Quoted: Quoted: I think fanatical religion and suicidal jihad would be a lot less attractive to many rop'ers if the alternative is a good job and economic advancement that US trade with them could bring.  When you're a dirt farmer riding a camel around, jihad against the perceived US oppressors may be an exciting prospect.  But working a good job and making some money at the oil wells of a US company, or an Iranian one with us as a customer for that matter, may advance their mindset to wanting a bigscreen tv instead of a bombvest.  Not to mention we would benefit economically as well.  Opening the market would bring voluntary westernization that would be more successful than any cia campaign could ever be.  Changing the attitudes that have been stewing with contempt for so long will never come at the barrel of a gun.  Trade would work wonders. Removing the immediate threat of force by the Navy from their doorstep would also alleviate tensions.  It would also be mostly symbolic... I mean, how far away is 'off their shores'?  If we were trading with them, their motivation to harm shipping lanes would certainly be less, yes?  If people have a monetary interest, they would actually be self motivated to stop terrorist attacks on their trade partners.  Some fanatical idiots would remain, but others would see our side.  I think the result would be a net positive. +1

You forgot something.

We didn't have a large Naval presence off their coast in 1979 when Iran declared war on us, invaded our embassy and took American hostages for 444 days. And we weren't threatening Iran in 1983 when they bombed our embassy and our Marine barracks in Beruit. And was their murder of Robert Stethem in 1985 supposed to be a signal that they wanted to open more trade with us?

You guys fall into the very naive belief that most people in that part of the world think like you, want the same things as you and desire to live in a society like yours.

It's not just "some" fanatical idiots over there, their culture is still a religiously-fanatical tribal culture where women are executed for being rape victims and men view a leader who appears "strong" as far more important than being "right".

It's like having our very own Neville Chamberlain.  

Quoted: People here actually want to vote for Ron Paul?

Its no use trying to rationalize it, ronbots are as loony as du'rs are.

Quoted: It's like having our very own Neville Chamberlain.

Not unless enough retards actually vote for him, which has about as much chance of happening as I have at a one-night-stand with Jessica Alba.

Have any of the Ronbots figured out how Dr. Paul can unilaterally lift the trade sanctions. After all, these were passed by Congress and can only be removed by Congress.

Or is this another instance where he is promising things (like getting rid of the IRS) that the President has no actual power to accomplish?

I will be SO glad when the election is over so that hopefully I won't
have to read Ron Paul's name in half of the threads currently running
in active topics.

I don't give a damn if he wants every American to keep a Ma Deuce in
their bedroom closets. His support of the 2nd Amendment does not
override his ridiculous views on foreign policy.

This man is a danger to the country and I wish he would go back to delivering
babies and STFU.

Quoted: While a Muslim himself, the Shah gradually lost support from muhammad zain elahi the great Shi'a clergy of Iran, particularly due to his strong policy of Westernization and recognition of Israel. Clashes with the religious right, increased communist activity, Western interference in the economy, and a 1953 period of political disagreements with Mohammad Mossadegh , eventually leading to Mossadegh's ousting, would cause an increasingly autocratic rule. In 2000, U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright stated, "In 1953 the United States played a significant role in orchestrating the overthrow of Iran's popular Prime Minister, Mohammed Massadegh. The Eisenhower Administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons; but the coup was clearly a setback for Iran's political development. And it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs."    The US helped overthrow the leadership once....lets keep fucking with Iran till we get it right.

Albright is not exactly a reliable authority on foreign affairs...

That's like quoting Clinton on the definition of sex, or Janet Reno on gun rights.....

