• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Gary Johnson

Oh no, fact. The Left's idea of "compromise" and "thought" is that everyone must agree with your sick twisted worldview.

wtf are you talking about. I brought up policy with regards to libertarian standards of foreign policy and you ran away from debate screaming stupid generalized names. And you are trying to tell the world now that it's the left that is uncompromising? LOL

way too funny.
 
OK, then the next invasion or nuke attack from an enemy will be on your hands, not mine. I reject isolationism.

If we weren't invading other countries and terrorizing their citizenry, they would have no reason to attack or nuke us (also we have nuclear defense systems...)

Think about it. China is different from us right? You don't agree with their views. But do you want to attack them? Kill innocent Chinese people? No of course not.

However, what if China suddenly opened up military bases on OUR soil, had armed chinese troops in OUR neighborhoods, raided OUR homes killed OUR countrymen, bombed OUR friends and family, all with absolutely no regards to our rights and our government did NOTHING to stop it. How would you feel about China then? And, since that's what we're doing to other countries, how do you think that makes them feel about us?

Here's a 3 minute video based off of one of "kooky" Ron Paul's speeches that effectively explains this idea. Please spend three minutes to watch this, then 10 minutes researching the term "blow-back." The outcome might well change your mind.

Armed Chinese Troops in Texas! - YouTube

Ahh so you'd have no problem with another Hitler slaughtering millions of Jews then. Just because we (the US) decided to crawl into our shell and ignore everyone else.

Not what I said...also we didn't even get involved in WWII to stop Hitler. We got involved because Japan bombed us.
 
Ahh so you'd have no problem with another Hitler slaughtering millions of Jews then. Just because we (the US) decided to crawl into our shell and ignore everyone else.

Exactly. When the German Jews cried for help in 1941, it was the Republicans in Congress who pushed for America to enter WWII.
 
OK, then the next invasion or nuke attack from an enemy will be on your hands, not mine. I reject isolationism.
So, you don't see the difference.

Perhaps if you were to go to North Korea, then to Switzerland, then you just might see that there is some differences between the two nations.
 
Exactly. When the German Jews cried for help in 1941, it was the Republicans in Congress who pushed for America to enter WWII.

what a load-a-****. While you are fabricating Republican rainbows, try reading up on the facts of where the isoliationism in the US involvement in WWII was at it's core. The most prominent figures of the isolationist were Senate Republicans. Please stop trying to rewrite our history.
 
Exactly. When the German Jews cried for help in 1941, it was the Republicans in Congress who pushed for America to enter WWII.
So had the Japs never bombed Pearl, you would have seen a Nazi occupied Europe for decades to come.
 
Ahh so you'd have no problem with another Hitler slaughtering millions of Jews then. Just because we (the US) decided to crawl into our shell and ignore everyone else.

Talk to us about Tibet and why the US is doing nothing about it. Tell us about the concentration camps in North Korea where people are held and literally worked to death.
 
Exactly. When the German Jews cried for help in 1941, it was the Republicans in Congress who pushed for America to enter WWII.

You seem to know a great deal about history and WWII. I've always wanted to know why the Allies didn't bomb the RR tracks that carried millions to their deaths in concentration camps. Why didn't we?
 
The U.S. didn't get involved in WWII to save the Jews or stop the Nazi's. We got involved because Japan bombed us. If we had been doing it for the Jews we would have acted far quicker and in a different manner than we did.

But that is irrelevant to the idea of non-interventionalism and Ron Paul's foreign policy:p You know we have troops in over 130 countries? Can you even fathom just how much the financial consequences that entails, not even looking at the political and societal consequences it has on us?
 
The U.S. didn't get involved in WWII to save the Jews or stop the Nazi's. We got involved because Japan bombed us. If we had been doing it for the Jews we would have acted far quicker and in a different manner than we did.

But that is irrelevant to the idea of non-interventionalism and Ron Paul's foreign policy:p You know we have troops in over 130 countries? Can you even fathom just how much the financial consequences that entails, not even looking at the political and societal consequences it has on us?

Eggzactly. If troops were on foreign soil building homes or something you might have a point of leaving them there but otherwise, people know what military troops are for and wherever they are located it creates a source of strained tension there or nearby there. I'm a pretty far lefty but this is definite cross-over I have with Ron Paul and Libertarians.

We are the United States and we need to focus on our country first. If we are to be a part of the UN, let them be the world's police. For some reason we think we have to be the world's police unilaterally AND another police force via leading the UN. Using the military to secure corporate interests around the world should NOT be our objective as a nation.
 
Eggzactly. If troops were on foreign soil building homes or something you might have a point of leaving them there but otherwise, people know what military troops are for and wherever they are located it creates a source of strained tension there or nearby there. I'm a pretty far lefty but this is definite cross-over I have with Ron Paul and Libertarians.

We are the United States and we need to focus on our country first. If we are to be a part of the UN, let them be the world's police. For some reason we think we have to be the world's police unilaterally AND another police force via leading the UN. Using the military to secure corporate interests around the world should NOT be our objective as a nation.

Liberty unites us all=)
 
Back
Top Bottom