It’s not “isolationism,” to believe in common sense. What you are supporting is Obama’s foreign policy and the establishment policy of the last 70 years. In the words of Herman Cain, “How’s that workin’ out for ya?” And Paul is not alone: http://non-intervention.com/ http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2011/09/12/russell-kirk-ron-paul-and-911/ Your article is laughable on it’s face, but I’ll stoop down here to ask, “Do you really want to be seen as having anything of value to say when you call someone’s ideas “dumbass?” Ideas that are echoed by Michael Scheuer, who you may disagree with but is the undisputed expert on Bin Laden–he would point out that your premise is exactly opposite of the truth; Paul is the only one with a foreign policy that would remove the terrorists’ biggest recruiting tool.

Here is what we needed to know about Ron Paul:

 He’s OK with Nuclear armed terrorist states. (Iran)  This means Nuclear armed TERRORISTS, everywhere else.

this was only the most recent of his stupid statements that would keep me from noticing his name on a ballot.

I wouldn’t vote for the delusional fucker for crossing guard at the sun city golf course.

You believe interventionism is needed because you believe the propoganda. The US govt foreign policy is designed to make certain people rich.

Good post, Pat. We’re on the same page. 

His views aren’t isolationist, they are all based on non-intervention. This is pure 100% rhetorical spin.

Government plan: ‘They attacked us for our freedoms’ ‘Better take freedoms way’

Hows that working for ya?

Gunpowder, machine-guns, tanks, long-range bombers….all closely guarded military technologies at one point…and now much  of the world has them.  If you think that you can prevent a particular weapon technology from falling into the “wrong hands”,  all of human history says you are wrong.   I have no doubt that Iran will eventually get a nuclear weapon, as will most other countries given enough time.  So the question you have to ask is, what is more likely to make those countries want to use them against the U.S.A. once they get them? I guarantee you, inflicting our will on other countries, either economically or militarily, either directly or through the U.N. (which we largely fund),  is probably high on the list.

The fact of the matter is,  however noble our intentions, the United States of America has NO BUSINESS dictating to other sovereign nations unless it directly threatens our security. “Directly” does not mean “pre-emitive wars against nations who MAY develop a weapon that they MAY eventually use against us.”   People attack us, not because “we are free” or because of religious reasons. There are nations more free, and more Christian than us. Religion is just the spark that ignites the fuel supplied by socio-economics. No, we get attacked because we feel we have some god-given right to be Big Brother to the world.   We have more suicide attacks today than before 9-11 (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/oct/24/ron-paul/ron-paul-says-terror-attacks-have-increased/). For every terrorist we kill with a drone, who admittedly probably deserves his fate, we kill 5 innocents, and create 10 more dedicated, America-hating terrorists.  The war against terror is a war that cannot be won, as is the war on drugs, or any other War on “Insert-Vague-Idea-Here”.  You might as well have a War on Sex.   Those are not forces that can be defeated, they are tactics and ideas. You cannot defeat ideas with weapons.  Terrorism is as old as warfare itself.  All you can do against tactics is to do your best to not foster circumstances that make folks want to use those tactics against you. And the only way to combat ideas is through example.

This is a simple concept:  What if your very rich neighbor camped in your front yard, read your mail, blocked certain people from visiting you, and periodically entered your house without permission and threatened you into painting your kitchen the color he thought would most likely increase your and his property values?  Might you harbor a little resentment, even hatred, toward that neighbor?  This is a metaphor for what we do as a nation.  It is wrong and it is unconstitutional, and our nation’s founders are spinning about 10,000 RPM in their graves right now.  If a majority of people cannot understand this relatively simple concept, then we really are screwed as a nation.  We will fail in policing the world, bankrupt ourselves, destroying the middle class, and create a storm of Anti-Americanism.  It is the same fate as every world power that has ever existed, that thought they could control the world and then over-extended itself.

Gunpowder, machine-guns, tanks, long-range bombers….all closely guarded military technologies at one point…and now much  of the world has them.  If you think that you can prevent a particular weapon technology from falling into the “wrong hands”,  all of human history says you are wrong.   I have no doubt that Iran will eventually get a nuclear weapon, as will most other countries given enough time.  So the question you have to ask is, what is more likely to make those countries want to use them against the U.S.A. once they get them? I guarantee you, inflicting our will on other countries, either economically or militarily, either directly or through the U.N. (which we largely fund),  is probably high on the list.