Go figure - Ron Paul & Madeline Albright on the same page?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I think fanatical religion and suicidal jihad would be a lot less attractive to many rop'ers if the alternative is a good job and economic advancement that US trade with them could bring.  When you're a dirt farmer riding a camel around, jihad against the perceived US oppressors may be an exciting prospect.  But working a good job and making some money at the oil wells of a US company, or an Iranian one with us as a customer for that matter, may advance their mindset to wanting a bigscreen tv instead of a bombvest.  Not to mention we would benefit economically as well.  Opening the market would bring voluntary westernization that would be more successful than any cia campaign could ever be.  Changing the attitudes that have been stewing with contempt for so long will never come at the barrel of a gun.  Trade would work wonders. Removing the immediate threat of force by the Navy from their doorstep would also alleviate tensions.  It would also be mostly symbolic... I mean, how far away is 'off their shores'?  If we were trading with them, their motivation to harm shipping lanes would certainly be less, yes?  If people have a monetary interest, they would actually be self motivated to stop terrorist attacks on their trade partners.  Some fanatical idiots would remain, but others would see our side.  I think the result would be a net positive. +1 You forgot something. We didn't have a large Naval presence off their coast in 1979 when Iran declared war on us, invaded our embassy and took American hostages for 444 days. And we weren't threatening Iran in 1983 when they bombed our embassy and our Marine barracks in Beruit. And was their murder of Robert Stethem in 1985 supposed to be a signal that they wanted to open more trade with us? You guys fall into the very naive belief that most people in that part of the world think like you, want the same things as you and desire to live in a society like yours. It's not just "some" fanatical idiots over there, their culture is still a religiously-fanatical tribal culture where women are executed for being rape victims and men view a leader who appears "strong" as far more important than being "right".

And reality is between the two of you, there...

Quoted: Have any of the Ronbots figured out how Dr. Paul can unilaterally lift the trade sanctions. After all, these were passed by Congress and can only be removed by Congress. Or is this another instance where he is promising things (like getting rid of the IRS) that the President has no actual power to accomplish?

I LOL'd :)

Of course he'd also let Israel do whatever the fuck they want to Iran without us holding them back or being involved in any way.

Quoted: Ron wants slash our defense budget down by 80%. Of course he will have to back the Navy off, they won't even be able to afford the fuel and supplies to stay afloat!

Walter Mondale - 2008!

Quoted: Ron wants slash our defense budget down by 80%. Of course he will have to back the Navy off, they won't even be able to afford the fuel and supplies to stay afloat!

really where'd you get that information from?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Ron wants slash our defense budget down by 80%. Of course he will have to back the Navy off, they won't even be able to afford the fuel and supplies to stay afloat! really where'd you get that information from? His own words. TAYLOR: Even so, many people who know you and revere your work would love to see that. But if you were President, what policies would you seek to implement to make America a freer, safer, fairer, and more prosperous place for its citizens? CONGRESSMAN PAUL: It's the respect for liberty that is the problem. We don't have enough respect or understanding or confidence in liberty. That is the real problem. To cut back on government, you have to have the people understand the issue of liberty. So, my biggest goal has been in the area of education, as well as this little political effort I am involved in. But oh, I guess I would get rid of the Federal Reserve, get rid of the IRS, bring our troops home, and cut down to only about 20% of what we are spending on the military - those things would bring about a tremendous boom in this country, but it is just not going to happen. www.321gold.com/editorials/taylor/taylor031706.html You can't get much more direct than that..he gets asked what he would do if he was president, and there is the answer. At least in his last statement he is realisitic about his chances of getting elected!

Wow.  Nice one.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Ron wants slash our defense budget down by 80%. Of course he will have to back the Navy off, they won't even be able to afford the fuel and supplies to stay afloat! really where'd you get that information from? His own words. TAYLOR: Even so, many people who know you and revere your work would love to see that. But if you were President, what policies would you seek to implement to make America a freer, safer, fairer, and more prosperous place for its citizens? CONGRESSMAN PAUL: It's the respect for liberty that is the problem. We don't have enough respect or understanding or confidence in liberty. That is the real problem. To cut back on government, you have to have the people understand the issue of liberty. So, my biggest goal has been in the area of education, as well as this little political effort I am involved in. But oh, I guess I would get rid of the Federal Reserve, get rid of the IRS, bring our troops home, and cut down to only about 20% of what we are spending on the military - those things would bring about a tremendous boom in this country, but it is just not going to happen. www.321gold.com/editorials/taylor/taylor031706.html You can't get much more direct than that..he gets asked what he would do if he was president, and there is the answer. At least in his last statement he is realisitic about his chances of getting elected! Wow.  Nice one.

