S-10 Forum banner

1 - 20 of 52 Posts

·
Time to bulk up!
Joined
·
4,332 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
What do you guys think of Ron Paul? A friend of mine told me about him and I went to his website and agreed with him on everything (which was really surprising)

In case some of you are interested, here is a link:

http://ronpaul2008.com/

I'm not political at all and don't care for it that much, but just found his views very interesting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Yeah I just recently heard about him too,been watching and reading alot of stuff about him. I would definately vote for him. We definately need change in this country the way everything is becoming. He's definately got a ton of ideas that I think are great.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
193 Posts
I haven't seen a point on which I don't agree with him on. I don't see him getting the Rep. nomination though. I'll cross over and vote for him if he runs as an independant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
I haven't seen a point on which I don't agree with him on. I don't see him getting the Rep. nomination though. I'll cross over and vote for him if he runs as an independant.
Yea he said that if he didn't get the Rep nomination that he wouldn't run as an independant..

Which I hope he does change his mind if that does happen.
 

·
Xtremely Unique Mod
Joined
·
20,541 Posts
I do not agree with him on the war and to me thats a VERY important issue and that war needs to be finished with force, not walking away with our tails in our legs like the democrates do..... FAgs/
 

·
Time to bulk up!
Joined
·
4,332 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
I do not agree with him on the war and to me thats a VERY important issue and that war needs to be finished with force, not walking away with our tails in our legs like the democrates do..... FAgs/
Not trying to start anything, but when will the war be "finished" or how would one consider it finished? When there are no more suicide bombers? If so, that will be never. Kind of like the war on drugs. It will ALWAYS be there.
 

·
Xtremely Unique Mod
Joined
·
20,541 Posts
Not trying to start anything, but when will the war be "finished" or how would one consider it finished? When there are no more suicide bombers? If so, that will be never. Kind of like the war on drugs. It will ALWAYS be there.
This war will end when the Democrates stop being a bunch of slack jawed faggots and let us shoot some people and actually fight this war. They want it so we can only shoot people if they are clearly showing they are infact alQudia, which means they pretty much have to be waering tshirts saying they are.

Also, If you were the enemy and all you heard on American news stations was pull out of Iraq NOW, we need to leave, this is crazy pull out and you also saw the senate trying to pass the bill to get us out would you stop fighting knowing that your enemy may leave any day??

The Democrates are known for their cut and run tatics. This war will end when we can fight it, hell we put only 20k more troops in Iraq and its working, lets give them another 80k then you'll see changes.


Please answer the BOLD question.
 

·
Time to bulk up!
Joined
·
4,332 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
I still don't get what you are trying to say. You said, "this war will end when the Democrates stop being a bunch of slack jawed faggots and let us shoot some people and actually fight this war."

So are you saying when there are no more martyrs or Al-Qaida members, we'll be victorious? Again, that will NEVER happen. And if it were ever possible, our casuality rate would probably be astronomical.

When will an anti-gang task force no longer be needed in the police force? It will ALWAYS be needed. There will always be gangs, mobs, etc.

As for the bold statement, maybe the attacks will rise and maybe they won't. Either way, they will continue.
 

·
Xtremely Unique Mod
Joined
·
20,541 Posts
I still don't get what you are trying to say. You said, "this war will end when the Democrates stop being a bunch of slack jawed faggots and let us shoot some people and actually fight this war."

So are you saying when there are no more martyrs or Al-Qaida members, we'll be victorious? Again, that will NEVER happen. And if it were ever possible, our casuality rate would probably be astronomical.

When will an anti-gang task force no longer be needed in the police force? It will ALWAYS be needed. There will always be gangs, mobs, etc.

As for the bold statement, maybe the attacks will rise and maybe they won't. Either way, they will continue.
we can hardly shoot them because of the democrats and their policies, the terriosts see all this including the fact that the dems keep saying they are going to pull the troops. Why would they give up and leave? They won't. They are still fighting waiting for the usual democrate move, which is cut and run. IF you were the enemy would you leave or give up considering all you hear is anti war shit and pulling the troops out?
 

·
Time to bulk up!
Joined
·
4,332 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
we can hardly shoot them because of the democrats and their policies, the terriosts see all this including the fact that the dems keep saying they are going to pull the troops. Why would they give up and leave? They won't. They are still fighting waiting for the usual democrate move, which is cut and run. IF you were the enemy would you leave or give up considering all you hear is anti war shit and pulling the troops out?
I completely understand your point. But, what I don't understand is when are we finished in Iraq? What are our goals?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Exactly, all your going to do if we stay in Iraq and whatnot, is to keep fighting.

