U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-21-2011, 05:46 PM
 
3,335 posts, read 2,024,576 times
Reputation: 565

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by emilybh View Post
Also Q.G. don't forget that I doubt Ron Paul would have more contributions from the military than all of the other candidates combined if he was going to downsize the military. The Military obviously likes Ron Paul because they trust him and know he would not put them in harms way unless it is really necessary and war had been declared UNLIKE Obama and the Bushes and presidents before them have done.
Sounds to me...like Paul doesn't want to put the Military in ''Any way''

They wouldn't have much to do..if Paul was POTUSA. But, no need to worry, He won't be.

Hope that's not too preposterous a statement for you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-21-2011, 10:08 PM
 
Location: SC
8,981 posts, read 13,140,207 times
Reputation: 3366
Quote:
Originally Posted by quality guy View Post
Sounds to me...like Paul doesn't want to put the Military in ''Any way''

They wouldn't have much to do..if Paul was POTUSA. But, no need to worry, He won't be.

Hope that's not too preposterous a statement for you.
They could protect our borders here for a change. They could also practice and hone their skills without fear of being maimed or killed. We could use the National Guard for Emergencies here -- natural disasters. We'd be MUCH better prepared and have far less of a cash outlay than we do now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2011, 10:23 PM
 
3,335 posts, read 2,024,576 times
Reputation: 565
Quote:
Originally Posted by emilybh View Post
They could protect our borders here for a change. They could also practice and hone their skills without fear of being maimed or killed. We could use the National Guard for Emergencies here -- natural disasters. We'd be MUCH better prepared and have far less of a cash outlay than we do now.

emily, I still love ya....but let me ask you. Does it not TROUBLE you...Ron Paul's attitude regarding Iran? And you don't believe the highest priority of a US President...is protecting America...from enemy forces...outside of our borders?

Emily, surely you're not that naive?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2011, 10:39 PM
 
Location: SC
8,981 posts, read 13,140,207 times
Reputation: 3366
Quote:
Originally Posted by quality guy View Post
emily, I still love ya....but let me ask you. Does it not TROUBLE you...Ron Paul's attitude regarding Iran? And you don't believe the highest priority of a US President...is protecting America...from enemy forces...outside of our borders?

Emily, surely you're not that naive?
No I'm not naive. Iran is not a threat because they don't even have a military to speak of. Iraq also was not a threat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2011, 10:45 PM
 
3,335 posts, read 2,024,576 times
Reputation: 565
Quote:
Originally Posted by emilybh View Post
No I'm not naive. Iran is not a threat because they don't even have a military to speak of. Iraq also was not a threat.
You're plain WRONG, Again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2011, 11:08 PM
 
8,121 posts, read 4,453,607 times
Reputation: 2246
Quote:
Originally Posted by quality guy View Post
You're plain WRONG, Again.
So for some strange reason we are to believe that YOU have more knowledge on this than a sitting member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2011, 11:31 PM
 
48,526 posts, read 76,051,210 times
Reputation: 17834
Its deep amoung thosew who like him as a candidaite just has it was last elction. But it will get him no nomiation or elected presdient. he in fact doesn't even support the republican platform by his views in campigning.Congressionally amoung republicans he has no real support in his party.In fact on mnay issues foreign policy that republcians and demopcrats agree on he is not on board with ether them or past presidents.Can you inmagine the result of his proposig to bring our Military out of South Korea?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2011, 11:44 PM
 
3,335 posts, read 2,024,576 times
Reputation: 565
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
Its deep amoung thosew who like him as a candidaite just has it was last elction. But it will get him no nomiation or elected presdient. he in fact doesn't even support the republican platform by his views in campigning.Congressionally amoung republicans he has no real support in his party.In fact on mnay issues foreign policy that republcians and demopcrats agree on he is not on board with ether them or past presidents.Can you inmagine the result of his proposig to bring our Military out of South Korea?

As i've said all afternoon...Paul has dropped to 6% support of repubs...in 6th place. Thankfully, he' a non-factor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2011, 12:21 AM
 
8,760 posts, read 8,155,980 times
Reputation: 1408
Quote:
Originally Posted by emilybh View Post
No I'm not naive. Iran is not a threat because they don't even have a military to speak of. Iraq also was not a threat.

lol...don't underestimate the trouble Iran can cause. Their military is nothing compared to the US, but it is much more powerful than Iraq's was. Iran is a threat to it's neighbors in the middle east and they have a pretty good missile program which they have been known to use. The threat of them shutting off the Strait of Hormuz is a constant possibility.

It is estimated that Iran could have a nuclear weapon by 2013. To think they won't develop one is naive and irresponsible. This is a very dangerous country and has a history of being very ruthless in the forms of weapons they will use.

Everything is not about a country attacking us on our soil (although that is what 9/11 was), it's about keeping balance in areas like the middle east. You cannot allow a country like Iran to get out of control. Any country in the middle east that gains control of the region can literally hold the rest of the world hostage as things are now. Without the oil coming out of the middle east, the world economy definitely has more issues than it has presently. This is not just about the US, we live in a global economy like it or not. It's a little too late to put the genie back in the bottle on that one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2011, 12:47 AM
 
Location: Texas
19,988 posts, read 8,090,893 times
Reputation: 4358
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
Its deep amoung thosew who like him as a candidaite just has it was last elction. But it will get him no nomiation or elected presdient. he in fact doesn't even support the republican platform by his views in campigning.Congressionally amoung republicans he has no real support in his party.In fact on mnay issues foreign policy that republcians and demopcrats agree on he is not on board with ether them or past presidents.Can you inmagine the result of his proposig to bring our Military out of South Korea?
Okay either listen to Ron Paul or business as usual with all the horrible policies that keep us in countless and never ending foreign wars. When has our current foreign policy worked? We are not safer. As long as we occupy other countries we will incite hatred toward us.

Maybe you need to take a look at what republican stands for. Its the republican party that's lost its way. There is little difference between these manipulating parties. One favors unions, the other corporations, all to the determent of the working stiff.

Can you explain why leaving Korea is bad. There is a greater chance of them blowing themselves up than other countries. They can't even shoot off missiles without photo shopping them into pictures.
All the weapons Russia had and they didn't attack. Because they knew it wouldnt be worth it. Same with Iran. Their leaders and people are not idiots. They are calculating. research on their attacks has shown us that. They don't do it on a whim. Its well planned. They just want us off their land. You do not defeat a super power with weapons, you do it from within. You bankrupt them. Gee I wonder where that has happened before?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top