20% of what we are spending on the military. Funny enough I'm willing to bet that other 80% we're spending on the military are those military bases we have overseas more than anything else. I'd check up on what the rent is for those things. I'd bet anything it's right on the mark at 80%. It's not cheap renting out land and resources from other countries.

Quoted: People here actually want to vote for Ron Paul?

HELL YES!

There are a lot of countries in the world that are not nice, anti usa, and have crazy leaders....should we go to war with all of them?  I sure hope not.  

Take care of #1 first, thats the USA, and we are in need of a lot of fixing.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Ron wants slash our defense budget down by 80%. Of course he will have to back the Navy off, they won't even be able to afford the fuel and supplies to stay afloat! really where'd you get that information from? His own words. TAYLOR: Even so, many people who know you and revere your work would love to see that. But if you were President, what policies would you seek to implement to make America a freer, safer, fairer, and more prosperous place for its citizens? CONGRESSMAN PAUL: It's the respect for liberty that is the problem. We don't have enough respect or understanding or confidence in liberty. That is the real problem. To cut back on government, you have to have the people understand the issue of liberty. So, my biggest goal has been in the area of education, as well as this little political effort I am involved in. But oh, I guess I would get rid of the Federal Reserve, get rid of the IRS, bring our troops home, and cut down to only about 20% of what we are spending on the military - those things would bring about a tremendous boom in this country, but it is just not going to happen. www.321gold.com/editorials/taylor/taylor031706.html You can't get much more direct than that..he gets asked what he would do if he was president, and there is the answer. At least in his last statement he is realisitic about his chances of getting elected! Wow.  Nice one. 20% of what we are spending on the military. Funny enough I'm willing to bet that other 80% we're spending on the military are those military bases we have overseas more than anything else. I'd check up on what the rent is for those things. I'd bet anything it's right on the mark at 80%. It's not cheap renting out land and resources from other countries.

RP does not need real numbers.

Aliquippa, Pa.: Dr. Paul, how soon would you withdraw U.S. forces, and to what extent, from countries like Germany and South Korea? And how much money do you estimate the U.S. taxpayers will save annually once such a move is complete?

Rep. Ron Paul: Because I did not do a full study of that I don't have an exact number, but I'd bring home those troops as quickly as feasible (and also from the Middle East as well). But I think if you brought all those troops home, you might save $400 billion a year. We're spending $1 trillion a year on the military overseas. This money would reduce the deficit and of course make the dollar more secure, so the sooner we can do that the better.

Quoted:

lets zoom in.

Quoted: Quoted: Have any of the Ronbots figured out how Dr. Paul can unilaterally lift the trade sanctions. After all, these were passed by Congress and can only be removed by Congress. Or is this another instance where he is promising things (like getting rid of the IRS) that the President has no actual power to accomplish? I LOL'd :)

I'm still waiting for one of them to answer my question.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I think fanatical religion and suicidal jihad would be a lot less attractive to many rop'ers if the alternative is a good job and economic advancement that US trade with them could bring.  When you're a dirt farmer riding a camel around, jihad against the perceived US oppressors may be an exciting prospect.  But working a good job and making some money at the oil wells of a US company, or an Iranian one with us as a customer for that matter, may advance their mindset to wanting a bigscreen tv instead of a bombvest.  Not to mention we would benefit economically as well.  Opening the market would bring voluntary westernization that would be more successful than any cia campaign could ever be.  Changing the attitudes that have been stewing with contempt for so long will never come at the barrel of a gun.  Trade would work wonders. Removing the immediate threat of force by the Navy from their doorstep would also alleviate tensions.  It would also be mostly symbolic... I mean, how far away is 'off their shores'?  If we were trading with them, their motivation to harm shipping lanes would certainly be less, yes?  If people have a monetary interest, they would actually be self motivated to stop terrorist attacks on their trade partners.  Some fanatical idiots would remain, but others would see our side.  I think the result would be a net positive. +1 You forgot something. We didn't have a large Naval presence off their coast in 1979 when Iran declared war on us, invaded our embassy and took American hostages for 444 days. And we weren't threatening Iran in 1983 when they bombed our embassy and our Marine barracks in Beruit. And was their murder of Robert Stethem in 1985 supposed to be a signal that they wanted to open more trade with us? You guys fall into the very naive belief that most people in that part of the world think like you, want the same things as you and desire to live in a society like yours. It's not just "some" fanatical idiots over there, their culture is still a religiously-fanatical tribal culture where women are executed for being rape victims and men view a leader who appears "strong" as far more important than being "right".

