Political Junky
Gold Member
- May 27, 2009
- 25,793
- 3,990
- 280
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Ron Paul: US Should Not Support Israel's Gaza Blockade
- Thread starter Political Junky
- Start date
William Joyce
Chemotherapy for PC
Amen.
Ron Paul's got balls.
Ron Paul's got balls.
I've said for years he was a damned fool.
- Banned
- #5
...?!does good golly ollie favor stealing unknown illion$ from american taxpayers and giving it to some stinking motherfucking iZraeli politicians?!..
...(many of these stooooooooooopid fuck republicrats' opinions about 'the middle east' could be summarized by a stinking parrot trained to squawk, "israel is our friend...SQUAWK...they are the only democracy over there..SQUAWK..)
...stfu, you republicrat idiot..anyone with a stinking teevee set knows what you 'think' about 'the middle east'..
...Zionist cheerleaders, fuck you...the rest of you, have a good day!..
VaYank5150
Gold Member
We can't afford to support this anyway..we don't have any money, remember?
Tech_Esq
Sic Semper Tyrannis!
Ron Paul's response is doctrinaire Libertarianism. This is really the focal point of the wedge between conservatives and Libertarians. Libertarians do not believe in a robust defense and foreign policy and conservatives are more along the lines of Hans Morganthau and Real Politick in their view of both Foreign policy and National defense.
(Note here for the left-wingnuts -- this is distinguished from the "NeoCons" who operate on a completely different theory that includes democratic hegemony and an forward leaning, almost offensive, National defense policy including the theory of pre-emption).
I would say Paul's comments are consistent with where Paul has always been on these issues and this isn't news.
(Note here for the left-wingnuts -- this is distinguished from the "NeoCons" who operate on a completely different theory that includes democratic hegemony and an forward leaning, almost offensive, National defense policy including the theory of pre-emption).
I would say Paul's comments are consistent with where Paul has always been on these issues and this isn't news.
Last edited:
...?!does good golly ollie favor stealing unknown illion$ from american taxpayers and giving it to some stinking motherfucking iZraeli politicians?!..
...(many of these stooooooooooopid fuck republicrats' opinions about 'the middle east' could be summarized by a stinking parrot trained to squawk, "israel is our friend...SQUAWK...they are the only democracy over there..SQUAWK..)
...stfu, you republicrat idiot..anyone with a stinking teevee set knows what you 'think' about 'the middle east'..
...Zionist cheerleaders, fuck you...the rest of you, have a good day!..
Kiss my ass, any time you want to actually debate a subject bring a permission slip from mommy and let's go. Other wise STFU.
Gunny
Gold Member
Amen.
Ron Paul's got balls.
Nah. That would make him a pussy.
- Banned
- #11
"Libertarians do not believe in a robust defense and foreign policy
... ..what miserable horseshit!..every libertarian i know favors ROBUST DEFENSE of AMERICANS HERE IN AMERICA..(apparently this republicrat gets his 'knowledge' of 'Libertarianism' from glen stinking beck, kneel boor, etc. republicrat radio fuckheads galore)
and conservatives are more along the lines of Hans Morganthau and Real Politick in their view of both Foreign policy and National defense.
...there's hardly a sliver of difference between the stinking motherfucking 'conservative' republicrats and the stinking motherfucking 'liberal' republicrats when it comes to 'foreign policy' etc..they 'both' support using 'the military' etc. as a global policeman and executioner to facilitate world-wide corporate profiteering, adventurism, etc...
...i remember asking a stoooooooooooopid conservative republicrat cheerleader some years ago, 'why should the US favor israel in 'foreign policy?'...the stoooopid fuck answered something like, 'because the jews are "the chosen people"..(and this stoooooopid self-loather calls himself a 'christian'!!)
...i asked him to explain what he meant by 'the jews are the chosen people' and a bunch of ooga booga bullshit came out of his asskisser that i wouldn't attempt to recall here..
...are there any of you stoooooooopid republicrat rush limbag glen beck fucks here who think "the jews are the chosen people?"..if so, explain why...please put your fucking ooga booga here in print for all to see..
