Getting tired of Ron Paul

[majorownage]

Switzerland is not the most powerful country in the world. A comparison can't even be drawn.

What about Rome?

[CJ]

What about Rome?

Seems like you're unaware of what I'm advocating, and just assuming. To answer your question, the Romans empire fell for a variety of reasons. The rise of Islam, over extending their territorial responsibilities, etc. I'm talking about Iran and nuclear weapons, and advocating cutting off almost all foreign aid.

[majorownage]

Seems like you're unaware of what I'm advocating, and just assuming. To answer your question, the Romans empire fell for a variety of reasons. The rise of Islam, over extending their territorial responsibilities, etc. I'm talking about Iran and nuclear weapons, and advocating cutting off almost all foreign aid.

Maybe if they had nuclear weapons we would think twice about invading them.

The Soviets had thousands, and we didn't need to invade them.

[Marklar]

Ron Paul has threatened to go third party if he loses the nomination (which he will). That would essentially give obama the election.

He wont. He's saying the same thing now that he said in 2008 and he didn't run third party in '08 either.

Plus in an interview with... Wolf Blitzer maybe?.... he sort of slipped and said something to the effect of he wouldn't endorse a third party candidate because his main focus is getting Obama out of office.. Can't remember exactly what he said but it was something like that.

[CJ]

Maybe if they had nuclear weapons we would think twice about invading them.

The Soviets had thousands, and we didn't need to invade them.

When did I say anything about invading them? Am I going to be a part of your conversation?

[CJ]

He wont. He's saying the same thing now that he said in 2008 and he didn't run third party in '08 either.

Plus in an interview with... Wolf Blitzer maybe?.... he sort of slipped and said something to the effect of he wouldn't endorse a third party candidate because his main focus is getting Obama out of office.. Can't remember exactly what he said but it was something like that.

I don't think he will either, my post may be misinterpreted as saying he will run third party. I was saying he won't get the nomination, and has given hint he might run third party. But again, I don't think he will.

[mikec]

On the topic of crazy countries of the middle east, how can we be certain that if they do get nuclear weapons that they would come after us? How can we say with any degree of certainty that they wouldn't set about trying to conquer the lands around them? What proof do we actually have that shows they are close to achieving their goals? There are so many areas in which we truly don't have the actual answer that no one, imo, can say with any degree of certainty what will or will not happen. It's all supposition. I just don't agree that we should stay the course and keep doing what we are when it is resulting in that which we see transpiring in todays society. It's obviously not working, something is broken and the same old song and dance is NOT the answer.

And I agree that he is not the perfect candidate, but he's all we have. Newt is releasing his book after the election, which by all reports espouses the exact opposite of what a true conservative believes. It's just more of the same. They tell us what we want to hear, then go back to those indelibly etched in the sand party lines, which are by design preventing us from exploring an alternative solution to the problems that plague our country.

We have got to find a way to eliminate the two party system and begin to work together.

[majorownage]

When did I say anything about invading them? Am I going to be a part of your conversation?

Reading in between the lines.

Neo-con typical-ness.

[Hobie]

We used to produce propaganda encouraging nuclear power in Iran when the dictator we put in power was still running the show.

In 2003 we were told Saddam had nukes and was linked to 9/11. We maimed and sacrificed thousands of American Soldiers, not to mention killing many more locals, all because of complete lies.

Seems like the gov't is just crying wolf again to get taxpayers to buy fuel for the war machine.

[CJ]

On the topic of crazy countries of the middle east, how can we be certain that if they do get nuclear weapons that they would come after us? How can we say with any degree of certainty that they wouldn't set about trying to conquer the lands around them? What proof do we actually have that shows they are close to achieving their goals?