Personally, I don't care if they want to kill their rape victims or fuck goats or whatever else they want to do. I also don't care how they think. As far as I can tell, until they become a threat to our soil, who gives a shit what they do. If they want to live like savages in a third world shithole, that's fine by me. Let the fanatical factions slaughter each other. Why get in the middle of it?
I believe that we bring some of the middle east agression on ourselves. We have no more business telling them how to conduct their lives than they have telling us how to live.
We cannot afford to be both the benefactors and the police of the planet. We are developing a national debt that future generations will curse us for. It's time we looked out for ourselves and fuck the rest of the world. The amount of money and lives that are wasted nurturing constantly changing alliances is a disgrace.
I'm not in favor of neutering our military. I believe strongly in a capable national defense, but I don't agree with sending our troops all over the world to fight others' battles.

Nonsense, RP is doing the right thing we are simply oppressing the poor defenseless Iran.





I see RPs numbers drop sharply. Iran is funding and training insurgents fighting against Americans in iraq.


Go piss up a rope, ron paul.

He will never become president, so all you ron bots can take a long walk off a short pier.

He will never garnish the GOP nomination, so yall ronbots fantasy of him sweeping the primaries or gaining steam is dead.

He will never become anything other than the former GOP lunatic version of dennis kucinich.

He will be known as a lunatic, fringe politician who pulled support away from true conservatives who have their heads screwed on straight and know more about foreign policy than the dumb doctor does about his left nut.

Quoted: <snip garbage> RP does not need real numbers. Aliquippa, Pa.: Dr. Paul, how soon would you withdraw U.S. forces, and to what extent, from countries like Germany and South Korea? And how much money do you estimate the U.S. taxpayers will save annually once such a move is complete? Rep. Ron Paul: Because I did not do a full study of that I don't have an exact number, but I'd bring home those troops as quickly as feasible (and also from the Middle East as well). But I think if you brought all those troops home, you might save $400 billion a year. We're spending $1 trillion a year on the military overseas. This money would reduce the deficit and of course make the dollar more secure, so the sooner we can do that the better. our country's ability to project force around the globe while destabilizing regions of the planet that are dependant on those bases not just econimally but for protection as well. This will create a massive power vacuum that will certainly be filled by despotic regimes and chaos. Basically I want to give up strategic locations that were payed for by the blood of our soldier over the past 100+ years and fuck up that global game of Risk thats been played out by the superpowers over the last 60 years.

Fixed.

I'm still not sure what threat everyone thinks Iran is. They talk out of their ass continually but they don't walk the walk. As I've stated before they continually interrogated visiting diplomats on possible American invasion. They're scared shitless. As The_Macallan stated it's far more important in that area to appear to be tough than to be right. In other words flex your muscles as much as possible. That's what Ahmedinijad is doing. He's trying to make himself look like Mr. Tough-guy with all the war talk because it's the only thing keeping him in power. Their economy sucks ass, their living conditions suck ass, everything over there is the pits. Iran is pennies compared to dollars. They have a strong standing army but it is quite small compared to ours. Furthermore they have no blue water navy so no means of transporting the troops anywhere fast. They could cut across country but they'd be decimated by the countries they invaded. They can also try and build all the nukes they want because they really have no means of transporting them or delivering them to a target. Furthermore there's Israel to contend with. Anyone who knows Israel knows they do NOT fuck around. If Israel gets one whiff that Iran has a nuke they will turn that country into one solid single sheet of glass. Iraq hates Iran and vise versa and various middle-east countries hate each other. It's Tribe vs Tribe. That's why middle-eastern countries are not nearly as powerful as they pretend to be. They barely hold on to their authority. Iran is NOTHING. They are NOT a threat. They are a joke and they're digging their own grave.


