And the beat goes on - and the beat goes on

[Joyful HoneyBee]

While the left and right keep slinging mud at one another, hoping against hope they'll stop sinking in the mire of the muck, Americans who are fed up with the status quo are working diligently to ensure that the next election returns a more desirable result. Folks on DP can deny it all they want, but Ron Paul is gaining an edge that will take him to the White House.

http://<iframe width="420" height="345" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/oULpsuoEY7c" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> (http://%3Ciframe%20width=%22420%22%20height=%22345%22%20s rc=%22http://www.youtube.com/embed/oULpsuoEY7c%22%20frameborder=%220%22%20allowfullsc reen%3E%3C/iframe%3E)

<iframe width="420" height="345" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/FO-EPg_F_GM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[red states rule]

You would have beter luck buying a Lotto ticket then putting your money on Ron Paul becoming President

You might have my support except the idiot said America brought 9/11 on itself. I would expect something like that from a liberal Dem and not a Republican

[Joyful HoneyBee]

What he actually said was that our policies brought 9/11 on America. Basically, he was pointing the finger at the political machine, not the American people.

Now, I expect others to twist that somehow. I would actually be shocked if they didn't, but, there is a distinct difference between the American people and the policies of the American government.

[red states rule]

What he actually said was that our policies brought 9/11 on America. Basically, he was pointing the finger at the political machine, not the American people.

Now, I expect others to twist that somehow. I would actually be shocked if they didn't, but, there is a distinct difference between the American people and the policies of the American government.

Poor spin dear

In the debate Paul said America brought 9/11 on itself and Rudy ripped him a new on (the crowd cheered)

Paul lost me for good with that one

When people jump 90 floors to advoid being burned alive due to a terrorist attack I will turn on any politican who then blames America and not the terrorists

Not twisting what he said - this is what he said

[Noir]

I like the idea of a none party president. But not Ron Paul.

I primary reason for that is this quote of his;

“I don’t see Islam as our enemy,” Paul said. “I see that motivation is occupation and those who hate us and would like to kill us, they are motivated by our invasion of their land, the support of their dictators that they hate."

It's start well enough, Islam is not our enemy, dogmatism is. But I'll leae that for now. The second part is so wrong it's laughable. Like a sniper using bollocks for ammunition, it's almost dumbfounding that a seemingly intelligent man can be so ignorant about such a detail.

As one example of what motivates the like of AQ I'd point to East Timor where we (the west) stopped a genocide taking place. Stopping that genocide was the reason behind the Bali Bombing, and several other terrorist attacks, and for it AQ have said they will 'never forgive the west for talking an Islamic republic away from them.

In other words, Mr Paul. If you don't want to upset these people, if you don't want to insult them or motivate them, you *must* be willing to let them commit genocide at will. Because if you don't you've brought any future attack on you upon yourself.

[red states rule]

I like the idea of a none party president. But not Ron Paul.

I primary reason for that is this quote of his;


It's start well enough, Islam is not our enemy, dogmatism is. But I'll leae that for now. The second part is so wrong it's laughable. Like a sniper using bollocks for ammunition, it's almost dumbfounding that a seemingly intelligent man can be so ignorant about such a detail.

As one example of what motivates the like of AQ I'd point to East Timor where we (the west) stopped a genocide taking place. Stopping that genocide was the reason behind the Bali Bombing, and several other terrorist attacks, and for it AQ have said they will 'never forgive the west for talking an Islamic republic away from them.

In other words, Mr Paul. If you don't want to upset these people, if you don't want to insult them or motivate them, you *must* be willing to let them commit genocide at will. Because if you don't you've brought any future attack on you upon yourself.


Holy cow

Hell has just forzen over since now that Noir and I agree on a foreign policy issue

Is Noir moving further to the right or am I moving further to the left? :laugh2:

[Noir]

Holy cow

Hell has just forzen over since now that Noir and I agree on a foreign policy issue

Is Noir moving further to the right or am I moving further to the left? :laugh2:

I think yourself (and maybe others) underestimate how much to the right I am, because I am not part of the Christian right as such. As my secularism by inference somewhat distorts the private/public bubbles IMO,

For example an issue like drugs; I would consider decriminalisation to be to the right, but rather it's part of the liberal left while the christain right reels aginst it.

