POLL: What's your #1 reason for not supporting Ron Paul?

[bruceBRUCEbruce]

Not a war hawk, and I am for less foreign intervention - Just not to the extreme that RP's statements and positions imply.

you know that we are pretty much an island nation, surrounded by allies, and are the safest power the world's ever seen, right?

your chances of being killed in a 9/11 or Pearl Harbor are/were probably about .000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000000000001%

you've got a better chance of being struck by lightning at the same time you are buying a winning lotto ticket.

[jarvol]

Not a war hawk, and I am for less foreign intervention - Just not to the extreme that RP's statements and positions imply.

WTF is extreme about not attacking and/or invading other countries who do not attack or threaten the US?

It isn't the US's right to tell a country whether or not they can build a nuclear weapon or buy or develop any weapon or technology for that matter. If you believe America has this right then you would also have no problem with the Chinese or Russian military coming onto US soil and supporting the Branch Dividians in Waco or the Weaver family in Ruby Ridge or else you are a very large hypocrite.

[Lockitup1x]

"Is it really in the interest of the United States to guarantee the survival of any foreign country?"
-Ron Paul

The answer to the question above is yes. I would hope any president of this country would unequivocally realize that. No one has posted any sort of support or evidence to the contrary. Just rhetoric…

[The Madcap]

"Is it really in the interest of the United States to guarantee the survival of any foreign country?"
-Ron Paul

The answer to the question above is yes. I would hope any president of this country would unequivocally realize that.

And they all do, at least, once in the White House. Primary candidates are not privy to intelligence briefings or the advising of top military commanders, (unless that candidate is serving on the Senate intelligence committee, ala Michelle Bachman. And there's plenty of info she isn't given). It isn't until a challenging candidate has won the party nomination and a few months have passed into the full Presidential campaign season that they are granted access to this information. And it is this information and advising sessions which most dictate US foreign policy.

It is also much easier to arm-chair quarterback any policy decision with an idealist's perspective when you aren't on the hotseat.

During his re-election campaign in 1916, pacifist Woodrow Wilson repeatedly avowed the US would avoid military participation in WWI. Only four months into his second term he had declared war on Germany. Obama ran as an anti-war candidate, but his policies changed drastically once he was elected. The main difference between him and Bush is rhetoric. Bush tried to convince us it was the right thing to do so as to spare our conscience, while Obama's tactic is to pretend it's not happening to spare our conscience. But neither have had a problem intervening in the foreign affairs of other nations. Anyone who previously argued Obama's use of militaristic might was merely in an effort to clean up Bush's mess in Iraq and Afghanistan has clearly been disproved by current actions in Libya.

Ron Paul, as much he believes he's right and wants to end our occupations, will have his hands tied by the realities of the day. Just like all the Presidents before him who preached peace and ended up using force.

But that being said, I think Ron Paul is steadfast and principled enough that he will do whatever is in his power to untie his hands safely as soon as he can. I can't say the same for Obama/Bush who seemed to lack the same sincere motivation Paul has. Bush saw himself as the protector of the known world and responsible for delivering freedom to the oppressed. Obama seems to see himself as Daniel Dravol in "The man who would be King" and simply wants to stay in power as long as possible. I believe Paul truly wants to get America back to a more isolationist policy, and I think he is willing to give up America's position as the world's police dog to do it. He doesn't care about our power position, he cares about prosperity. And while the two might go hand in hand for most people, I think Paul believes he can forge a new future where America doesn't meddle in the affairs of the world until they are on our doorstep. However, I also believe that once he starts receiving those briefings he's going to realize the affairs of the world are constantly on America's doorstep, and we have to stand guard to prevent invaders from entering.

