ron paul's historic what if speech

[The Rabbi]

we didn't... every other civilized country that had to end slavery, simply had the government buy the slaves off the slave owners. Wouldn't this have been better than the civil war?

You honestly think slavery caused the civil war???

let me guess you think its "state's rights"

Damn sure wasn't slavery.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

This coming from the same man that said we didn't need to fight the civil war!

we didn't... every other civilized country that had to end slavery, simply had the government buy the slaves off the slave owners. Wouldn't this have been better than the civil war?

I you kidding, if your claims and directions are wrong and we follow them, then Islamofacist will dig in further and further, develop weapons and armies on par with us and then who knows what happens after that!

The fact of the matter is we can't ignore the rest of the world like Ron Paul has stated. That is even more true today! Can we and should we scale back, absolutely! I'm sorry, even though at times Ron Paul has great ideas, his radical ideas always seem to place him into the Nuthouse corner!

Islamofacism is a threat and, unlike Ron "Chamberlain" Paul, WE CAN'T IGNORE IT!

and what got them after us in the first place?

All hail God Paul!

I completely stop all arguments with a person who says the civil war didn't need to be fought, because they lack logic or reason. No reason to proceed any further!

That's because you'd rather attack the messenger than the message.

 

[rightwinger]

Ron Paul completely ambivalent of the US role as a Superpower. Ron ignores WWII, the Cold War, the war on terrorism....
Ron would have us return to the isolationist policies of the 1930s

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Ron Paul completely ambivalent of the US role as a Superpower. Ron ignores WWII, the Cold War, the war on terrorism....
Ron would have us return to the isolationist policies of the 1930s

This is incorrect.

 

[BasicGreatGuy]

Ron Paul completely ambivalent of the US role as a Superpower. Ron ignores WWII, the Cold War, the war on terrorism....
Ron would have us return to the isolationist policies of the 1930s

The U.S. has never practiced isolationism.

 

[Contumacious]

Ron Paul completely ambivalent of the US role as a Superpower. Ron ignores WWII, the Cold War, the war on terrorism....
Ron would have us return to the isolationist policies of the 1930s

The U.S. has never practiced isolationism.

The US should have practiced NEUTRALITY and NON-INTERVENTIONISM.

.

 

[uptownlivin90]

The guy says a big anti-military speech and all you libs cheer him but wait until he talks about reducing the size of government to its constitutional limits and you cry what an evil man he is.

Anyways, I kind of agree with Ron Paul a little because military should only be used for defending our interest around the world and not for creating a global military presence. At one time conservatives were isolationist who did not want to get involved with wars in other countries unless it happen to involve us directly. I think it might be time to revise that policy.

Let me clarify:

1. I'm not anti-war, I'm anti-stupid war that waists money. Couldn't care less if we went to war... just as long as it gets us all something in return besides a kick in the ass 30 years later.

2. Sure if isolationism is your thing fine.

3. As for big government, small government, it's funny because alot of "small government" folks believe in small government, until it comes down to forcing kids to say the pledge, teaching them "values" in schools instead of reading, and making people have "pro-American" views. Then there's the let's through away billions on criminal banks that'll probably end up in the same place in the next 15 years, but if you want a road or a bridge, that's "waistful spending".

4. I agree with Paul on the 2nd Amendment and waistful spending as it relates to stupid sh** that nobody really needs.

Paul is a good man. He's not a coward he stood for his principles (whether or not I agree with all of them) when they weren't popular. I respect that in a man... putting all this, "you evil liberal commie" partisan bullshit aside... and looking at reality... there are dirty and respectable politicians on BOTH sides. turns out most of the dirty ones work together regardless of their political affiliation to f-up the country.

 

[uptownlivin90]

You honestly think slavery caused the civil war???

let me guess you think its "state's rights"

Damn sure wasn't slavery.

Kind of states rights. Kind of economic greed. Kind of a culture war between north and south. Kind of stupidity on both sides. But not much slavery is in there at all, I'll agree.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

WTG Dr. Paul!!

 

[Charles Stucker]

This coming from the same man that said we didn't need to fight the civil war!

WE didn't. The people in the United States and Confederate States in 1860-1865 fought the civil war. A strong case can be made for the following three propositions
1 - The secession of the Southern states was legal
2 - Even if Lincoln had allowed them to go without a fight, the secession of the Southern states was a mistake
3 - Lincoln's use of force to compel the states to return was a mistake

Islamofacism is a threat and, unlike Ron "Chamberlain" Paul, WE CAN'T IGNORE IT!

Given the postulate that Islamofascism is a threat, the optimum solution to it may not lie in military action. Paul is putting forward the thesis that a different policy could be more successful with less cost. If the only way to completely eradicate Islamofascism proved to be eliminating all higher (multicellular) life on Earth, would you find the price too high?
If Islamofascism could be countered to an extent which guaranteed the USA would never be invaded by their armies nor have to fight them on foreign shores by spending $10 billion a year on non-violent opposition would you still prefer to destroy all life on Earth?

Unless all the options are explored, a blind refusal to listen is untenable. A very strong case can be made that sending troops into foreign countries does not weaken Islamofascism, and may in fact strengthen it.

 

[Contumacious]

If the only way to completely eradicate Islamofascism proved to be eliminating all higher (multicellular) life on Earth, would you find the price too high?.

The ONLY way to completely eradicate "Islamofascism" is for the US to cease and desist intervening in the ME.

.

 

[Charles Stucker]

The ONLY way to completely eradicate "Islamofascism" is for the US to cease and desist intervening in the ME.

I don't know if that will eradicate it, but it would probably make the US a non-target.
Oh wait that would be giving up, and wouldn't we rather the country was impoverished with millions of dead than be losers who "GIVE UP" !!!!!!

 

[Contumacious]

The ONLY way to completely eradicate "Islamofascism" is for the US to cease and desist intervening in the ME.

I don't know if that will eradicate it, but it would probably make the US a non-target.
Oh wait that would be giving up, and wouldn't we rather the country was impoverished with millions of dead than be losers who "GIVE UP" !!!!!!

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1bm2GPoFfg"]What motivated the 9/11 hijackers? See testimony most didn't[/ame]