[red states rule]

I think yourself (and maybe others) underestimate how much to the right I am, because I am not part of the Christian right as such. As my secularism by inference somewhat distorts the private/public bubbles IMO,

For example an issue like drugs; I would consider decriminalisation to be to the right, but rather it's part of the liberal left while the christain right reels aginst it.

I may have underestimated you Noir and I stand corrected

[Noir]

I may have underestimated you Noir and I stand corrected

http://emob1122.photobucket.com/albums/l521/cupcakecommunist/Neil%20Patrick%20Harris/tumblr_lei8p8WkBx1qbg12q.gif?t=1303347318

[fj1200]

You might have my support except the idiot said America brought 9/11 on itself.

You expect there are no repercussions to US foreign policy?

[red states rule]

You expect there are no repercussions to US foreign policy?

What did the US do to justify the murder of 3,000 civilians?

[Noir]

You expect there are no repercussions to US foreign policy?

Repercussions?

Mkay. Roleplay; You're the commander in chief, you learn that a large Islamic republic wants to acquire East Timor, by genocide. East Timor (due to empericism) is a largely Portuguese speaking Christian country. You have two choices;

A) Let the Genocide take place.
B) Intervene, and stop the genocide.

Doing A will please the Islamic Republic, and you will suffer no repercussions.
Doing B will anger the Islamic Republic, causing terrorists to commit attacks across several UN nations and vowing to never rest until they have Timor.

Which would you choose, A or B?

[fj1200]

What did the US do to justify the murder of 3,000 civilians?

I don't justify murder but did they think that their actions were just through the lens of our actions?

[fj1200]

Which would you choose, A or B?

What are our strategic national interests? Do you ask the same question of the PM of Lichtenstein?

[red states rule]

I don't justify murder but did they think that their actions were just through the lens of our actions?

Again what actions? Hell we had the real first black President Bill Clinton for 8 years when the attack was planned

It is amazing how some want to ask if we were responsible for the worst attack on the US in our history

I do not recall reading anyone asking if we deserved Pearl Harbor. We just got up off the ground and defeated the enemy

[J.T]

Repercussions?

Mkay. Roleplay; You're the commander in chief, you learn that a large Islamic republic wants to acquire East Timor, by genocide. East Timor (due to empericism) is a largely Portuguese speaking Christian country. You have two choices;

A) Let the Genocide take place.
B) Intervene, and stop the genocide.

Doing A will please the Islamic Republic, and you will suffer no repercussions.
Doing B will anger the Islamic Republic, causing terrorists to commit attacks across several UN nations and vowing to never rest until they have Timor.

Which would you choose, A or B?
Since when does America have a problem with genocide?

Native Americans
The Jews in Europe
Rwanda

Seriously, when when does America give a shit? Since when is America some great moral crusader protecting the weak?

[fj1200]

Again what actions? Hell we had the real first black President Bill Clinton for 8 years when the attack was planned

It is amazing how some want to ask if we were responsible for the worst attack on the US in our history

I do not recall reading anyone asking if we deserved Pearl Harbor. We just got up off the ground and defeated the enemy

What has UBL said? What the hell does that have to do with it?

[Noir]

What are our strategic national interests? Do you ask the same question of the PM of Lichtenstein?

...genocide is okay if it's in your national interest?

I've yet to have any corospondants with the PM of Lichtenstein.

Anyways, answer the question A or B, I won't ask again, make a choice or dont bother replying to me at all in this thread.

[red states rule]

What has UBL said? What the hell does that have to do with it?

We had Bill running things and the terrorists hit us 6 times on his watch and yet all of a sudden it the US brought 9/11 on ourself

[Noir]

Since when does America have a problem with genocide?

Native Americans
The Jews in Europe
Rwanda

Seriously, when when does America give a shit? Since when is America some great moral crusader protecting the weak?

It should of done more in the past, like most nations. More to the point it can't make the same mistakes again. Though seeing someone above hesitate when answering a 2 option question when one of the options is genocide....unbelievable.