[wtf]

great post cap

but I truly wonder about these "briefings" how some towel head is going to take over all of civilization

I can see how they paint the worst possible scenario, if you do not attack mother fukin AFGHANISTAN they are all going to walk in via the rio grande with a nuke on the back of a burro - by the the thousands

ok-attack

[Tech N9ne]

Quit the nonsense

Vote obama

[The Madcap]

great post cap

but I truly wonder about these "briefings" how some towel head is going to take over all of civilization

I can see how they paint the worst possible scenario, if you do not attack mother fukin AFGHANISTAN they are all going to walk in via the rio grande with a nuke on the back of a burro - by the the thousands

ok-attack

Well certainly there is some self-serving interest from the intelligence and military communities. Just like any other government department/bureaucracy, they have a need to justify their relevance and budget. And then you've got the MID backers who use wartime scenarios to test their product lines, legitimize their expenses, and of course generate revenue by creating a need for the government to buy their wares.

But if you want to look at it less cynically, the briefings about Afghanistan aren't so much about preventing the Taliban/al-Qaeda from crossing into US soil as ensuring the fight is contained where we have resources to do something about it. If all the jihadists are leaving Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Iran to fight in Afghanistan, then we don't have to worry about going into those countries to take care of the problem, we can just wait for them to come to us. Not saying this is the best strategy, but it's better than sitting on our asses hoping they will all just go away.

The unfortunate reality is that at this point, (and really, probably since the original WTC bombing in '93) we are not going to be in a position to lay down our arms against these fukkers until they are all dead or there's enough economic prosperity in the region to give them something else to live for other than killing themselves in the hopes of finding a paradise full of virgins in the afterlife. We could remove all our military forces from the Muslim "holy lands," abandon Israel both monetarily and militarily, watch them murder all the Jews, make a giant damned apology about getting in the way of their genocide and then donate a $100 billion to both Iraq and Afghanistan and it probably still wouldn't be enough to keep them from wanting to develop nukes and come over here and try and force us to bend down on a carpet five times a day with a rag on our heads and praise Allah. And that being the case, it's hard to consider a course of action.

In other wars things were different. The Viet-cong just wanted to be left the fuk alone to rule their own country as they saw fit and didn't give a shit what we did when we went back home. Eventually we killed enough Chinese and North Koreans the commies lost interest in taking over South Korea. When we helped the Afghans fight the Soviets it was a somewhat similar issue to us with 'nam, the Afghans just wanted the damn Russians to leave them alone and stop killing them. The shit today is completely different. While you need some amount of radicalism in any war effort to effectively demonize the enemy so your troops can find the guts to kill other living human beings and be able to live with it without being completely wracked with guilt, the jihadists take it to a whole new fukking level.

Most wars, even when offensive, are inherently defensive. They are about survival. Either economic survival or the protection of innocents from being killed. The radical Islamists are after something completely different. They are after shaping the world in their own image. And that's some dangerous fukked up NAZI shit right there. Why these radical clerics are not more routinely portrayed as modern day Hitlers I don't know. But that's exactly what they are. It might not be about perfecting the human race through genetics, but it's certainly about perfecting the human race through religious indoctrination (and wiping out the Jews and taking that land back from them).

Whatever the case, the President of the United States, whoever it may be, is going to have a most difficult task for the foreseeable future. Perhaps one day we will be able to broker some secret deal with the Saudi kings and the oil sheiks and the leaders of the Muslim world so they agree to weed these fukkers out themselves so we don't have to do it and we can all get on with our lives. Unfortunately, there are so many people of wealth and power living in these nations starting to believe this radicalist bullshit that these countries seem to be growing less and less likely to want to do anything about it. They have delusions of grandeur that we can be weakened enough and scared enough into letting Israel fall or be converted to Islam. They think they can outlast us. But like most deluded people, they haven't thought the matter through, and they don't seem to realize they need western civilization to continue buying their oil so as to keep the wealth flowing. How we get them to realize this I don't know, but in the mean time, it doesn't hurt to kill as many of the most deluded ones as possible. I just wish we could find more efficient ways to do it. It gets harder every day to know more and more of our brave men and women are losing their lives in this fight against evil. And make no mistake about it, these sons of bitches are evil. Every bit as evil as Hitler. Hopefully we will soon figure out a way to put these motherfukkers down for good so we can stop even more and more of our brothers and sisters and children from getting killed.