- 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
2
Posted on 5/6/18 at 1:14 pm to Antonio Moss
He's the best candidate to ever run for the presidency in my 50+ years. The United States doesn't deserve Dr. Paul
Posted on 5/6/18 at 1:53 pm to umop_apisdn
eta: I thought the OP said Rand Paul.
This post was edited on 5/6/18 at 1:57 pm
Posted on 5/6/18 at 2:12 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
Are you kidding? Ron Paul stood firm in the 2008 and 2012 debates when the morons in the crowd booed him for talking about blowback as it relates to foreign policy interventionism. I watched him tell a group redneck South Carolinians during a 2012 debate that using heroin was an exercise of liberty. I haven't seen someone with more steadfast principles in my lifetime. He wouldn't give two shites about the media onslaught.
Ron Paul is an American hero. And so is his weenie son. Either would make a great president.
Posted on 5/6/18 at 2:21 pm to umop_apisdn
quote:
Woohoo, debates.... He's a mathematical grandstand politician.
He's a pushover that needs attention to try to stand out but do nothing.
He's fake. He could never go through what Trump is going through now. He's a politician.
Good lord, you're ignorant.
Posted on 5/6/18 at 2:24 pm to just1dawg
quote:
Good lord, you're ignorant.
Donald Trump is literally the only person who would have defeated Hillary Clinton in 2016. Not because he is the only person who would have made a better choice than her, shite any of the 16 Republicans who he beat in the primaries would have. But he IS the only one who could have withstood the onslaught that Trump faced.
Or do you think Rand Paul wouldn't have been accursed of being a misogynist, racist , puppet of Putin's had he been the nominee.?
Trump was not the perfect candidate , but he was the perfect candidate to face Hillary Clinton.
Posted on 5/6/18 at 2:39 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
That might be the most ignorant take on the last 20 years of foreign affairs I've ever seen.
Well since you’d apparently rather make declarations than discuss what the hell you mean, I’ll just say Antonio Moss always struck me as queer, and anyone who goes by that handle probably is too. Cool?
Posted on 5/6/18 at 2:58 pm to russellvillehog
He did run as a Republican... The cucks put in rule 40 known as the Ron Paul rule to shaft him if he caught fire in the primary. They slipped this in 2012 where to be nominated you had to win 8 states which backfired big time against the establishment GOP canidates , because according to the rules only Trump and Cruz were eligible to receive the nomination ,which the establishment hated. So you really can thank Ron Paul for the election of Donald Trump.
Posted on 5/6/18 at 3:33 pm to troyt37
quote:
I’ll just say Antonio Moss always struck me as queer, and anyone who goes by that handle probably is too. Cool?
The difference of course being that your entire post is direct evidence in support of my assertion that you are quite ignorant of foreign affairs whereas your defensive rebuttal is simply a flaming fabrication.
Posted on 5/6/18 at 3:33 pm to russellvillehog
quote:
We may have not needed trump to come in had he won
Paul was great on some things, but very naive on others. He was very soft on the border and did not understand the nature of the threats to our country. He believed that if we just left everyone alone, they'd leave us alone. I believe he would have severely weakened the military. Human nature and history teach us that strength is the best way to achieve peace.
The military does need to be more accountable for how they use their money, though. We could be just as strong for less money.
Posted on 5/6/18 at 3:46 pm to olgoi khorkhoi
quote:
I believe he would have severely weakened the military
How so?
Posted on 5/6/18 at 3:56 pm to olgoi khorkhoi
I don't see how that's a bad thing
Posted on 5/6/18 at 3:57 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
The difference of course being that your entire post is direct evidence in support of my assertion that you are quite ignorant of foreign affairs whereas your defensive rebuttal is simply a flaming fabrication.
Well, since you can’t bring yourself to engage, or back up anything you say, at all, I guess we’ll just have to take your word for it, won’t we?
Posted on 5/6/18 at 4:25 pm to troyt37
quote:
Saddam Hussein would probably be dictator of Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait, with his own cabinet full of letters of marque, and gas would cost 12.00 a gallon.
I'll start here. Under Hussein, Iraq was a secular state with the most powerful military in the ME. He was the stablizing force in between the Sunni power (Saudi Arabia) and the Shiite power (Iran). His removal directly lead to the spread of ISIS, funded by Saudi Arabia, and the Syrian Crisis which, among other things, is a proxy war between the Saudis and the Persians. Saddam was a bad guy but he was a bad guy with an important purpose - maintain the tension between the two theocracies. Removing him has lead to a multitude of problems.
