- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
USA Today: Ron Paul Weighs In On Crimea
Posted on 3/18/14 at 7:25 pm
Posted on 3/18/14 at 7:25 pm
As expected, Paul is a voice of reason on this whole matter.
Read more here:
LINK /
And Pat Buchanan echoed Paul in his column today:
LINK /
quote:
What's the big deal? Opponents of the Crimea vote like to point to the illegality of the referendum. But self-determination is a centerpiece of international law. Article I of the United Nations Charter points out clearly that the purpose of the U.N. is to "develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples."
Why does the U.S. care which flag will be hoisted on a small piece of land thousands of miles away?
Critics point to the Russian "occupation" of Crimea as evidence that no fair vote could have taken place. Where were these people when an election held in an Iraq occupied by U.S. troops was called a "triumph of democracy"?
Perhaps the U.S. officials who supported the unconstitutional overthrow of Ukraine's government should refocus their energies on learning our own Constitution, which does not allow the U.S. government to overthrow governments overseas or send a billion dollars to bail out Ukraine and its international creditors.
Read more here:
LINK /
And Pat Buchanan echoed Paul in his column today:
LINK /
3
Posted on 3/18/14 at 7:29 pm to trackfan
It's not 1900 anymore. We are involved. Economic sanctions would be fine with me. Problem is, European countries will just undermine everything with back door deals.
Posted on 3/18/14 at 7:33 pm to alajones
Since it's in Europe's back yard, why shouldn't we defer to them?
Posted on 3/18/14 at 7:42 pm to trackfan
Between NATO and the UN, we are in everyone's back yard. It's 2014, countries can't just go around acquiring territory anymore. There has to be consequences, and whether Europe wants to admit it or US constituents want to accept it, the world looks to us first.
Posted on 3/18/14 at 7:43 pm to trackfan
quote:
Since it's in Europe's back yard, why shouldn't we defer to them?
I agree, they have more of a vested interest in this than we do.
However, I think they are used to having the assurance that the big, bad US military always has their back and is eager to intervene if/when they have problems. We've been there for so long, they are used to being able to have the option to use us as a "911" service if needed. This is something we need to change. They don't need to beef up their security because they don't have to.
Posted on 3/18/14 at 7:45 pm to alajones
quote:
Between NATO and the UN, we are in everyone's back yard. It's 2014, countries can't just go around acquiring territory anymore.
Yes, but we need to literally pick our own battles here. Is it worth starting a war over a territory where the vast majority of the people welcome the invading forces as liberators? I say no.
I know, I know, Sudetenland, etc, etc...
Posted on 3/18/14 at 7:53 pm to trackfan
quote:
Paul is a voice of reason on this whole matter
Wut?
Posted on 3/18/14 at 7:54 pm to trackfan
quote:
Critics point to the Russian "occupation" of Crimea as evidence that no fair vote could have taken place. Where were these people when an election held in an Iraq occupied by U.S. troops was called a "triumph of democracy"?
Iraq didn't vote to join the United states. This is a bad comparison.
If Crimea wants to join Russia, fine. But it is hard to get an hones opinion when they are being occupied by Russia.
Posted on 3/18/14 at 7:56 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
Iraq didn't vote to join the United states. This is a bad comparison.
Granted, however, considering they were voting for their highest office, and we've shown we have no qualms with interfering in the leadership of other nations, the comparison isn't as bad as it would initially seem.
Posted on 3/18/14 at 8:00 pm to upgrayedd
But Europeans have shown a willingness to fight when they feel their interests are threatened or if we need their help. Don't forget that France and England declared war on Germany two years before Pearl Harbor was attacked, or that they both contributed more than a division to the effort to kick Saddam out of Kuwait in Operation Desert Storm, or that we had plenty of European help fighting Al Qaeda in Afghanistan after 9/11, or that it was actually Nicholas Sarkozy who rounded up the posse to go to Libya to take out Gadhafi, with even Norway contributing to the bombing campaign its air force.
This post was edited on 3/18/14 at 8:01 pm
Posted on 3/18/14 at 8:00 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
Granted, however, considering they were voting for their highest office, and we've shown we have no qualms with interfering in the leadership of other nations, the comparison isn't as bad as it would initially seem.
It makes a fair point for sure, but I think it seems closer to this.
Hitler driving into Paris. Guess we should have left France to self. determine.
Posted on 3/18/14 at 8:02 pm to SammyTiger
I see a lot of German soldiers in that picture.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News