Ron Paul: US Should Not Support Israel's Gaza Blockade

[Kevin_Kennedy]

You're the only one deflecting in this thread. I've answered and corrected any claims made about libertarianism in this thread, and have done so comfortably. I have no problem expounding any views that I hold, or explaining whether all libertarians agree on a given issue or not. You, however, would rather deflect from discussing your own imperialist views by saying they're not relevant to this thread. Have you not given your opinion on U.S. policy towards Israel in this thread the same as Ron Paul has? Therefore your imperialist views are as relevant to this thread as Ron Paul's libertarian views.

i'm afraid i've never seen a 'libertarian' of today's ilk, (and i don't mean goldwater conservatives) acknowledge there is ever a war worth fighting or a foreign intervention of moment. there is also, clearly to those of us to whom the issue actually matters, a clear hatred of israel. it's just couched in terms like 'we shouldn't give money'...

yet, i've never seen a single one of you post thread after thread talking about the money we give to the pals, to saudi arabia or to any other country... it's ALWAYS israel that's the focus.

you can try to disprove that all you want...

and now you'll say 'i don't think we should intervene at all'

which means the only one we say drop dead to is israel.

Libertarians see war as the health of the state, and history shows that that's an accurate belief. We believe the only just war is a purely defensive war, and, in my opinion, there has only been one in our history. That being the Revolutionary War. Now that is not a doctrinaire libertarian position, because as I said before many libertarians would say WW2 was just as well. As for foreign interventions of the moment, none of them are defensive so why would we support them?

I've already stated in this thread that we shouldn't be giving any money to the Palestinians.

I'm sure you can supply evidence of Ron Paul stating that he hates Israel, and I'm sure you can supply evidence that anyone who supports Ron Paul hates Israel as well. That will be tough, because as a supporter of Ron Paul I can honestly say that I don't hate Israel at all. We simply don't believe that the U.S. should be funding Israel, or Palestinians, or Canada, or anyone else for that matter. But you're so touchy about Israel that you're quick to jump the gun and brand anyone who disagrees with anything Israel does, or the money that we give to Israel, as a person who hates Israel or just Jews in general.

Now, for whatever reason, it's clear you simply want to believe that all libertarians hold some special hatred for Israel, for whatever reason, when that's not the case. You know that libertarians would oppose funding any country, but you think we hate Israel because we don't make an exception for them. The reason Israel gets criticized for this more than other countries, and I agree with you that they do, is because the relationship between the U.S. and Israel is always put up on a pedestal far more than other countries the U.S. funds. And you can't deny that.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

It's all the fault of the "neo-cons" which is code for "Jews."

It would not surprise me if anti-semitism was latent in the narco-libertarian movement.

No, actually, neocon is code for "supporter of big government that pretends to be a conservative." Such as yourself.

 

[jillian]

It's all the fault of the "neo-cons" which is code for "Jews."

It would not surprise me if anti-semitism was latent in the narco-libertarian movement.

No, actually, neocon is code for "supporter of big government that pretends to be a conservative." Such as yourself.

no--neocon is someone who thinks the mideast, and therefore the geopolitical map- can be changed by overly aggressive pre-emptive military action.

from the horses' mouths at the PNAC:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm

 

[nraforlife]

...........and what's it to ya?

Just interested in FULL Disclosure as to WHY you place the interests of a foreign state above those of the American People. Its because you are a jew isn't it.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

It's all the fault of the "neo-cons" which is code for "Jews."

It would not surprise me if anti-semitism was latent in the narco-libertarian movement.

No, actually, neocon is code for "supporter of big government that pretends to be a conservative." Such as yourself.

no--neocon is someone who thinks the mideast, and therefore the geopolitical map- can be changed by overly aggressive pre-emptive military action.

from the horses' mouths at the PNAC:

Statement of Principles

Like I said, supporter of big government.

 

[The Rabbi]

It's all the fault of the "neo-cons" which is code for "Jews."

It would not surprise me if anti-semitism was latent in the narco-libertarian movement.

No, actually, neocon is code for "supporter of big government that pretends to be a conservative." Such as yourself.

