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.
I am not a Ron Paul supporter. This however is a typical ad hominium attack on people who do not support foreign aid to Israel. It takes a certain group of people who advocate a position and uses the faults of those people to fallaciously attack the position.
Many of people including myself feel the money could better be spent elsewhere. As to the national security argument that is flawed as well I can think of dozens of other countries that the money could go to in order to more effectively fight terrorism. An example is giving support to Indonesia's police and anti-terror forces in their largely sucessful campaign against JI or allocating the money to customs inspection and immigration to keep terrorists and dangerous material out of the US. The fact of the matter is that Israel despite our aid has had a dismal record of dealing with its terrorism problems and preventing the spread of international terrorism.
OK tell me who in the middle east will supplant Israel if we cut them off? I don't think Indonesian intelleigence agents would blend in too well in Iran.
I am not a Ron Paul supporter. This however is a typical ad hominium attack on people who do not support foreign aid to Israel. It takes a certain group of people who advocate a position and uses the faults of those people to fallaciously attack the position.
Many of people including myself feel the money could better be spent elsewhere. As to the national security argument that is flawed as well I can think of dozens of other countries that the money could go to in order to more effectively fight terrorism. An example is giving support to Indonesia's police and anti-terror forces in their largely sucessful campaign against JI or allocating the money to customs inspection and immigration to keep terrorists and dangerous material out of the US. The fact of the matter is that Israel despite our aid has had a dismal record of dealing with its terrorism problems and preventing the spread of international terrorism.
It is not an ad hominem attack. I have posted 2 out of literallly 50 links tying his supporters to anti semitism. I have said a number of times I do not believe he is an anti semite but some of his supporters use his views as cover to bash Israel.
It is not an ad hominem attack. I have posted 2 out of literallly 50 links tying his supporters to anti semitism. I have said a number of times I do not believe he is an anti semite but some of his supporters use his views as cover to bash Israel.
bashing unconditional support for Israel does not equal anti-Semitism.
Ah see my other post about ways to save money. Of course the Federal government can and must conduct national security.
This is part of a problem I have with Neo-Cons. They never met a military program they did not like. Imho Spending should only be conducted when there is a reasonable potential of long term return on investment. Most Americans do not get this. It is something I learned from experience and along with the idea of financially backing sucess and abandoning failure has served me well. It is the same reason I oppose TARP and most welfare schemes. Not all and in fact quite a bit of military does not achieve these goals and should be cut. Quite frankly I find it hard to believe that someone would back failing programs or oppose potentially lucrative investments just because of broad ideology, but that is why our country is in the financial mess it is in now I guess.
Bwhahahahahahaha!!!!! Some dude put up a website and said it was so, therefore it is so. You belong more in the Obama camp with every post, believing what people will tell you.
It is not an ad hominem attack. I have posted 2 out of literallly 50 links tying his supporters to anti semitism. I have said a number of times I do not believe he is an anti semite but some of his supporters use his views as cover to bash Israel.
What is an ad hominem is saying X people are anti-semetic and also oppose sending military aid to Israel. Therefore we should send aid to Israel. The justification for aid to Israel in that particular line of reasoning has nothing to do with the merits or drawbacks of sending aid to Israel, but instead focuses the argument on people who are anti-semetic and their position, something which is complete unrelated to why we should or should not send aid and thus an ad hominem ie (attacking a characteristic of someone making an argument rather then the argument itself).
This is part of a problem I have with Neo-Cons. They never met a military program they did not like. Imho Spending should only be conducted when there is a reasonable potential of long term return on investment. Most Americans do not get this. It is something I learned from experience and along with the idea of financially backing sucess and abandoning failure has served me well. It is the same reason I oppose TARP and most welfare schemes. Not all and in fact quite a bit of military does not achieve these goals and should be cut. Quite frankly I find it hard to believe that someone would back failing programs or oppose potentially lucrative investments just because of broad ideology, but that is why our country is in the financial mess it is in now I guess.
Well Ok I think you have a point there somewhere. Please explain how our support of Israel hasn't produced long term success. The fact that they blew up Irans nuclear program is justification alone to support them.
That is your source. Funny. You must not have gotten the memo. It is time to switch back to the democratic party. That is what a neo-conservative is, as you well know.
Neoconservatism is dead no politician who wants to get elected wants to be known as a neoconservative.
I am waiting for a response to Israel spying on the U.S.
What is an ad hominem is saying X people are anti-semetic and also oppose sending military aid to Israel. Therefore we should send aid to Israel. The justification for aid to Israel in that particular line of reasoning has nothing to do with the merits or drawbacks of sending aid to Israel, but instead focuses the argument on people who are anti-semetic and their position, something which is complete unrelated to why we should or should not send aid and thus an ad hominem ie (attacking a characteristic of someone making an argument rather then the argument itself).
Yikes are you trying to say that criticizing Israel immunizes one from charges of anti semitism. Isn't it possible that someone is against sending aid to Israel because they hate jews?
You somehow imply that I am for sending aid to Israel because anti semites are against it. I outlined in several posts why our friendship with Israel serves our national interest.
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.
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.
