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 can think of a few reasons...
1. Ron Paul was in the armed forces and served the nation like they are/have.
2. Many military fit the Ron Paul supporter description which is young libertatian (want to do for themselves and work without handouts) adults who are struggling in this economy and concerned with the America they're inheriting.
3. Ron Paul's name is known by now from the past few elections, unlike these different big government candidates who pop up every election.
4. People realize America's interests over-seas seem to be more important than the problems we face at home and I think that angers many Americans.
I think that Americans have gotten used to the USA having an extremely aggressive and militant foreign policy. We're sold on the idea that we are playing the role of Superman, standing up for truth, justice, liberty and all things good.
That's not the way the rest of the world sees us. From Western Europe to Latin America, Asia, the Middle East, Russia and Africa -- the USA isn't loved for our aggressive foreign policy. Far from it. We are feared and hated for it. Absolutely everyone is at least a little bit scared of us because we have the ability to invade them -- ALL OF THEM -- without warning and they know they wouldn't be able to stop us. They also know that we do invade other nations and we do so frequently.
Ron Paul might be asking for too big of a change too quickly. The American people can't adapt to a night to day shift in foreign policy happening on an instant. They won't understand. And in all honesty, the world needs a more gradual approach as well. Going from being the world's policeman to a strict non-player militarily across the globe ... the nations of the world need time to adapt to that change.
But whether it's done gradually or instantaneously, Ron Paul is right on this issue. We meddle where we have no business meddling and the other nations of the world don't appreciate it. Ultimately we're spending vast sums of money on a never-ending quest to right all the wrongs in the world, but we're also doing things very selectively based upon our own selfish national interests. Why continue doing it?
That's not the way the rest of the world sees us. From Western Europe to Latin America, Asia, the Middle East, Russia and Africa -- the USA isn't loved for our aggressive foreign policy. Far from it. We are feared and hated for it. Absolutely everyone is at least a little bit scared of us because we have the ability to invade them -- ALL OF THEM -- without warning and they know they wouldn't be able to stop us. They also know that we do invade other nations and we do so frequently.
Excellent work. I particularly liked the last sentence, however.
Does anyone else find it amusing that our personal freedom and sovereignty are always the two biggest things anyone in power thanks our troops for - despite neither of these things ever being threatened by foreign powers or militant groups at all? The last major and only attack on US soil that I can think of was 9/11 - an act of terrorism that was used by our own government to monitor all Americans with the Patriot Act and now the Defense Authorization Act which allows any of us to be held without due process under suspicion of being a terrorist?
If anything, our extreme devotion to subverting the sovereignty of other nations is what should really be discussed. In addition to our own government using terrorism as a scapegoat for the elimination of our freedoms that we thank our troops for "protecting" somehow despite their being stationed over in Iraq and Afghanistan and not really defending anything in America since nothing is actually being threatened.
Going to war to defend freedom only to have it robbed from you by the very government that claims to be protecting it. Quite the big ironic situation. Isn't it.
Excellent work. I particularly liked the last sentence, however.
Does anyone else find it amusing that our personal freedom and sovereignty are always the two biggest things anyone in power thanks our troops for - despite neither of these things ever being threatened by foreign powers or militant groups at all? The last major and only attack on US soil that I can think of was 9/11 - an act of terrorism that was used by our own government to monitor all Americans with the Patriot Act and now the Defense Authorization Act which allows any of us to be held without due process under suspicion of being a terrorist?
If anything, our extreme devotion to subverting the sovereignty of other nations is what should really be discussed. In addition to our own government using terrorism as a scapegoat for the elimination of our freedoms that we thank our troops for "protecting" somehow despite their being stationed over in Iraq and Afghanistan and not really defending anything in America since nothing is actually being threatened.
Going to war to defend freedom only to have it robbed from you by the very government that claims to be protecting it. Quite the big ironic situation. Isn't it.
SO very true... Not to mention I lived in South America for about 15 years...and yes, we are hated there too because we don't mind our business.
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.