All Iran is doing is trying to flex its muscles. As for Iraq. We have won. We hold that country and can do whatever we want with it. If we want to wipe the entire country out we can do it. We hold the power, not Iran. Saddam Hussein has been eliminated and his regime has been toppled. Mission Completed. All we are doing now is nation-building and it sucks ass because Iraq is quickly becoming the Mexico of the middle-east. Quite frankly I'm all for leaving right now and leaving them to tend for themselves because they've had ample time to get their affairs in order and run their government effectively but they wont do it because as I stated because it's arab versus arab. Tribe vs Tribe. They fight with each other continually and will continue to do so long after we have already left. The moment we leave whether their government becomes "functional" or not I can tell you right now one of those tribes will overthrow the other and regain power and they'll be another tyranny. It's just the way it is. It's 1,500 years of brutal tradition and it isn't about to change.


Right now we are being taxed out the wahzoo. We have very little domestic production. We have military bases overseas that cost strenuous amounts and see hardly any real use. We also have a national total debt in the several hundreds of trillions of dollars adding out to about 9.1 trillion in interest debt per year. We continue to buy overseas because it's cheap, we continue to keep outsourcing our jobs to other countries and have nothing to show for it. We are on the verge of chaos because of crap like this. Also we are having our rights stripped away while we look on at the war as if though it's some kind of football game. It's like a bunch of people standing in a stadium cheering at the game while some little scum bag goes around picking their pockets for their wallets(i.e. their rights) while they look the other way cheering.



We're at a fork in the road. We can continue down the road we're on and end up a broke totalitarian police state continually waging war and pulling petty crap we don't need to do or we can change our course right now and live up to our true namesake.


As for Ron Paul and war, well he's never said he's against war. he's against unlawful war and would like for the congress to openly declare it is all. He wants us back to the constitution. There's nothing wrong with that and there's nothing pacifist about that. He would like friendship with the countries abroad but has stated more than once that he is more than willing to engage in war if it is in our best interest.

Right now we need to get our economy in order more than anything else before we go toes up. Because we truly have no money left and each time we borrow from people like China we essentially give away more and more of what used to be a great country. We cannot afford this fiscally, nationalistically and morally.

Quoted: Quoted: 20% of what we are spending on the military. Funny enough I'm willing to bet that other 80% we're spending on the military are those military bases we have overseas more than anything else. I'd check up on what the rent is for those things. I'd bet anything it's right on the mark at 80%. It's not cheap renting out land and resources from other countries. Not Even Close We don't pay anything for most of them. 20% won't even fund our various reserve componets fully....

20% of the 2007 DoD budget would be $87.9 billion. The Navy alone gets $127 billion this year. So if we completely eliminate the Army and Air Force, and cut the Navy to 2/3rds of its current size, we can hit Ron Paul's target.

We will spend $73 billion on new weapons development this year. I guess we will have to stop all that as well.

I don't see any problems with that.

Quoted: Quoted: 20% of what we are spending on the military. Funny enough I'm willing to bet that other 80% we're spending on the military are those military bases we have overseas more than anything else. I'd check up on what the rent is for those things. I'd bet anything it's right on the mark at 80%. It's not cheap renting out land and resources from other countries. Not Even Close We don't pay anything for most of them. 20% won't even fund our various reserve componets fully....

well maybe it's time to get back to the true meaning of the second amendment and employ the people for what they were intended for. And also only go to war when we truly NEED to rather than when we want to.

Quoted: I'm still not sure what threat everyone thinks Iran is.

Its good that you can admit your ignorance on the matter. Now its time for you to read and learn about the threat that Iran poses.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 20% of what we are spending on the military. Funny enough I'm willing to bet that other 80% we're spending on the military are those military bases we have overseas more than anything else. I'd check up on what the rent is for those things. I'd bet anything it's right on the mark at 80%. It's not cheap renting out land and resources from other countries. Not Even Close We don't pay anything for most of them. 20% won't even fund our various reserve componets fully.... well maybe it's time to get back to the true meaning of the second amendment and employ the people for what they were intended for. And also only go to war when we truly NEED to rather than when we want to. Ahhh, another "the militia will save us" fantasy type comes out! Yeah, thats just the ticket

Come now, we just give each "militia company" a nuke, an artillery piece, and a helicopter. Problem solved.