[fj1200]

...genocide is okay if it's in your national interest?

I've yet to have any corospondants with the PM of Lichtenstein.

Anyways, answer the question A or B, I won't ask again, make a choice or dont bother replying to me at all in this thread.

I'm sorry that you don't understand. And damn those heartless Lichtensteinians.

[fj1200]

We had Bill running things and the terrorists hit us 6 times on his watch and yet all of a sudden it the US brought 9/11 on ourself

So only Clinton's two terms are to blame for decades of American policy? You didn't answer my original question.

[ConHog]

What has UBL said? What the hell does that have to do with it?

It's a whole new attitude of no one EVER accepting responsibility for their own actions. EVERYTHING must be someone elses fault.

[fj1200]

It should of done more in the past, like most nations. More to the point it can't make the same mistakes again. Though seeing someone above hesitate when answering a 2 option question when one of the options is genocide....unbelievable.

So your position is that the US should send carrier groups all over the world ending any hint of the possibility of genocide? Do you have a number in mind for how much genocide we should be willing to accept? Will we require a UN resolution prior to taking such action? Because the UN is all about backing up their own resolutions you know. :rolleyes: And once the world embraces our global imperialistic activities of benevolence then we can go around and end all possibility of strife between nations by parking our armed forces nearby ready to strike? Gee, and I thought you were against the Iraq War.

[Noir]

So your position is that the US should send carrier groups all over the world ending any hint of the possibility of genocide? Do you have a number in mind for how much genocide we should be willing to accept? Will we require a UN resolution prior to taking such action? Because the UN is all about backing up their own resolutions you know. :rolleyes: And once the world embraces our global imperialistic activities of benevolence then we can go around and end all possibility of strife between nations by parking our armed forces nearby ready to strike? Gee, and I thought you were against the Iraq War.

Well East Timor was occupied for 25 years while America did nothing and (even worse) Britian, France & India supported the occupying indonessia, selling them weapons. As many as 180,000 people (of a population of 700,000) were murdered during those years. Ofcourse it's impossible to say '8000 deaths is okay but at 8001 we must send help' etc. But to argue that is to miss the point.

You failed to answer the question I asked. You'd rather muddy it with nonsense about the UN and sarks about their PMs. Pathetic IMO, that you can't answer such a striaght forward question, and would rather hide behind nonsense. Only makes you look a fool and I thought much better of you than that.

As for being against the Iraq war, I am not. I am aginst the reasons used to go into it (Britian especially) as we were lied to. However, I'm glad the Saddam was removed anyhow, it's just a shmae we don't have the ability to free all the oppressed people's of the world from tyrants like him.

[ConHog]

Well East Timor was occupied for 25 years while America did nothing and (even worse) Britian, France & India supported the occupying indonessia, selling them weapons. As many as 180,000 people (of a population of 700,000) were murdered during those years. Ofcourse it's impossible to say '8000 deaths is okay but at 8001 we must send help' etc. But to argue that is to miss the point.

You failed to answer the question I asked. You'd rather muddy it with nonsense about the UN and sarks about their PMs. Pathetic IMO, that you can't answer such a striaght forward question, and would rather hide behind nonsense. Only makes you look a fool and I thought much better of you than that.

As for being against the Iraq war, I am not. I am aginst the reasons used to go into it (Britian especially) as we were lied to. However, I'm glad the Saddam was removed anyhow, it's just a shmae we don't have the ability to free all the oppressed people's of the world from tyrants like him.

I'm confused as to what your point is in this thread. But what I do know is that I'm sick of the whole world expecting the US to fix every problem in the world, all the while bitching about the way we do it. Or just bitching about us unless and until they need us.

[Noir]

I'm confused as to what your point is in this thread. But what I do know is that I'm sick of the whole world expecting the US to fix every problem in the world, all the while bitching about the way we do it. Or just bitching about us unless and until they need us.

Mkay, views expressed in this thread as best I can....