This is sorta like Vietnam, we could keep fighting and killing, but its not going to stop. Now we aren't fighting with them, and we have trading going on wich is alot more better then us killing each other.

And yeah, maybe if we did pull all of our troops out of their land it may help , who knows. I am sure if some country invaded the USA wouldn't you hate them as long as they were here? Countries have other lifestyles of living, we can't force them to be like us if they don't want to be.

And if you hate Iraq and all those other places so much, then lets get the hell out, if they want to kill themselves or whatever, what do you care?
 

·
The Original A D M I N
Joined
·
18,797 Posts
The real problem is that if we find and destroy the perpetrators, we only make them martyrs. This will only guarantee that others will attack the US again. Now if we absolutely defeat their goals and punish those who support and protect them, we can put an end to this sort of thing once and for all, but we are left with appeasing and cut/run tactics of the liberal left.

The real and only way to win is to come forth with the appropriate response. That is not to punish them, but to deprive them absolutely of the objective they desire. We should announce that any nation that harbors or funds the activities of any of the active anti-American groups will be punished.

The people of Islamic nations should be made to see clearly that the anti-American fanatics and fundamentalists who attacked America in the name of Islam bring down nothing but losses upon themselves and the people they represent. This would mean to take the land, independence, livelihood, take out the military forces and at minimum the nationhood of such countries who support such activities against the US and others.

The real problem is that most of the US does not have the spine to do such a thing or back such a thing. That is where we will fail. No one wants to back such a campaign to put an end to it all. I am fully aware that this would not be an overnight thing, not be easy and frankly there would be a larger loss in life over this by the military. BUT to get it right the military needs to be able to do its job and not be limited like it was in Vietnam. That is exactly what will help end a lot of this.

There are those that say we should be out. What does that accomplish? Really what does it accomplish?

Ok I will entertain it.

1. It will have an immediate affect on the loss of life of the US soldiers.
2. It will get the US out of a region allowing some other country or idea to move in.
3. It will show the world how weak willed the US really is. We backed out of Vietnam and now Iraq.
4. It will bring forth further attacks upon the US on US territory.

There is more, but I will just leave it at this for now.

What I say is a strong forward thinking action against this shit is what is needed. Not some pansy ass crap that the Democrats what the US troops to do. Cut and run is not a way to end this.

Let me ask this of those that think what we are doing now is too much. Do you think that the US could have beaten Hitler using the same tactics that they have to use now? Ok Ok tell me how it was a different war. Really. that is not the question. The question is. Do you honestly think that the US could have beaten Hitler or Japan using the same tactics they are forced to use now?

I have more....but will spare ya for now.
 

·
Time to bulk up!
Joined
·
4,332 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
John,

I know you know A LOT more about this subject than I do and have put me in my place before :D

I am curious as to what, in reality, is our mission in Iraq. Again, I haven't followed up with what we have accomplished lately but know we have accomplished a lot. Yet, I don't see a situation where we can say, "Okay, guys, our job is done here in Iraq. Let's go home."

Any insight would be appreciated :)
 

·
The Original A D M I N
Joined
·
18,797 Posts
Let me preface this reply with the following.....

This reply will contain the following.

1. Spelling errors as I have been drinking.
2. Opinion based on many things.
a) a deep seeded pol/sci background
b) the psychology of the whole situation
c) My out of the box thinking.
3. Facts

I will have Factual info as well as my opinion based comments. Most of my opinion on the matter and what I say is going to be based in facts that I have. Take it how you want.

I am curious as to what, in reality, is our mission in Iraq.
Original mission was really a regime change with a quick placement of a puppet govt in there. The removal of Saddam and his henchmen as well as disrupting the AQ and other terrorist organizations that were in that country. Yes, they were there no matter how many say otherwise. Yes, Saddam did support them by offering up $'s for deaths. Direct ties? I dont care and really it was not part of what the larger overall scheme of things that was to be encompassed.

Now back to the topic...with the USG(US Government) running into heavier resistance and doing some pretty stupid things they had to make changes on the fly.

First mistake was announcing the build up.
Second mistake was allowing media to tag along.
Third mistake was not going in with the "Shock and Awe" as described....it was more of a thump and laugh..

There are more mistakes but those are the general ones that I see as the originating downfall and prolonged engagement we are seeing there.