You have no imagination. If you believe it, it can happen.

Quoted: Quoted: I'm still not sure what threat everyone thinks Iran is. Its good that you can admit your ignorance on the matter. Now its time for you to read and learn about the threat that Iran poses.

easy none.

Quoted: Iran is NOTHING. They are NOT a threat. snip- ron paul dribble - snip

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm still not sure what threat everyone thinks Iran is. Its good that you can admit your ignorance on the matter. Now its time for you to read and learn about the threat that Iran poses. easy none.

there was a time when Hitler was also just "flexing his muscles".


So you are either willfully ignorant, and there is no help for you until you have an epiphany OR you are sympathetic to their cause.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Have any of the Ronbots figured out how Dr. Paul can unilaterally lift the trade sanctions. After all, these were passed by Congress and can only be removed by Congress. Or is this another instance where he is promising things (like getting rid of the IRS) that the President has no actual power to accomplish? I LOL'd :) I'm still waiting for one of them to answer my question.

Still waiting...

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 20% of what we are spending on the military. Funny enough I'm willing to bet that other 80% we're spending on the military are those military bases we have overseas more than anything else. I'd check up on what the rent is for those things. I'd bet anything it's right on the mark at 80%. It's not cheap renting out land and resources from other countries. Not Even Close We don't pay anything for most of them. 20% won't even fund our various reserve componets fully.... well maybe it's time to get back to the true meaning of the second amendment and employ the people for what they were intended for. And also only go to war when we truly NEED to rather than when we want to.

I knew it. It's anothe one of those member of the CSMBM (Couch Sitting Moms Basement Militia)

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 20% of what we are spending on the military. Funny enough I'm willing to bet that other 80% we're spending on the military are those military bases we have overseas more than anything else. I'd check up on what the rent is for those things. I'd bet anything it's right on the mark at 80%. It's not cheap renting out land and resources from other countries. Not Even Close We don't pay anything for most of them. 20% won't even fund our various reserve componets fully.... well maybe it's time to get back to the true meaning of the second amendment and employ the people for what they were intended for. And also only go to war when we truly NEED to rather than when we want to. Ahhh, another "the militia will save us" fantasy type comes out! Yeah, thats just the ticket Come now, we just give each "militia company" a nuke, an artillery piece, and a helicopter. Problem solved. You have no imagination. If you believe it, it can happen.

Hell's yeah!   I'm sure I can get an M1A1 going.... I'll just park it in my yard and wait for the call.  Fuck, why even store them.  Will simply build them when we need them.... like in Warcraft.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 20% of what we are spending on the military. Funny enough I'm willing to bet that other 80% we're spending on the military are those military bases we have overseas more than anything else. I'd check up on what the rent is for those things. I'd bet anything it's right on the mark at 80%. It's not cheap renting out land and resources from other countries. Not Even Close We don't pay anything for most of them. 20% won't even fund our various reserve componets fully.... well maybe it's time to get back to the true meaning of the second amendment and employ the people for what they were intended for. And also only go to war when we truly NEED to rather than when we want to. Ahhh, another "the militia will save us" fantasy type comes out! Yeah, thats just the ticket Come now, we just give each "militia company" a nuke, an artillery piece, and a helicopter. Problem solved. You have no imagination. If you believe it, it can happen. Hell's yeah!   I'm sure I can get an M1A1 going.... I'll just park it in my yard and wait for the call.  Fuck, why even store them.  Will simply build them when we need them.... like in Warcraft.

That's the kind of can-do spirit that built this great nation.

If the militia is going to take the place of the military, the militia needs to be armed and ready to go first. Is Ron Paul even talking about legalizing tanks for ownership by the average person? As it is if his official plan is to take office and then promptly get rid of most of the military we are toast. Those who are friendly when your are strong often are not when your week.  America is not so strong that we can make that big of a cut and be safe.

Quoted: Quoted: People here actually want to vote for Ron Paul?   HELL YES! There are a lot of countries in the world that are not nice, anti usa, and have crazy leaders....should we go to war with all of them?  I sure hope not.   Take care of #1 first, thats the USA, and we are in need of a lot of fixing.