...btw, no decent libertarian cares what you stooooooooopid fuck republicrats do with YOUR money, life, etc..if you stoooopoid fucks want to give YOUR money, life, etc. to some stinking, crazy, zionist motherfuckers, GO FOR IT!!!..
...but decent people don't want your miserable, vicious 'zionism' financed, in any way, from the US treasury, you miserable, stooooooopid republicrat fucks....
..the rest of you, have a good day!...
...
..what miserable horseshit!..every libertarian i know favors ROBUST DEFENSE of AMERICANS HERE IN AMERICA..(apparently this republicrat gets his 'knowledge' of 'Libertarianism' from glen stinking beck, kneel boor, etc. republicrat radio fuckheads galore) and conservatives are more along the lines of Hans Morganthau and Real Politick in their view of both Foreign policy and National defense.
...there's hardly a sliver of difference between the stinking motherfucking 'conservative' republicrats and the stinking motherfucking 'liberal' republicrats when it comes to 'foreign policy' etc..they 'both' support using 'the military' etc. as a global policeman and executioner to facilitate world-wide corporate profiteering, adventurism, etc...
...i remember asking a stoooooooooooopid conservative republicrat cheerleader some years ago, 'why should the US favor israel in 'foreign policy?'...the stoooopid fuck answered something like, 'because the jews are "the chosen people"..(and this stoooooopid self-loather calls himself a 'christian'!!)
...i asked him to explain what he meant by 'the jews are the chosen people' and a bunch of ooga booga bullshit came out of his asskisser that i wouldn't attempt to recall here..
...are there any of you stoooooooopid republicrat rush limbag glen beck fucks here who think "the jews are the chosen people?"..if so, explain why...please put your fucking ooga booga here in print for all to see..
...btw, no decent libertarian cares what you stooooooooopid fuck republicrats do with YOUR money, life, etc..if you stoooopoid fucks want to give YOUR money, life, etc. to some stinking, crazy, zionist motherfuckers, GO FOR IT!!!..
...but decent people don't want your miserable, vicious 'zionism' financed, in any way, from the US treasury, you miserable, stooooooopid republicrat fucks....
..the rest of you, have a good day!...
- Banned
- #12
...btw, for those of you republicrat dumbassess who think there's some 'important difference' between the stinking R's/cons. and the D's/libs. as to 'foreign policy,' GET REAL..'US foreign policy' has been REMARKABLY BI-PARTISAN FOR DECADES!
America's Empire of Bases
"America's Empire of Bases
by Chalmers Johnson
As distinct from other peoples, most Americans do not recognize -- or do not want to recognize -- that the United States dominates the world through its military power. Due to government secrecy, our citizens are often ignorant of the fact that our garrisons encircle the planet. This vast network of American bases on every continent except Antarctica actually constitutes a new form of empire -- an empire of bases with its own geography not likely to be taught in any high school geography class. Without grasping the dimensions of this globe-girdling Baseworld, one can't begin to understand the size and nature of our imperial aspirations or the degree to which a new kind of militarism is undermining our constitutional order.
Our military deploys well over half a million soldiers, spies, technicians, teachers, dependents, and civilian contractors in other nations. To dominate the oceans and seas of the world, we are creating some thirteen naval task forces built around aircraft carriers whose names sum up our martial heritage -- Kitty Hawk, Constellation, Enterprise, John F. Kennedy, Nimitz, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Carl Vinson, Theodore Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, John C. Stennis, Harry S. Truman, and Ronald Reagan. We operate numerous secret bases outside our territory to monitor what the people of the world, including our own citizens, are saying, faxing, or e-mailing to one another.
Our installations abroad bring profits to civilian industries, which design and manufacture weapons for the armed forces or, like the now well-publicized Kellogg, Brown & Root company, a subsidiary of the Halliburton Corporation of Houston, undertake contract services to build and maintain our far-flung outposts. One task of such contractors is to keep uniformed members of the imperium housed in comfortable quarters, well fed, amused, and supplied with enjoyable, affordable vacation facilities. Whole sectors of the American economy have come to rely on the military for sales. On the eve of our second war on Iraq, for example, while the Defense Department was ordering up an extra ration of cruise missiles and depleted-uranium armor-piercing tank shells, it also acquired 273,000 bottles of Native Tan sunblock, almost triple its 1999 order and undoubtedly a boon to the supplier, Control Supply Company of Tulsa, Oklahoma, and its subcontractor, Sun Fun Products of Daytona Beach, Florida.