Like I said, you are incredibly ignorant of foreign affairs.
Posted on 5/6/18 at 4:52 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
Like I said, you are incredibly ignorant of foreign affairs.
Well, at least I have a lot of company in my ignorance on this subject. How convenient for you that we will never know what may have happened, had we just let him continue down his path. The only good thing I can think of is the destruction of the UN. Maybe we would have seen and recognized it as the League of Nations of our time, and abandoned it.
So, how far do you go back with Iraq? Should we have allowed the destruction and takeover of Kuwait, so we wouldn’t have had no-fly zones to enforce, so Hussein wouldn’t have been firing missiles at our fighters? Should we have turned a blind eye to WMD, and paying bounties on dead Americans?
Are we to tell ourselves that Hussein was actually doing us favors with the Saudis and Iranians? Are we to pretend that the Saudis weren’t scared shitless of Iraq and wanted Hussein out? Are we supposed to ignore the fact that Iran became the largest exporter of terror on earth during this time, and continues to be to this day?
Posted on 5/6/18 at 4:55 pm to troyt37
quote:
Are we to pretend that the Saudis weren’t scared shitless of Iraq and wanted Hussein out? Are we supposed to ignore the fact that Iran became the largest exporter of terror on earth during this time, and continues to be to this day?
Do you even realize you're making my point?
Your post speaks volumes.
quote:
Well, at least I have a lot of company in my ignorance on this subject.
First correct statement you've made in this thread.
This post was edited on 5/6/18 at 5:03 pm
Posted on 5/6/18 at 5:21 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
Do you even realize you're making my point?
Your point that having Hussein dictator of Iraq was in our best interests because we want Iran to become to largest exporter of terror in the world, and we want our largest oil trading partner in fear of their existence?
quote:
First correct statement you've made in this thread.
Yep, everyone except you, Ron Paul, and all of his supporters are ignorant. Isn’t it great not knowing how disastrous your philosophy would have been? Of course, I guess we could do some reading up on Neville Chamberlain, see how it worked out for him.
This post was edited on 5/6/18 at 5:22 pm
Posted on 5/6/18 at 5:28 pm to troyt37
quote:
Your point that having Hussein dictator of Iraq was in our best interests because we want Iran to become to largest exporter of terror in the world, and we want our largest oil trading partner in fear of their existence?
No, the point that removing Hussein empowered Iran in the ME.
quote:
Yep, everyone except you, Ron Paul, and all of his supporters are ignorant.
How one views macro-foreign policy has little bearing on their knowing basic foreign affairs facts. I have no problem with people that advocate interventionalist foreign policy so long as they can make a competent argument. That is a far cry from your original post in which you displayed an incredibly lack of knowledge of Middle Eastern history over the last twenty years. (and your ignorance of Russian actions but I didn't address that.)
quote:
Isn’t it great not knowing how disastrous your philosophy would have been?
Is it better than knowing the incredibly expensive disaster that the Bush Doctrine has been?
quote:
Of course, I guess we could do some reading up on Neville Chamberlain, see how it worked out for him.
Yes, because there are so many similarities between Hussein and Hitler. Remind me what sovereign nation(s) Hussein was invading in 2002?
Posted on 5/6/18 at 5:57 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
No, the point that removing Hussein empowered Iran in the ME.
You are aware that Hussein and the Ayatollahs in Iran came to power about the same time, and we didn’t take Saddam out until 2003 or so correct? Iran made their terrorist bones while Saddam was the dictator of Iraq. Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, and their support of the PLO, long predate Saddam’s removal.
quote:
Is it better than knowing the incredibly expensive disaster that the Bush Doctrine has been?
You’re asking me? What I’m saying is you guys won’t even contemplate what the results of leaving the ME to it’s own devices could be. I’m sure no more than a few would immolate themselves in the town square at the destruction of Israel, but when Russia, (who most certainly will never go hands off in the ME) Iran, Syria, and Lebanon dominate the ME, and a loaf of bread is $15, because gas prices are set by countries who first and foremost want our destruction ala Israel, then maybe you folks will understand that appeasement and non interventionism wasn’t quite so brilliant.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News