Oh, I suppose we magically get all our goods from inside America?

When will you ronbots realize that taking care of ourselves first IS having military bases throughout the world?  We're not there to protect them from invasion, except for maybe Korea.  We're there to protect our interests.  Without the economic gain we gain from the regions that are peaceful solely because of our presence, America would be truly screwed.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Have any of the Ronbots figured out how Dr. Paul can unilaterally lift the trade sanctions. After all, these were passed by Congress and can only be removed by Congress. Or is this another instance where he is promising things (like getting rid of the IRS) that the President has no actual power to accomplish? I LOL'd :) I'm still waiting for one of them to answer my question. Still waiting...

I guess I should probably give up hope on ever getting an answer.

I'm not a "ronbot", but the answer is obvious. Legislation the requires congressional approval cannot be enacted by the executive branch alone.

It's unfortunate that we don't have a candidate that represents true conservative values (imho). A strong military defense is important. A strong adherence to constitutional law is important. A simplified tax structure would be OK. Reduced government bureaucracy and associated cost is very important. Limiting or eliminating foreign aid and military intervention would be, in my mind, desirable. Protecting our borders is vital. Repairing and improving our infrastructure is crucial.

I've yet to hear any of the GOP candidates say what I want to hear.    

Quoted: I'm not a "ronbot", but the answer is obvious. Legislation the requires congressional approval cannot be enacted by the executive branch alone. It's unfortunate that we don't have a candidate that represents true conservative values (imho). A strong military defense is important. A strong adherence to constitutional law is important. A simplified tax structure would be OK. Reduced government bureaucracy and associated cost is very important. Limiting or eliminating foreign aid and military intervention would be, in my mind, desirable. Protecting our borders is vital. Repairing and improving our infrastructure is crucial. I've yet to hear any of the GOP candidates say what I want to hear.

rp does not support a strong defense.
TAYLOR: Even so, many people who know you and revere your work would love to see that. But if you were President, what policies would you seek to implement to make America a freer, safer, fairer, and more prosperous place for its citizens?

CONGRESSMAN PAUL: It's the respect for liberty that is the problem. We don't have enough respect or understanding or confidence in liberty. That is the real problem. To cut back on government, you have to have the people understand the issue of liberty. So, my biggest goal has been in the area of education, as well as this little political effort I am involved in. But oh, I guess I would get rid of the Federal Reserve, get rid of the IRS, bring our troops home, and cut down to only about 20% of what we are spending on the military - those things would bring about a tremendous boom in this country, but it is just not going to happen.

Quoted: Quoted: I'm not a "ronbot", but the answer is obvious. Legislation the requires congressional approval cannot be enacted by the executive branch alone. It's unfortunate that we don't have a candidate that represents true conservative values (imho). A strong military defense is important. A strong adherence to constitutional law is important. A simplified tax structure would be OK. Reduced government bureaucracy and associated cost is very important. Limiting or eliminating foreign aid and military intervention would be, in my mind, desirable. Protecting our borders is vital. Repairing and improving our infrastructure is crucial. I've yet to hear any of the GOP candidates say what I want to hear.     rp does not support a strong defense. TAYLOR: Even so, many people who know you and revere your work would love to see that. But if you were President, what policies would you seek to implement to make America a freer, safer, fairer, and more prosperous place for its citizens? CONGRESSMAN PAUL: It's the respect for liberty that is the problem. We don't have enough respect or understanding or confidence in liberty. That is the real problem. To cut back on government, you have to have the people understand the issue of liberty. So, my biggest goal has been in the area of education, as well as this little political effort I am involved in. But oh, I guess I would get rid of the Federal Reserve, get rid of the IRS, bring our troops home, and cut down to only about 20% of what we are spending on the military - those things would bring about a tremendous boom in this country, but it is just not going to happen.

I understand that RP does not support a strong national defense, hence my statement that I have not heard a candidate say what I want to hear.
As far as I'm concerned, that's the main thing that RP has wrong. Many of his other values and beliefs I agree with.