At Least Seven Hundred Foreign Bases
It's not easy to assess the size or exact value of our empire of bases. Official records on these subjects are misleading, although instructive. According to the Defense Department's annual "Base Structure Report" for fiscal year 2003, which itemizes foreign and domestic U.S. military real estate, the Pentagon currently owns or rents 702 overseas bases in about 130 countries and HAS another 6,000 bases in the United States and its territories. Pentagon bureaucrats calculate that it would require at least $113.2 billion to replace just the foreign bases -- surely far too low a figure but still larger than the gross domestic product of most countries -- and an estimated $591,519.8 million to replace all of them. The military high command deploys to our overseas bases some 253,288 uniformed personnel, plus an equal number of dependents and Department of Defense civilian officials, and employs an additional 44,446 locally hired foreigners. The Pentagon claims that these bases contain 44,870 barracks, hangars, hospitals, and other buildings, which it owns, and that it leases 4,844 more.
These numbers, although staggeringly large, do not begin to cover all the actual bases we occupy globally. The 2003 Base Status Report fails to mention, for instance, any garrisons in Kosovo -- even though it is the site of the huge Camp Bondsteel, built in 1999 and maintained ever since by Kellogg, Brown & Root. The Report similarly omits bases in Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Qatar, and Uzbekistan, although the U.S. military has established colossal base structures throughout the so-called arc of instability in the two-and-a-half years since 9/11.
For Okinawa, the southernmost island of Japan, which has been an American military colony for the past 58 years, the report deceptively lists only one Marine base, Camp Butler, when in fact Okinawa "hosts" ten Marine Corps bases, including Marine Corps Air Station Futenma occupying 1,186 acres in the center of that modest-sized island's second largest city. (Manhattan's Central Park, by contrast, is only 843 acres.) The Pentagon similarly fails to note all of the $5-billion-worth of military and espionage installations in Britain, which have long been conveniently disguised as Royal Air Force bases. If there were an honest count, the actual size of our military empire would probably top 1,000 different bases in other people's countries, but no one -- possibly not even the Pentagon -- knows the exact number for sure, although it has been distinctly on the rise in recent years...."
between the stinking R's/cons. and the D's/libs. as to 'foreign policy,' GET REAL..'US foreign policy' has been REMARKABLY BI-PARTISAN FOR DECADES!America's Empire of Bases
"America's Empire of Bases
by Chalmers Johnson
As distinct from other peoples, most Americans do not recognize -- or do not want to recognize -- that the United States dominates the world through its military power. Due to government secrecy, our citizens are often ignorant of the fact that our garrisons encircle the planet. This vast network of American bases on every continent except Antarctica actually constitutes a new form of empire -- an empire of bases with its own geography not likely to be taught in any high school geography class. Without grasping the dimensions of this globe-girdling Baseworld, one can't begin to understand the size and nature of our imperial aspirations or the degree to which a new kind of militarism is undermining our constitutional order.
Our military deploys well over half a million soldiers, spies, technicians, teachers, dependents, and civilian contractors in other nations. To dominate the oceans and seas of the world, we are creating some thirteen naval task forces built around aircraft carriers whose names sum up our martial heritage -- Kitty Hawk, Constellation, Enterprise, John F. Kennedy, Nimitz, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Carl Vinson, Theodore Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, John C. Stennis, Harry S. Truman, and Ronald Reagan. We operate numerous secret bases outside our territory to monitor what the people of the world, including our own citizens, are saying, faxing, or e-mailing to one another.
Our installations abroad bring profits to civilian industries, which design and manufacture weapons for the armed forces or, like the now well-publicized Kellogg, Brown & Root company, a subsidiary of the Halliburton Corporation of Houston, undertake contract services to build and maintain our far-flung outposts. One task of such contractors is to keep uniformed members of the imperium housed in comfortable quarters, well fed, amused, and supplied with enjoyable, affordable vacation facilities. Whole sectors of the American economy have come to rely on the military for sales. On the eve of our second war on Iraq, for example, while the Defense Department was ordering up an extra ration of cruise missiles and depleted-uranium armor-piercing tank shells, it also acquired 273,000 bottles of Native Tan sunblock, almost triple its 1999 order and undoubtedly a boon to the supplier, Control Supply Company of Tulsa, Oklahoma, and its subcontractor, Sun Fun Products of Daytona Beach, Florida.