As we know with regime change comes resistance. NOT everyone is going to like the puppetmasters choice. So now we have the Sunni and Shia ohh and lest I forget the Kurds..... The S&S tag team are not the best of friends and they both hate the Kurds...the USG has shit on all 3over many years through Saddam. Now with two rival factions S&S we have a grasp for a power play in the majority of Iraq. The US does not want to seem biased to either as frankly if they piss off one or the other they are pissing off Iran or Saudi. With the Saudis we have to play nice nice as to not lose our bases there. With the Iranians we dont want to piss them off too much as we already have bad ties with them through the Saddam regime.

Ok back to where I was going and enough of some side info.....The mission per say at this time is to establish a new democratically elected government. This is not going to be like the US govt as it will have more of a "religious" role to it. BUT the whole ideal is to have it as a democratic style with elections and not appointments like Saddam did.

The USG is moving towards this with Iraq as I see it. I also see that they are trying to allow the sectarian violence to squelch itself. Killing each other off makes it easier to see who we need to take out in the end...but I digress...

There is an opportunity at hand to increase employment by rebuilding roads, houses, schools and government buildings, but also to engage the Iraqi people to participate in laying the foundation for a civil and prosperous society. This is something that should have already started on a larger scale than what has already been implimented. It should be open to all willing Iraqis -- Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds -- as a means of helping to create a common culture through shared participation in work projects to rebuild and take ownership of their nation.(Yes I know it sounds a lot like Socialism or a Democrat based society, but it is where it needs to start) With increased capitalism, growth AND getting the people involved will help in getting this moving forward faster.


The simple answer - promoting a stable, accountable democracy in the heart of the Middle East.

Again, I haven't followed up with what we have accomplished lately but know we have accomplished a lot. Yet, I don't see a situation where we can say, "Okay, guys, our job is done here in Iraq. Let's go home."

Any insight would be appreciated :)
It is really hard to just set ONE point or even a dozen to make a final decision on where/when the US can leave. Remember. A fledgling govt is not something that will happen overnight. There are many factors to take into consideration.

1. Currency
2. Infrastructure
3. Elected Govts.
4. Constitution
5. Laws

Now I am not saying in that order, but just those things alone are a starting point. Where are we at with just the first one I listed? Currency. We are trying to establish the new currency in the market. When it hits the CX markets that is when you know that Iraq is closer to being self suffiecent.

Yes, many things have happened. Many things still need to happen. Just remember that you dont hear many of the good things that happen in Iraq. I have yet to see any MSM outlet do a story on anything good going on there. I know many in Iraq that have first hand experience with the good things there and wondered why nothing was ever said.

Enough of my rambling. Back to drinking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Ok Lunatic, I really see what your saying in all of this, BUT, if they liked their country how it was before, why should another country say "hey , change it like this,etc,etc.." ???

I don't see why WE have to put our MONEY and TIME , and SOLDIERS LIFES into all of this..do you know who pays for this all??Try foreign nartions that we take loans on..then sooner or later we have to pay them back.

This war,what does it do for the normal people??? Does it make you or me safer? Was IRAQ reallly connected to 9/11??

Common sense says, get everyone out of countries, and protect YOUR OWN BORDER FIRST! Maybe if we had 1/2 of our troops back on our boarders this wouuldn't happen.

And as history repeats, every great super power makes 1 stupid mistake that contributes to their downfall. Don't think that the USA is invincible..were only like that so far cause of our debt...
 

·
The Original A D M I N
Joined
·
18,797 Posts
Ok Lunatic, I really see what your saying in all of this, BUT, if they liked their country how it was before, why should another country say "hey , change it like this,etc,etc.." ???
Now not knowing what you are replying too I will respond with a few answers.

1. If by they you mean Iraqi's then it goes a little something like this.

The Iraqi's were not happy with their current govt. They infact were terrorized by the leader. This is known and has been shown through time. Saddam used torture chambers and documented this all. If you said anything against him then you were gone. Period. So I do not see where we are saying that the Iraqi's were happy with their country or political outlook.

2. If by this reply you are stating a response to the take over comments...then it goes a little something like this....

So the security of all nations being possibly abused and jeopardized because the country wants to harbor terrorists is AOK with you? Just because the people are ok with it. Let's use Afghanistan here as the example. The country was run by the Taliban. The Taliban destroyed centuries of historical items, terrorized the populace on a daily basis. Imposed their strict religious practices upon everyone and those that did not follow it they were executed. Now saying that the populace could leave at any time is far from the facts. The US came in and summarily removed the Taliban and set up another puppet govt in its place. While there are issues at hand with the place now, it worked and following through for a little longer and allowing US/Nato troops in place to help in controlling the problem areas and warlords would be nice. We all know that the US/NATO is being hindered by the current puppet regime....but that is another novella.