Ron Paul is a fool for blaming US policy for terrorist attacks, and as such would be an awful president IMO.
Though I do like the idea of a 'non-party' president.
Anyone who agrees with Ron Paul that 'we brought it on ourselves' need only look at east Timor. Because we stopped a 25 year genocide (after originally helping it) we were declared 'enemies' they could 'never forgive' and attacks followed.
i.e. Unless you want to 'bring an attack upon yourself' let these groups commit genocide.

As for the 'bitching about the way we do it' Iraq is a good example of where people let an idea cloud reality. The idea generally is 'it's none of our business' 'we shouldn't interfere in their affairs' but (in my experience) get most people one on one and challenge them on this critically and they soon change their mind.

[fj1200]

You failed to answer the question I asked. You'd rather muddy it with nonsense about the UN and sarks about their PMs. Pathetic IMO, that you can't answer such a striaght forward question, and would rather hide behind nonsense. Only makes you look a fool and I thought much better of you than that.

It's a shame no doubt about it. But I didn't realize how naive you are that I must accept your premise. International politics is nonsense? Interesting that you have the audacity to suggest that there are only two options and I must accept your 20/20 hindsight. How many do we get to kill to maybe save others? What other countries get to declare war because of our unilateral action?

[Noir]

It's a shame no doubt about it. But I didn't realize how naive you are that I must accept your premise. International politics is nonsense? Interesting that you have the audacity to suggest that there are only two options and I must accept your 20/20 hindsight. How many do we get to kill to maybe save others? What other countries get to declare war because of our unilateral action?

Yes. Having studied international politics and having been on the youth UN and EU Parliament I can assure you international politics is nonsense. And expensive nonesense at that.

[fj1200]

Yes. Having studied international politics and having been on the youth UN and EU Parliament I can assure you international politics is nonsense. And expensive nonesense at that.

I bet that changed the world. :rolleyes:

[Noir]

I bet that changed the world. :rolleyes:

Nope. Certainly changed my view on the two bodies though. Waste waste and more waste.

[fj1200]

^Explains the MoT eh? :laugh:

[J.T]

It's a whole new attitude of no one EVER accepting responsibility for their own actions. EVERYTHING must be someone elses fault.

So you're saying America needs to grow up and own its domestic policy and accept that there are consequences to what it does?

[ConHog]

So you're saying America needs to grow up and own its domestic policy and accept that there are consequences to what it does?


No, I'm saying the rest of the world needs to figure out that if you fuck with us you're going to get hurt.

Speaking of growing up, why don't you try it.

Alternatively since you hate this country so much, I'm more than willing to begin a fund to move you out of it. I'd bet we could easily collect enough right here on DP to buy you a one way ticket to the destination of your choice, provided you surrender your US passport .

[J.T]

No, I'm saying the rest of the world needs to figure out that if you fuck with us you're going to get hurt.


Maybe we should stop fucking with them first. Or stop bitching when we get hurt...

And I'll pass word to the Founding Fathers, the Abolitionists, and Tea Party that you said they should gtfo if they don't like it :rolleyes:

I always knew you were a damn tory POS

[ConHog]

Maybe we should stop fucking with them first. Or stop bitching when we get hurt...

And I'll pass word to the Founding Fathers, the Abolitionists, and Tea Party that you said they should gtfo if they don't like it :rolleyes:

I always knew you were a damn tory POS

you want to explain to me what exactly 3,000 Americans did to AQ to deserve 9/11?

[J.T]

you want to explain to me what exactly 3,000 Americans did to AQ to deserve 9/11?

As soon as you tell me what thousands of Japanese women and children did to deserve having napalm dropped on them.

I'll give you a hint: in both cases, the guilty party used the same argument to justify their actions

[ConHog]

As soon as you tell me what thousands of Japanese women and children did to deserve having napalm dropped on them.

I'll give you a hint: in both cases, the guilty party used the same argument to justify their actions

Yep, certainly no difference in a declared war and a terrorist attack. Your stupidity knows no bounds.

[J.T]

Yep, certainly no difference in a declared war

Both were declared wars. Japan attacked Pearl Habor and declared war. AQ declared war and attacked New York. America declared war and napalmed women and children in Tokyo.

Do you have an argument, or just further nationalist stupidity?