At Least Seven Hundred Foreign Bases
It's not easy to assess the size or exact value of our empire of bases. Official records on these subjects are misleading, although instructive. According to the Defense Department's annual "Base Structure Report" for fiscal year 2003, which itemizes foreign and domestic U.S. military real estate, the Pentagon currently owns or rents 702 overseas bases in about 130 countries and HAS another 6,000 bases in the United States and its territories. Pentagon bureaucrats calculate that it would require at least $113.2 billion to replace just the foreign bases -- surely far too low a figure but still larger than the gross domestic product of most countries -- and an estimated $591,519.8 million to replace all of them. The military high command deploys to our overseas bases some 253,288 uniformed personnel, plus an equal number of dependents and Department of Defense civilian officials, and employs an additional 44,446 locally hired foreigners. The Pentagon claims that these bases contain 44,870 barracks, hangars, hospitals, and other buildings, which it owns, and that it leases 4,844 more.
These numbers, although staggeringly large, do not begin to cover all the actual bases we occupy globally. The 2003 Base Status Report fails to mention, for instance, any garrisons in Kosovo -- even though it is the site of the huge Camp Bondsteel, built in 1999 and maintained ever since by Kellogg, Brown & Root. The Report similarly omits bases in Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Qatar, and Uzbekistan, although the U.S. military has established colossal base structures throughout the so-called arc of instability in the two-and-a-half years since 9/11.
For Okinawa, the southernmost island of Japan, which has been an American military colony for the past 58 years, the report deceptively lists only one Marine base, Camp Butler, when in fact Okinawa "hosts" ten Marine Corps bases, including Marine Corps Air Station Futenma occupying 1,186 acres in the center of that modest-sized island's second largest city. (Manhattan's Central Park, by contrast, is only 843 acres.) The Pentagon similarly fails to note all of the $5-billion-worth of military and espionage installations in Britain, which have long been conveniently disguised as Royal Air Force bases. If there were an honest count, the actual size of our military empire would probably top 1,000 different bases in other people's countries, but no one -- possibly not even the Pentagon -- knows the exact number for sure, although it has been distinctly on the rise in recent years...."
.., but no one -- possibly not even the Pentagon -- knows the exact number for sure, although it has been distinctly on the rise in recent years...."
Wow, and people actually believe this shit.
- Sep 2, 2008
- 33,178
- 3,055
- 48
Paul proving again why he bombs out on the national scene with conservatives. He is the crazy uncle of the Republican Party.
Actually, he just proves that's he not a neocon. Not invention is the heart of the Libertarian ideology, which happens to be the heart of Conservatism.
of course ronnie said that.
Paul proving again why he bombs out on the national scene with conservatives. He is the crazy uncle of the Republican Party.
Actually, he just proves that's he not a neocon. Not invention is the heart of the Libertarian ideology, which happens to be the heart of Conservatism.
non-interventionism has nothing to do with conservatism.
intervening 'conservatively'... and when appropriate does.
Soggy in NOLA
Diamond Member
- Jul 31, 2009
- 40,565
- 5,358
- 1,830
I wonder if he too thinks the Jews should go back to their homeland of Poland?
What the fuck is wrong with these people?
What the fuck is wrong with these people?
What world are you living in??? Israel needs us for EVERYTHING! Without us, there is no Israel.
Paul proving again why he bombs out on the national scene with conservatives. He is the crazy uncle of the Republican Party.
Actually, he just proves that's he not a neocon. Not invention is the heart of the Libertarian ideology, which happens to be the heart of Conservatism.
non-interventionism has nothing to do with conservatism.
intervening 'conservatively'... and when appropriate does.
Conservatism is all about intervention.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 17
- Views
- 356
- Replies
- 66
- Views
- 1K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 159
- Views
- 2K
- Replies
- 114
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 37
- Views
- 88
- Replies
- 258
- Views
- 1K
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8016
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 466
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-