simply for oil (especially since it was party ours!)

Originally Posted by jaasum

If the entire world was run by Hitler there would no wars either.

That's true, but I am talking about a free world with no wars. You can imagine what the world would be like under Hitlerian rule.

Originally Posted by jaasum

Who made Saddam powerful enough to try and invate Kuwait? And those stupid bastards, how dare they meddle in the affairs of another country simply for oil (especially since it was party ours!)

We did create a monster by allying with the Hussein regime. Hindsight is 20/20. That does not mean we took over Kuwait. The Hussein regime did that. And yes, how dare they take over another country simply for oil and run it with Hussein style totalitarianism.

The analogy to bullies that Universal Mind made is a great one for the foreign policy debate. We can take the advice of our parents, perhaps, and ignore their demands(perhaps also forming an alliance of friends), or capitulate, and give them what they want, or violently resist them. If we are going to ignore the demands of Al Qaeda, what foreign policy shall we seek?

If you choose to fight the bully, and achieve victory at the price of serious injury, is that worth your lunch money? Wasn't the point of fighting to eliminate the threat of injury? And won't he come back the next day to beat you up again for winning the last fight? If you leave the fight before it's finished to avert failure or injury, does your situation improve? Will you forever be forced to give in to the bully because you didn't beat him in a fight?

As far as I can tell, Ron Paul advocates the strategy one would expect from one who leads with restraint.

Anyone going for candidates other than Giuliani/R. Paul? I'd like to hear some good Democratic supporters.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

That's true, but I am talking about a free world with no wars. You can imagine what the world would be like under Hitlerian rule.



We did create a monster by allying with the Hussein regime. Hindsight is 20/20. That does not mean we took over Kuwait. The Hussein regime did that. And yes, how dare they take over another country simply for oil and run it with Hussein style totalitarianism.

You mean like we did with the Shaw in Iran?

I don't know what your opinions are for the Daily Show, but they spin fact in some funny ways from time to time. This is the "history lesson" Bill Orielly doesn't want anyone to talk about.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=iZ1_R6UUSGE

If Ron Paul doesn't win the election we know it's rigged.

Originally Posted by R.D.735

And won't he come back the next day to beat you up again for winning the last fight?

Generally they will not, but some will. Al Qaeda is one of the bullies that will. I dealt with bullies when I was a kid, and I beat up all of the ones who ever got violent with me. Only one of them started a fight with me a second time, and he did not do it a third time. But Al Qaeda is the type that would. However, they are also the type of bully that will grow to be much bigger if we give him our lunch money. All bullies will keep coming back for lunch money if you keep giving it to them, and most bullies will add more and more demands if you cave into their demands. Al Qaeda is a bully that wants nothing short of an Islamic world that uses the Koran as its law book according to Al Qaeda's view on what it says. Nothing will stop them short of that. I don't know about you, but I refuse to go along with that. All we can do is fight them and scare them while we take away the poverty and despair that give them their power.

Originally Posted by R.D.735

Will you forever be forced to give in to the bully because you didn't beat him in a fight?

No. People who fight bullies are usually left alone, even if they lose. The fact that you are willing to fight at all is a very powerful deterrent. It is a deterrent for not only that bully. All of the other bullies will know what they will have to deal with if they screw with you.

Originally Posted by Mystic7

If Ron Paul doesn't win the election we know it's rigged.

Yeah, he's whipping major ass in the polls right now.

Originally Posted by jaasum

You mean like we did with the Shaw in Iran?

That was an unfortunate Cold War matter. It might not have been the best move, but it was understandable. And we won the Cold War, which was necessary for the preservation of democracy.

I love relating the political history and foreign relations of the entire middle east with the western world to school-ground drama.

Originally Posted by jaasum

I love relating the political history and foreign relations of the entire middle east with the western world to school-ground drama.

There are important parallels. Al Qaeda is really just a big organization of bullies with absurd demands, as are the other Islamofascist terrorist organizations.

It isn't as simple of a comparison though. They aren't just "schoolyard bullies" if we are going to relate them to school then I would say it's something along the lines of columbine. These are people that have been irritated and harassed to the point of insanity, where they will kill without mercy. It has been going on much longer than the US also. It didn't help that George Bush called this a "crusade" lol.

Originally Posted by jaasum

if we are going to relate them to school then I would say it's something along the lines of columbine.

I totally agree with that, except the Columbine killers didn't have demands. They just wanted to kill. Now that I think about it, Al Qaeda would still be obsessed with killing even if they ever did achieve their version of an Islamic world. Columbine might be a perfect analogy.

Originally Posted by jaasum

These are people that have been irritated and harassed to the point of insanity, where they will kill without mercy.

Most of them have been brainwashed by their Al Qaeda leaders, who were evil even before the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. Good people generally don't suddenly become evil because they were harassed in adtulthood.

Originally Posted by jaasum

It didn't help that George Bush called this a "crusade" lol.

That might be the dumbest thing that ever came out of his mouth.

Look, I think a more homeward focus of security will help us. We are more concerned with the borders of foreign countries than our own. 9/11 happened because our security was a mess.

This is another thing about Ron Paul. If our policy wasn't to obey terrorists 9/11 wouldn't have happened. If the Airlines carried guns to protect their passengers this wouldn't have happened. If private property was respected and the government wasn't involved at every corner, this wouldn't have happened. If we were never meddling in the middle east this never would have happened. This is why I support Ron Paul.

