What's new
  • ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!

Ron Paul 2012!!! Your thoughts on who we should pick for our "Cause"?

Status
Not open for further replies.
SacredBreh

SacredBreh

Member
Shooting people war but drones not..... does anyone hear Double Speak?

Shooting people war but drones not..... does anyone hear Double Speak?

DiscoBiscuit said:
I can handle the concept of economic warfare but I usually reserve the term war for things like opposing sides actually shooting at each other.

I'm not a fan of presidential wars. That said, I'm not an isolationist.

I'm not a fan of covert wars.

I'm open to necessary national security measures and I want national security measures to be constitutional and to abide by Geneva conventions of war. Unfortunately I don't get what I want but I'm not ready for isolationist policy.

Ron Paul supporters suggest Ron Paul isn't isolationist yet equate decades of economic sanctions as prelude to war. The sun will rise tomorrow and with it may come a belligerent act on the part of Iran. Until then I'll consider sanctions as economic measures.

When China and Russia are on our side, gotta wonder if 99% of the globe doesn't like the idea of Iran obtaining nukes.
Click to expand...

Funny you argued earlier in the thread use of drones in Pakistan was not war either...... guess they are less dead with drones than if you shoot them??????

Peace
 
DiscoBiscuit

DiscoBiscuit

weed fiend
Veteran
SacredBreh said:
That was an ugly clip!..... Zero compassion. Everyone should see that!

Peace
Click to expand...

Get ready, it'll be his pretext for flip flopping on medical marijuana. If he's on both sides of enough issues, you and I couldn't possibly know for certain what he'd do as president - i.e. mission accomplished.
 
SpasticGramps

SpasticGramps

Don't Drone Me, Bro!
ICMag Donor
Veteran
DiscoBiscuit said:
I usually reserve the term war for things like opposing sides actually shooting at each other.
Click to expand...
And spontaneously combusting nuclear scientists? Seems to be a problem over there these days.
When China and Russia are on our side, gotta wonder if 99% of the globe doesn't like the idea of Iran obtaining nukes.
Click to expand...
That's debatable. You ready to risk it all? A lot more at stake this time than going into Iraq on some bogus propaganda.
"It is puzzling to some that Major General Zhang Zhaozhong, a professor from the Chinese National Defense University, said China will not hesitate to protect Iran even with a third World War... Professor Xia Ming: "Zhang Zhaozhong said that not hesitating to fight a third world war would be entirely for domestic political needs...."
Click to expand...

I'll leave the war bit alone. It'll get the thread closed. Plus, we are just going back and forth on semantics. As much as I hate it every time we come to points like this in history people die in hordes so I expect this time to be no different. Round and round we go history repeats itself.
 
Cojito

Cojito

Active member
SacredBreh said:
Cojito--The point is mute... all the candidates that are likely to be in the election do not agree with your view of things so in that respect "who do you support for our cause". Your argument against Ron Paul applies to actually all the top candidates. You don't even want me to get into a comparison of each's particular beliefs. Wouldn't matter because.... see the first sentence in this paragraph. What is your point as it relates to the discussion if they all are equal in regards to what you keep discussing?
Click to expand...

if all the top candidates disagree with me when i say we can know things, respect reason, evidence, and science to describe our world. if they believe there's a supernatural creature ordering our lives, then i would hope republicans demand smarter candidates. my "point" has always been that this kind of thinking is dangerous and not to be respected.
 
DiscoBiscuit

DiscoBiscuit

weed fiend
Veteran
SpasticGramps said:
And spontaneously combusting nuclear scientists? Seems to be a problem over there these days.That's debatable. You ready to risk it all? A lot more at stake this time than going into Iraq on some bogus propaganda.

I'll leave the war bit alone. It'll get the thread closed. Plus, we are just going back and forth on semantics. As much as I hate it every time we come to points like this in history people die in hordes so I expect this time to be no different. Round and round we go history repeats itself.
Click to expand...

Have we been implicated in the dead scientist caper? I'm ready to 'risk' Iran giving up it's nuclear weapons ambition through economic sanctions that Russia and China happen to back.

I didn't know the Iraq 'evidence' was a lie until media reports like Wilson's op ed in the NYT and Scott Ritter's public protests. That said, I was never in favor of preempting somebody who hadn't threatened us.
 
Hash Zeppelin

Hash Zeppelin

Ski Bum Rodeo Clown
Premium user
ICMag Donor
Veteran
^Iran just wants to be left to there own devices to destroy Israel. It isn't that I like Israel, but The Iranian government wants another holocaust and I can not support genocide. I like how their scientist are getting killed and their computers hacked.

