Ron Paul

[bhunter]

Originally Posted by neophyte

It both surprised and delighted me to hear the truth being spoken at that gathering about our "foreign policy", gunboat diplomacy being a far more accurate descriptive term for it.I can now take one of this group seriously. I am certain he hasn't the chance of a fart in a whirlwind of being elected POTUS, flaky or not. He spoke up against the wars of adventure that continue to plague this country, and will continue to until the fanatic militarism that infected our government 70+ years ago loses its grip on our country and minds. Any wisp of hope he may have had vanished when he said what he did. He sure gained my respect.

Seventy years ago? You really would support the isolationism encompassed in the War Neutrality Act of the late 1930s. That would also be counter to all Presidents since FDR. Isolationism may have been appropriate before technology made the world a much smaller place; however, today with the economic interconnectedness, it is foolhardy to assume that events elsewhere have no repercussion here. Those very international ties are largely responsible for the increased standard of living both here and abroad that has occurred over the last century. One thing is clearly certain, Europe and Asia would be decidedly different if we maintained an isolationist policy over those seventy years.

[bhunter]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

I'm with you Finn.

Pete

I'm with both you and Finn. Paul has some good ideas, but then he morphs into this strange crazed uncle persona.

[neophyte]

Originally Posted by bhunter

Seventy years ago? You really would support the isolationism encompassed in the War Neutrality Act of the late 1930s. That would also be counter to all Presidents since FDR. Isolationism may have been appropriate before technology made the world a much smaller place; however, today with the economic interconnectedness, it is foolhardy to assume that events elsewhere have no repercussion here. Those very international ties are largely responsible for the increased standard of living both here and abroad that has occurred over the last century. One thing is clearly certain, Europe and Asia would be decidedly different if we maintained an isolationist policy over those seventy years.

Isolationism is as impossible as it is impractical in these times. The incessantly meddlesome policies of the militaristic fanatics that have controlled our foreign policy and led us into our current level of disrepute with the nations we haven't bought off,intimidated or generally coerced into doing our bidding is at the far and extreme other end of the spectrum. All other nations besides American and Russia had had enough war and destruction at the end of WW2, and let it go. The profit incentive here proved too addictive for those here that fattened their coffers in the global conflict. Every nation in the world knows this besides our own, it seems. In my half century on this planet, we have moved from one undeclared, criminal war to another, and Iran is next. It's pathetic and inexcusable, as well as the primary reason we're in such a state of decline.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Though he wasn't as outspoken about our overseas military adventurism as Paul, Huntsmann's response to the foreign policy questions was along the line of "we need to focus on rebuilding our country's economic might again, as economic might will translate to a strong, influential foreign policy." He also seemed to dis the GOP's first inclination toward gunboat diplomacy, but in a more nuanced, thoughtful manner. Accordingly, he stands no chance with the GOP faithful.

When speaking to that crowd one must limit oneself to monosyllibic words and short sentences. Hence their love affair with sloganism and sound-bites. Comparisons of oneself to St. Ronnie and "The Founders" will score points too.

Dave

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

When speaking to that crowd one must limit oneself to monosyllibic words and short sentences. Hence their love affair with sloganism and sound-bites. Comparisons of oneself to St. Ronnie and "The Founders" will score points too.

Dave

I was joking with my son as I watched it last night that we should have a drinking game based upon taking a drink every time Reagan was mentioned. It would have been one of my drunker moments.

[piece-itpete]

Originally Posted by neophyte

Isolationism is as impossible as it is impractical in these times. The incessantly meddlesome policies of the militaristic fanatics that have controlled our foreign policy and led us into our current level of disrepute with the nations we haven't bought off,intimidated or generally coerced into doing our bidding is at the far and extreme other end of the spectrum. All other nations besides American and Russia had had enough war and destruction at the end of WW2, and let it go. The profit incentive here proved too addictive for those here that fattened their coffers in the global conflict. Every nation in the world knows this besides our own, it seems. In my half century on this planet, we have moved from one undeclared, criminal war to another, and Iran is next. It's pathetic and inexcusable, as well as the primary reason we're in such a state of decline.

So the US gaurenteeing regional stability in various theaters around the world has nothing to do with it? After ww2 human nature changed everywhere except here and the USSR?

That seems pretty simplistic neo.

Pete

[Bigerik]

Kinda like the middle east is stable now?

[piece-itpete]

Damsite more than if we didn't keep Saddam from building his stalinistic empire. At least everyone can use the Strait of Hormuz.

Pete

[Bigerik]

That is questionable....

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

Damsite more than if we didn't keep Saddam from building his stalinistic empire. At least everyone can use the Strait of Hormuz.

Pete

The Strait of Hormuz are controlled by Iran, not Iraq. It's 500 miles from Iraq.