Then on the media they make it sound like he thinks that the PASSENGERS should carry guns. That is NOT what he supports, he advocated the airlines carry guns. Sort of a side-note but you see what I am saying? About our security?

PS. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamofascism

PS to my PS

You sorta agreed with me now I don't know what to do lol.

Originally Posted by jaasum

Look, I think a more homeward focus of security will help us. We are more concerned with the borders of foreign countries than our own. 9/11 happened because our security was a mess.

This is another thing about Ron Paul. If our policy wasn't to obey terrorists 9/11 wouldn't have happened. If the Airlines carried guns to protect their passengers this wouldn't have happened. If private property was respected and the government wasn't involved at every corner, this wouldn't have happened. If we were never meddling in the middle east this never would have happened. This is why I support Ron Paul.

Then on the media they make it sound like he thinks that the PASSENGERS should carry guns. That is NOT what he supports, he advocated the airlines carry guns. Sort of a side-note but you see what I am saying? About our security?

I agree with most of that. I don't agree that if we didn't have a presence in the Middle East 9/11 would not have happened. It probably would have happened a different way at a different time, but we are hated because of our "infidel" culture. That is a fact. And now that we are at war with Islamofascism, pulling out of the Middle East is not going to influence them to call off the war. We went to war with Japan mainly because of Pearl Harbor, but pulling out of Pearl Harbor was not enough to stop us from attacking Japan. The surrender Japan signed had a list of demands. We ended up rewriting their constitution. Al Qaeda and other Islamofascists want more from us than for us to pull out of the Middle East.

For a direct reading of what Bin Laden wants from us and is calling us to do, read the answer to Q2 of his letter. Here it is. Please read it.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/securi...021120-ubl.htm

After a very, very long list of incredibly unrealistic demands of turning our entire culture into an oppressive Islamic Hell hole of uptight ridiculousness, he says, "If you fail to respond to these conditions, then prepare to fight with the Islamic nation."

I am not disagreeing with you about them, about their ideology. If we pulled out then they would turn on their own governments. And their own governments can fight the war with them.

If they truly hated our culture then there is other countries that are much more liberal and free than we are, the attack us because of our policy, while they simply disagree with other cultures.

I will read the letter, but you should also watch the latest Bin Laden tape, where he talks about our policy and why that is the reason they hate us, and he mentions other cultures and Christians like our country and that he has no quarrel with them. He ideologies such as yours with the "spreading of democracy" as something that needs islam to cure it. This is where he crosses the line. But no I directly disagree with you that if we never have messed with the middle east this still would have happened. If we left them alone they could give a flying fuck if our women can drive.

I don't think we should continue this conversation until you have read his answer to Q2 of the letter. You are overlooking some very important stuff. I edited my post at about the time you left your last one, so please make sure you catch what I said.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

After a very, very long list of incredibly unrealistic demands of turning our entire culture into an oppressive Islamic Hell hole of uptight ridiculousness, he says, "If you fail to respond to these conditions, then prepare to fight with the Islamic nation."

We are seen as the leaders of Western culture, and that is why he is talking to us about the Islamization demands.

I don't really have time right now, I will read it, but I have already told you that I am aware of his intentions to convert the entire west to islam.

Originally Posted by jaasum

I don't really have time right now, I will read it, but I have already told you that I am aware of his intentions to convert the entire west to islam.

He is not just trying to convert the West to Islam in the way Jehovah's witnesses knock on doors and smile while talking about pamphlets. He said, "If you fail to respond to these conditions, then prepare to fight with the Islamic nation."

I didn't say convert in that way, I know he will not stop until the entire west converts to islam and he intends to continue his attacks until we wake up to this fact.

Ron Paul is no idiot, he has read more than you have on the subject. Not to mention he has spent ten years in congress. He is the only one acting on valid intelligence, whereas Rudy and the rest of the neo cons just pull off of fabricated emotional ideals. "I was there on 9/11"

Originally Posted by jaasum

I didn't say convert in that way, I know he will not stop until the entire west converts to islam and he intends to continue his attacks until we wake up to this fact.

Ron Paul is no idiot, he has read more than you have on the subject.

What does Ron Paul think of the Bin Laden quote? He seems to think that if we pull out of the Middle East the war is over. If we pull out of the Middle East, we will not be removing the source of the hate. We will be rewarding it.

We will only be rewarding ourselves by allowing our focus to return to our own country. We would allow ourselves to focus on more accurate and effective security measures to prevent any future 9/11's. My point all along has been that the war in Iraq, the impending one in Iran and even the occupation of Afghanistan are NOT helping our security goals or helping fight the terrorist group that attacked us.

What you say will fuel the terrorist groups is a hypothetical from the same people who said this will be easy, a "couple of months" but in reality everything we have done in Iraq has actually grown, as in new members, Al Qeada, this group didn't even exist in Iraq before we were there. We aren't "sucking them out of the woodwork" we are showing the middle east that the terrorists were right about American foreign policy. You still haven't even commented on all the historical points I made about our involvement in the middle east. Do you have anything to say about that? Forgetting it is proving the terrorists point. They don't forget, just like we don't forget the horrible things that happen to us. Our only problem is we forget the horrible things we do to them.