As far as the people of Iran, they would love it if somebody killed their dictator. They voted him out and he decided to stay. they do not want to mess with the US, they just wanna live their lives in peace like most humans. In Tehran they have more females in universities then men. The leader is holding them back from full self westernization.

Bruce Springsteen didn't write Born in the USA because it sucks here.
 
ShroomDr

ShroomDr

CartoonHead
Veteran
When did they vote Ahmadinejad out?

If anything the mullahs wanted him removed because he refused to allow one of their puppets in his cabinet.

I dont know what happened after that.

Pretty sure Ahmadinejad was the mayor of a major city, he is/was very popular with the people.

Iran wants a bomb, but i doubt they intend to make one and send it to Tel Aviv. The retaliation would wipe them from the planet. I'll tell you this though, i wouldnt want to take the gamble and live in Tel Aviv.

=======

Can anyone tell us Ron Paul's plan for Korea? I would assume zero sanctions too, and almost certainly a removal of the ~40,000 troops we have on the DMZ.



-
 
itisme

itisme

Active member
Veteran
BAM!!! Big time endorsement. Santorm was dreaming :D LMAO....I see it a two man race after SC!

Sen. Davis’s full statement of endorsement follows.

Statement from Sen. Tom Davis

“It’s easy to campaign on lower taxes, less spending and fewer regulations – it’s another thing entirely to stand up for these limited government principles when the entire Washington establishment is aligned against you. Yet for more than three decades Ron Paul has cast thousands of lonely votes in our nation’s capital based on the constitutional principles that this country was founded on – and that the Republican Party has promised to protect. Yet while generations of politicians – including far too many Republicans – were losing their way or caving to the status quo, Ron Paul was standing as a Tea Party of one against a towering wave of red ink.

“2012 marks the fifth consecutive year in which the federal government is going to spend well over $1 trillion in money it doesn’t have. Each and every American taxpayer is now on the hook for $135,000 worth of federal debt – and last year’s debt deal adds another $7 trillion in deficit spending over the coming decade. Meanwhile the U.S. Senate hasn’t passed a budget in nearly 1,000 days.

“I’m endorsing Ron Paul because enough is enough. Despite this wave of unprecedented government spending, our unemployment rate has remained above 8 percent for the last 34 months and 146.4 million Americans – one out of every two people in this country – are now classified as poor or low-income.

“Government activism and government intervention clearly hasn’t fixed our economy – which is why the Republican Party needs a nominee who isn’t wedded to that failed approach. We won’t chart a path to fiscal solvency or victory in November by running toward the failed ideas of the left – we will achieve those victories by returning to the principles that the Republican Party once stood for.

“That is why I am proud to endorse Ron Paul for president.

“Ron Paul’s record matches his rhetoric, his fiscal plan matches the fiscal challenges that our nation is facing and his movement represents the taxpayers whose interests have been ignored in the political process for far too long.

“I’m also endorsing him because unlike what the pundits have led you to believe, he is the candidate who gives the Republican Party the best chance to beat Barack Obama in November.

“We have a choice: We can keep electing candidates who talk about change only during political campaigns as a way to get elected, or we can finally elect a candidate who will walk the walk and make that change a reality – restoring our bottom line, our individual liberties and our national pride in the process.”

Authorized and paid for by Ron Paul 2012 PCC Inc. www.RonPaul2012.com
 
MadBuddhaAbuser

MadBuddhaAbuser

Kush, Sour Diesel, Puday boys
Veteran
Cojito said:
if all the top candidates disagree with me when i say we can know things, respect reason, evidence, and science to describe our world. if they believe there's a supernatural creature ordering our lives, then i would hope republicans demand smarter candidates. my "point" has always been that this kind of thinking is dangerous and not to be respected.
Click to expand...

While you sit around waiting for an atheist or agnostic, me and the rest of america will be voting this year. maybe you can wait the rest of your life for things to change, but I can't and will vote for ron paul again this election.o

DiscoBiscuit said:
Have we been implicated in the dead scientist caper? I'm ready to 'risk' Iran giving up it's nuclear weapons ambition through economic sanctions that Russia and China happen to back.

I didn't know the Iraq 'evidence' was a lie until media reports like Wilson's op ed in the NYT and Scott Ritter's public protests. That said, I was never in favor of preempting somebody who hadn't threatened us.
Click to expand...

So you don't remember bush two saying "saddam tried to kill my daddy"? You don't recall his war hawk cabinet? I hadn't seen such an obvious fabrication by a presidency since "wag the dog"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top