The fact of the matter is,  however noble our intentions, the United States of America has NO BUSINESS dictating to other sovereign nations unless it directly threatens our security. “Directly” does not mean “pre-emitive wars against nations who MAY develop a weapon that they MAY eventually use against us.”   People attack us, not because “we are free” or because of religious reasons. There are nations more free, and more Christian than us. Religion is just the spark that ignites the fuel supplied by socio-economics. No, we get attacked because we feel we have some god-given right to be Big Brother to the world.   We have more suicide attacks today than before 9-11 (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/oct/24/ron-paul/ron-paul-says-terror-attacks-have-increased/). For every terrorist we kill with a drone, who admittedly probably deserves his fate, we kill 5 innocents, and create 10 more dedicated, America-hating terrorists.  The war against terror is a war that cannot be won, as is the war on drugs, or any other War on “Insert-Vague-Idea-Here”.  You might as well have a War on Sex.   Those are not forces that can be defeated, they are tactics and ideas. You cannot defeat ideas with weapons.  Terrorism is as old as warfare itself.  All you can do against tactics is to do your best to not foster circumstances that make folks want to use those tactics against you. And the only way to combat ideas is through example.

This is a simple concept:  What if your very rich neighbor camped in your front yard, read your mail, blocked certain people from visiting you, and periodically entered your house without permission and threatened you into painting your kitchen the color he thought would most likely increase your and his property values?  Might you harbor a little resentment, even hatred, toward that neighbor?  This is a metaphor for what we do as a nation.  It is wrong and it is unconstitutional, and our nation’s founders are spinning about 10,000 RPM in their graves right now.  If a majority of people cannot understand this relatively simple concept, then we really are screwed as a nation.  We will fail in policing the world, bankrupt ourselves, destroying the middle class, and create a storm of Anti-Americanism.  It is the same fate as every world power that has ever existed, that thought they could control the world and then over-extended itself.

WOW… that was a serious snivel… see a doctor.

personally I don’t give a rats ass what one Islamic does to another one,The more they kill, the fewer one of my grand kids may have to shoot off a goat.

 I’m worried about HERE, the US, right wrong or indifferent, this is the only concern. IF Iran is allowed to build nuclear weapons, COUNT on one in your back yard, in your near future.  If “they” don;t launch it, it will be delivered, by hand if need be, by one of the terrorist organizations they support and train.

I’m just hoping YOUR backyard is a long ways from mine.

WOW… that was a serious snivel… see a doctor.

personally I don’t give a rats ass what one Islamic does to another one,The more they kill, the fewer one of my grand kids may have to shoot off a goat.

 I’m worried about HERE, the US, right wrong or indifferent, this is the only concern. IF Iran is allowed to build nuclear weapons, COUNT on one in your back yard, in your near future.  If “they” don;t launch it, it will be delivered, by hand if need be, by one of the terrorist organizations they support and train.

I’m just hoping YOUR backyard is a long ways from mine.

WOW… that was a serious snivel… see a doctor.

personally I don’t give a rats ass what one Islamic does to another one,The more they kill, the fewer one of my grand kids may have to shoot off a goat.

 I’m worried about HERE, the US, right wrong or indifferent, this is the only concern. IF Iran is allowed to build nuclear weapons, COUNT on one in your back yard, in your near future.  If “they” don;t launch it, it will be delivered, by hand if need be, by one of the terrorist organizations they support and train.

I’m just hoping YOUR backyard is a long ways from mine.

WOW… that was a serious snivel… see a doctor.

personally I don’t give a rats ass what one Islamic does to another one,The more they kill, the fewer one of my grand kids may have to shoot off a goat.

 I’m worried about HERE, the US, right wrong or indifferent, this is the only concern. IF Iran is allowed to build nuclear weapons, COUNT on one in your back yard, in your near future.  If “they” don;t launch it, it will be delivered, by hand if need be, by one of the terrorist organizations they support and train.

I’m just hoping YOUR backyard is a long ways from mine.

WOW… that was a serious snivel… see a doctor.

personally I don’t give a rats ass what one Islamic does to another one,The more they kill, the fewer one of my grand kids may have to shoot off a goat.

 I’m worried about HERE, the US, right wrong or indifferent, this is the only concern. IF Iran is allowed to build nuclear weapons, COUNT on one in your back yard, in your near future.  If “they” don;t launch it, it will be delivered, by hand if need be, by one of the terrorist organizations they support and train.

I’m just hoping YOUR backyard is a long ways from mine.

and in all of that, not one damn reason to support Ron Paul or to believe any of the juvenile hype about him.

and in all of that, not one damn reason to support Ron Paul or to believe any of the juvenile hype about him.

and in all of that, not one damn reason to support Ron Paul or to believe any of the juvenile hype about him.

and in all of that, not one damn reason to support Ron Paul or to believe any of the juvenile hype about him.

“No wate, it makez purfect scense…. Sea, I wuz 4 turm limitz beefur I wuz agenst da turm limitz. I vote agenst da earmarkz aftur I put em in da billz, ‘nd I getz da moneez eneewayz – makez total centz. No, sereeusly. Someone else poot dem racist commentz in ma newzletterz wif ma name – I didn’t du itz. Sea, sinse da doller iz daklining, we need da gouldz beekuz da Constitution is Unconstitutional.”