Actually the only definition of neo con that would fit me as well is "Jew". So I guess i'm right after all.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

It's all the fault of the "neo-cons" which is code for "Jews."

It would not surprise me if anti-semitism was latent in the narco-libertarian movement.

No, actually, neocon is code for "supporter of big government that pretends to be a conservative." Such as yourself.

Actually the only definition of neo con that would fit me as well is "Jew". So I guess i'm right after all.

Except there are neocons who aren't Jewish, so I guess you're wrong.

 

[CMike]

I don't accept the term neo con which has been developed by neo liberals.

I am a conservative.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I don't accept the term neo con which has been developed by neo liberals.

I am a conservative.

Neocons are one type of conservative, the dominant type in modern politics. There are also paleoconservatives such as Patrick Buchanan.

 

[CMike]

Conservatives can define themselves, we don't need the neo liberal libtards to define us.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Conservatives can define themselves, we don't need the neo liberal libtards to define us.

Well I'm not a neoliberal and I'm not defining conservatives, the definitions are already there. I'm merely explaining them.

 

[The Rabbi]

Conservatives can define themselves, we don't need the neo liberal libtards to define us.

Well I'm not a neoliberal and I'm not defining conservatives, the definitions are already there. I'm merely explaining them.

Bullshit. You are adding your own spin.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Conservatives can define themselves, we don't need the neo liberal libtards to define us.

Well I'm not a neoliberal and I'm not defining conservatives, the definitions are already there. I'm merely explaining them.

Bullshit. You are adding your own spin.

So then please explain to us the difference between a neoconservative and a paleoconservative.

 

[The Rabbi]

Well I'm not a neoliberal and I'm not defining conservatives, the definitions are already there. I'm merely explaining them.

Bullshit. You are adding your own spin.

So then please explain to us the difference between a neoconservative and a paleoconservative.

Since I don't know what either of those things is I can't explain it.
A neo conservative is a Jew who is pro Israel. But he can't be called a Jew by the Nativists on the right because that would sound like discrimination.
A paleoconservative is Pat Buchanan but he is called a paleoconservative because it makes it sound like he represents someone other than himself.

 

[CMike]

I think Buchanan is more a libertarian than a conservative.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Bullshit. You are adding your own spin.

So then please explain to us the difference between a neoconservative and a paleoconservative.

Since I don't know what either of those things is I can't explain it.
A neo conservative is a Jew who is pro Israel. But he can't be called a Jew by the Nativists on the right because that would sound like discrimination.
A paleoconservative is Pat Buchanan but he is called a paleoconservative because it makes it sound like he represents someone other than himself.

That's the only spin going on here. Anyone who disagrees with you must simply hate Jews.

The main difference between neocons and paleocons is foreign policy. Neocons are imperialists and paleocons are noninterventionists.

 

[The Rabbi]

I think Buchanan is more a libertarian than a conservative.

I dunno. The defining characteristic of narco-libertarians seems to be a narcissistic desire to turn the country into drug addled zombies. I dont know where Pat stands on that one. His foreign policy is certainly geared towards the cowardly narco-libs. But I would have to see his stance on abortions.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I think Buchanan is more a libertarian than a conservative.

You're wrong. Buchanan is a huge proponent of protectionism, which is a traditional conservative position, whereas libertarians favor free trade. Though you're right that paleocons such as Buchanan and libertarians have more in common than libertarians and neocons.

 

[CMike]

I think Buchanan is more a libertarian than a conservative.

I dunno. The defining characteristic of narco-libertarians seems to be a narcissistic desire to turn the country into drug addled zombies. I dont know where Pat stands on that one. His foreign policy is certainly geared towards the cowardly narco-libs. But I would have to see his stance on abortions.

That's true. I think he would be against legalizing all drugs.

However, he is liberterian as far as foreign policy.

 

[jillian]

No, actually, neocon is code for "supporter of big government that pretends to be a conservative." Such as yourself.

no--neocon is someone who thinks the mideast, and therefore the geopolitical map- can be changed by overly aggressive pre-emptive military action.

from the horses' mouths at the PNAC:

Statement of Principles

Like I said, supporter of big government.

that *whoosh* you just heard is the point going over your head.