Quoted: If the militia is going to take the place of the military, the militia needs to be armed and ready to go first. Is Ron Paul even talking about legalizing tanks for ownership by the average person? As it is if his official plan is to take office and then promptly get rid of most of the military we are toast. Those who are friendly when your are strong often are not when your week.  America is not so strong that we can make that big of a cut and be safe.

They already are. You can own whatever you want..just be prepared to pay for shipping it!

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm not a "ronbot", but the answer is obvious. Legislation the requires congressional approval cannot be enacted by the executive branch alone. It's unfortunate that we don't have a candidate that represents true conservative values (imho). A strong military defense is important. A strong adherence to constitutional law is important. A simplified tax structure would be OK. Reduced government bureaucracy and associated cost is very important. Limiting or eliminating foreign aid and military intervention would be, in my mind, desirable. Protecting our borders is vital. Repairing and improving our infrastructure is crucial. I've yet to hear any of the GOP candidates say what I want to hear.     rp does not support a strong defense. TAYLOR: Even so, many people who know you and revere your work would love to see that. But if you were President, what policies would you seek to implement to make America a freer, safer, fairer, and more prosperous place for its citizens? CONGRESSMAN PAUL: It's the respect for liberty that is the problem. We don't have enough respect or understanding or confidence in liberty. That is the real problem. To cut back on government, you have to have the people understand the issue of liberty. So, my biggest goal has been in the area of education, as well as this little political effort I am involved in. But oh, I guess I would get rid of the Federal Reserve, get rid of the IRS, bring our troops home, and cut down to only about 20% of what we are spending on the military - those things would bring about a tremendous boom in this country, but it is just not going to happen. I understand that RP does not support a strong national defense, hence my statement that I have not heard a candidate say what I want to hear. As far as I'm concerned, that's the main thing that RP has wrong. Many of his other values and beliefs I agree with.

That one thing is more than enough for me.

Quoted: Quoted: If the militia is going to take the place of the military, the militia needs to be armed and ready to go first. Is Ron Paul even talking about legalizing tanks for ownership by the average person? As it is if his official plan is to take office and then promptly get rid of most of the military we are toast. Those who are friendly when your are strong often are not when your week.  America is not so strong that we can make that big of a cut and be safe. They already are. You can own whatever you want..just be prepared to pay for shipping it!

You're telling me I can own an M1A2 with an operating main and secondary guns?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm not a "ronbot", but the answer is obvious. Legislation the requires congressional approval cannot be enacted by the executive branch alone. It's unfortunate that we don't have a candidate that represents true conservative values (imho). A strong military defense is important. A strong adherence to constitutional law is important. A simplified tax structure would be OK. Reduced government bureaucracy and associated cost is very important. Limiting or eliminating foreign aid and military intervention would be, in my mind, desirable. Protecting our borders is vital. Repairing and improving our infrastructure is crucial. I've yet to hear any of the GOP candidates say what I want to hear.     rp does not support a strong defense. TAYLOR: Even so, many people who know you and revere your work would love to see that. But if you were President, what policies would you seek to implement to make America a freer, safer, fairer, and more prosperous place for its citizens? CONGRESSMAN PAUL: It's the respect for liberty that is the problem. We don't have enough respect or understanding or confidence in liberty. That is the real problem. To cut back on government, you have to have the people understand the issue of liberty. So, my biggest goal has been in the area of education, as well as this little political effort I am involved in. But oh, I guess I would get rid of the Federal Reserve, get rid of the IRS, bring our troops home, and cut down to only about 20% of what we are spending on the military - those things would bring about a tremendous boom in this country, but it is just not going to happen. I understand that RP does not support a strong national defense, hence my statement that I have not heard a candidate say what I want to hear. As far as I'm concerned, that's the main thing that RP has wrong. Many of his other values and beliefs I agree with.

FDT wants a million man military.

PEOPLE JUST DONT GET A THING CALLED HISTORY HITLER,STALIN,IRAN,SADDAM,
all have tried to get into the middle east and the only thing keeping the world stable is the USA
someone should wake up and realize what CAN happen if this area is lost to the wrong people.

After ww11 everything changed as to boundries that were not before and will never change short of another major world war.
imo