Umm. Did you read the blog?  He was attacking Dr. Paul’s non-interventionist foreign policy.  I just defended it.  If you can’t understand the reasoning, then neither I nor anyone else will be able to help you.  Keep fighting for a system that will destroy what you want to protect.

All the candidates suck, all the parties suck. Come November it might just be time to sit back with a 30-pak, watch it all go up in flames and watch all these narcissistic nimrods get lynched.

Then after the lynching and razing we can start over.

Seems to me that if we adopt a non-interventionist policy, then eventually the countries that practice strong intervention will eventually band together and intervene in America.   I’d rather we defend our country by fighting in somebody else’s.  I think it is foolish to wait ’till we are invaded before defending ourselves.

Seems to me that if we adopt a non-interventionist policy, then eventually the countries that practice strong intervention will eventually band together and intervene in America.   I’d rather we defend our country by fighting in somebody else’s.  I think it is foolish to wait ’till we are invaded before defending ourselves.

I would like Ron Paul to explain why Al Qaeda was attacking Americans during the 1990′s, when under Clinton we intervened in the Balkans to protect muslims, and why AQ never attacked Serbia or any Bosnian Serbs back then. 

uh oh I see the ron paul cult is out! which is worse    obama zombies or Ron paul zombies? 

these Ron Paul cult supporters sure seem to be droppin to much acid!  Ronnie boy is not going anywhere which is just lovely to watch! 

Ron Paul cult followers troll around like a bunch of fucking crazy ass leftist rats! ooooooo dont talk bout our Ron like that hes our god!  LOL 

Ron Paul cult followers troll around like a bunch of fucking crazy ass leftist rats! ooooooo dont talk bout our Ron like that hes our god!  LOL 

LMFAO! hahahahhahhahahahahhahhahahahahahhhahahahahahahhahhahahahhhahahahahahhhahhahahahahhahahahahahhahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahhahahahhahahahhahahaahahahhahahahahahahahahahahhaha  hows that weed workin for ya?

Which is worse………I am not a fan of either, but people such as yourself likely worse..

No wonder the military hates Ron Paul.

It’s unfortunate that any American 10 years after 9/11 doesn’t understand where Osama became emboldened to attack the US, so allow me to explain.  When we went into Iraq in 1990, Osama went to the Saudi Monarchy and explained that his group of (Muslim) fighters could be used in defense of Saudi Arabia.  He was told to take his band of merry men and stick it where the sun don’t shine, the Saudis wanted professionals (and in Bin Laden’s eyes infidels) to handle the threat posed by Saddam.  This offended Osama’s conservative (Wahabist) and radical (Salafi) interpretation of Islam, as infidels should not be defending Islam’s holiest of countries.  Hence his decision to go after the US.  

He was further emboldened when we went into Mogadishu and did not finish the job.  Clinton said the evening after the Battle of Mogadishu that we would get Aidid, and then changed his mind the next day when poll numbers came back which said American’s didn’t like seeing their boys die overseas.  Bin Laden cited, on numerous occasions, this moment as the point where he knew the US was vulnerable, could be attacked, and (he believed) defeated.

As to AQ attacking Serbia/Bosnia.  AQ is not a massive organization now, and it wasn’t in the mid-90s either so they would naturally have to pick and choose their resource allocation.  Additionally there are serious racial undertones in the Arabic world.  The linked article provides a lot of information on Arab inaction in the Balkans and paints a picture of sheer ignorance or double standards with regard to various nation’s involvement in the conflict.

http://www.meforum.org/166/the-arab-betrayal-of-balkan-islam

I’m not Ron Paul, but I can see where he is coming from on many issues.  Weather you call it isolationism or non-interventionism the end is the same.  The way I see things, and I could be wrong, the biggest issue people have with Paul’s current foreign policy stance a nuclear capable Iran or “Iranian bomb.”  While we should not stand by idly, and have not, while they seek to acquire these weapons currently we don’t have the “global capital” to leverage those who would be able to prevent its creation (China/Russia).  Those that would be most affected by the creation of an Iranian bomb, Saudi Arabia and Israel, have the means to prevent its creation, through force if necessary, and this is part of the point that Paul makes.  If that escalates into a larger conflict we can have a proper vote in congress for a declaration of war, mobilize, commit the nation to the cause, and end the conflict decisively.  In this way there is conflict resolution, rather than the slow bleed wars with limited long term success which we have engaged in over the last quarter century.  It is much better to prepare for the eventuality that there will be an Iranian bomb.      

The military has given more to Ron Paul’s campaign than to any other candidate, Democrat or Republican.

Pretty good.  Why don’t you smoke some and chill the fuck out?