Basically, if a country can not control its own people then really should the Global community just sit by and allow atrocities, drug trading and executions of innocents to happen?

But I will address more later as you brought up other things....

I don't see why WE have to put our MONEY and TIME , and SOLDIERS LIFES into all of this..do you know who pays for this all??Try foreign nartions that we take loans on..then sooner or later we have to pay them back.
Actually it is a little more complex than you make it out to be. The US has been and had been for some time taking loans out from other nations. With a strong dollar it would not hurt the US as much, but as we are in a weaker cycle the US is going to have to pay back larger loans. Just as the US loaned out billions and trillions to other nations the US does it too. It is part of the global exchange network.


Yes there is more to this, but explaining it fully would take way too much time and space.

The real question is this. If the US does not step up and take the lead then what country will? Let us say it is China. If it is China then we now have not only the growing threat of their nation in the trading community, but now they are going to be the larger presence in the mid-east region, increasing their market ability.

Understand that the Middle east is the newest growing area of the world as of right now. A small investment of getting the region democratic, freely trading their wares on the market is a greater investment for those that have backed it. An example is like taking a chance in the penny stocks. You buy into a stock that is .0017 per share for that chance the return on your value will come back with a share value of $2/per. Better yet, take MS. Its IPO was $21/share in 1986. Say you bought $2100 worth at the IPO, today your investment is worth $897,408.00.

Now apply that same idea of stock investment to investing into a country. Some money has to be spent, lives will have to be spent, but the return on investment is far greater than the small amount spent now.

This war,what does it do for the normal people???
What does it do to you that we are there? That is the question I ask you. You sit here and say it does nothing for you or others for the US to be in there. Well, if it does nothing then it should not bother anyone that we are there. BUT it does bother people that we are in another country trying to establish a democracy there.

Why is this? Why does it bother people? Is it due to the fact that US lives are being lost?

So where was this outcry against the US entering into Europe the first and second time. Is it not interesting that a region that "did not have any influence" on the US at the time required the US to enter into and remove a figure head. So it was ok that the US entered into the war in Europe, but not into the Middle east to help bring democracy to the region.

So really, how is this any different?

Hitler and Germany as a whole did not do anything to the US. They did sink a few boats with US citizens in international waters. The Germans even warned the US not to enter into said area. Yet, the US did.

So it was ok for the US to enter into a war to remove a dictator that really was not affecting the US in anyway.


Does it make you or me safer?
Yes, it does.

Contradictory to what others say. A region that is democratically controlled and is part of the freeworld markets is a safer place than a country that is run by a Warlord.

Was IRAQ reallly connected to 9/11??
Answer No.

See this is where people are stuck. People need a connection. Who in this administration has stated that Iraq was connected to 9/11? I would like to see the transcripts on this. Yet, no one has brought forth anything to prove that anyone in the current administration has said anything to the likes. I have been waiting for this since 2004 so far.

Just because the majority of the populace are a bunch of dribbling morons that can not read, put the context of a sentence together, understand what is being said...they naturally assume that some tie was said and that the connection was made.

Peoples inability to read is what the real downfall is here.


Common sense says, get everyone out of countries, and protect YOUR OWN BORDER FIRST! Maybe if we had 1/2 of our troops back on our boarders this wouuldn't happen.

Hardly. The removal of US troops is not going to do anything to better this nation. Shoving them on the border is not going to do anything other than make this place a military state. If that is how you want to live then by all means more power to you. I suggest Russia or even China.

Pulling troops and being a centrist state will further hurt this nation than help it.


And as history repeats, every great super power makes 1 stupid mistake that contributes to their downfall. Don't think that the USA is invincible..were only like that so far cause of our debt...
There have been several blunders by the US many times.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,615 Posts
I'm not going to be nearly as elaborate as Lunitic, but I just dont understand why some people cant grasp the fact that throwing in the towel and leaving Iraq now is the worst thing the US can do. It doesnt nothing but show the world our POLITICAL weakness. We have shown it so many times before and have been taken advantage of because of it. Yet there are those that seem to think that giving even more is the way to make things right.

Look at China, year after year we go into trade negotations with them, and every year we have a bunch of demands for free trade. China says no, and we say OK, we will move on for now, but come back to it later. Of course the conversation never seems to make it back to that and the US companies get screwed again.

Terrorists thrive on weakness. You show them any weakness at all and you've already lost.
 

·
Time to bulk up!
Joined
·
4,332 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Alright, I'm not trying to start a political debate because I'm not Republican or a Democrat, but what did Bush mean when he stated "Mission Accomplished"?
 
1 - 20 of 52 Posts
Top