Iran has said countless times in official public statements (and even in the US itself) that they aim to wipe Israel and the "Great Evil" (That's their name for the U.S.) off the face of the earth. That's a country publicly stating they intend to destroy Israel and the US. Are they serious? Is it all just a show? Possibly. More than likely I believe this is a 40% chance they would nuke anyone, and 95% chance it would be Israel. They do have the capability right now to deliver a nuclear weapon to the United States. And Israel is no problem with the Sejil, and Shahab-3 missile systems.

One of the lands around Iran is Israel, btw. And would you feel comfortable with them taking over surrounding nations? Germany did this before they invaded Europe.

As far as proof they are achieving their goals, it all comes from intelligence, and I can assure you if they had already achieved it, we wouldn't even know. Israel and the US are almost certainty leading the intelligence on this one.

[CJ]

Reading in between the lines.

Neo-con typical-ness.

Reading between the lines is code for not reading shit.

[mikec]

The war machine equals a profit machine for all those in power. Simple enough equation.

[mikec]

Iran has said countless times in official public statements (and even in the US itself) that they aim to wipe Israel and the "Great Evil" (That's their name for the U.S.) off the face of the earth. That's a country publicly stating they intend to destroy Israel and the US. Are they serious? Is it all just a show? Possibly. More than likely I believe this is a 40% chance they would nuke anyone, and 95% chance it would be Israel. They do have the capability right now to deliver a nuclear weapon to the United States. And Israel is no problem with the Sejil, and Shahab-3 missile systems.

One of the lands around Iran is Israel, btw. And would you feel comfortable with them taking over surrounding nations? Germany did this before they invaded Europe.

As far as proof they are achieving their goals, it all comes from intelligence, and I can assure you if they had already achieved it, we wouldn't even know. Israel and the US are almost certainty leading the intelligence on this one.

Then there really is no answer to this. We have no real choice but to continue wasting billions we don't have, and sending thousands of our children to their deaths.

Sure wish we could just turn them all to glass and say to hell with it. Sure would stop a lot our bitching and moaning... :wink1:

And no, I would not.

[CJ]

In 2003 we were told Saddam had nukes and was linked to 9/11. We maimed and sacrificed thousands of American Soldiers, not to mention killing many more locals, all because of complete lies.

That's true, intelligence can be damn risky. I wouldn't call them lies (unless you think there is a conspiracy theory there), it was bad intelligence. But consider this - all of the war losses post WW2 are a drop in the pan compared to that war. And Ron Paul-like Isolationism played a very large part in allowing that war to blossom. Libertarians in congress advocated staying out of that "distant country" and how Europe "isn't our problem, or our concern." When Japan started invading China, Korea, and the Pacific Islands the isolationist Libertarians of the time advocated not intervening, and after lots of pressure it culminated into an embargo on Japan which resulted in Pearl Harbor.

I'm not a war hawk whatsoever. I am however not going to blindly follow either an Isolationist or chicken hawk approach. Sometimes you need to be proactive, sometimes you don't. But sticking to one or the other blinding has proven a very costly mistake in the past.

[teal93derp]

Iran has said countless times in official public statements (and even in the US itself) that they aim to wipe Israel and the "Great Evil" (That's their name for the U.S.) off the face of the earth. That's a country publicly stating they intend to destroy Israel and the US. Are they serious? Is it all just a show? Possibly. More than likely I believe this is a 40% chance they would nuke anyone, and 95% chance it would be Israel. They do have the capability right now to deliver a nuclear weapon to the United States. And Israel is no problem with the Sejil, and Shahab-3 missile systems.

One of the lands around Iran is Israel, btw. And would you feel comfortable with them taking over surrounding nations? Germany did this before they invaded Europe.

As far as proof they are achieving their goals, it all comes from intelligence, and I can assure you if they had already achieved it, we wouldn't even know. Israel and the US are almost certainty leading the intelligence on this one.

Here's a little article about those alleged Iran statements. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...ended-launch-/
Let's see your proof of Iran saying they want to "wipe them off the face of the earth" since you've said they've said this "countless times."