Ron Paul - NeoCon Global Government

House Web Site ^ | 6-13-2005 | Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX)

[ninenot]

Well, we have to look at the same question I asked BE: what, exactly, IS "the national interest?"

In the current situation, for example, it may be in OUR interests that UN troops are sent to Sudan (or Congo.) Both countries are run by slimebag despots who are wholesale eliminating parts of their population.

BUT--there are not a whole lotta US troops to spare.

[ninenot]

We will HARDLY impinge on friendship over such matters as "the national interest," but I'd still love to find a definition which works and leaves sleazeball Presidents (there will be a couple more, sometime...) with little alternative in military decisions.

See my post immediately above for a situation in which the UN could actually be useful (not that they will, but...)

JPII was not stupid. I know who his #2-ranking emissary to the UN is, and that guy's not stupid, either. They knew full well that the UN has, ah, problems.

But a UN which is rightly-ordered and has integrity would certainly BE an asset to the US.

[houeto]

How many opponents of the UN, on this thread, support expanding the Patriot Act?

Expanding? Nope.

Eliminating? Yep.

[houeto]

check this...

[inquest]

In the current situation, for example, it may be in OUR interests that UN troops are sent to Sudan (or Congo.)

If for some reason it's in our interests to send troops into those places to quell the situation, then we might as well send our own troops. If we don't have enough troops for that, then (I suppose) we could pay another country to go in and take care of it, which is functionally no different from having the UN do it, seeing as how we'd end up paying for it anyway. But to have a permanent establishment like the UN is not necessary, and always has a dangerous potential.

[iconoclast]

All of my adult life, I have been involved in the conservative movement and it has NEVER tolerated paleocowardice as national policy. Interventionism is conservative policy, when, where and as we choose.

Please choose Pakistan the instant you develop testicles!

[iconoclast]

They seem to believe that the French and Dutch plebiscitary rejections of the Euro Constitution were produced at least substantially by: World Youth Days of JP II causing religious rebellion by young Europeans against their valueless 1960s generation parents who are enemies of Church and Culture and Civilization and a widespread belief among the European young that if their radical parents are for something, they should oppose that something.

Did you catch your man George on the tube today?

He's heartsick about the EU situation. I guess it is quite a set back for the one worlders. ;o)

[Nephi]

My sentiments, too.

I'm surprised no one responded to my question...maybe they thought I was making trouble? I was seriously trying to gauge the consensus of anti-UN freepers. There are so many freepers who have bought into globalism I'm trying to find true conservative freepers.

[inquest]

Another group to watch out for are those who are opposed to the current UN but want it replaced with some pro-"democracy" organization or some such. Those people are no bigger friends of this country's sovereignty than the current supporters of the UN.

[houeto]

I'm surprised no one responded to my question...

streetpreacher answered you and voted to eliminate Patriot also.

[streetpreacher]

Thanks for noticing. :-)

[BlackElk]

ninenot: There certainly are no troops to spare. The mistake du jour is in not doing whatever is necessary to bring reservists home, replace them with young regular servicemen, and escalate military pay and perks as necessary to overwhelm our "insurgent" (paid criminal) enemies in Iraq and elsewhere and bring troop strength back to Reagan era levels. We have not yet recovered from Clintonian military cuts much less restored the military strength of Reagan's era and we are trying to fight a war on the cheap (for the government) by dragging reservists back to active duty. That it is legal does not make it wise.

We can also allow Mexicans and Latin Americans to earn American citizenship through military service. With GI bill, one generation from rural Mexican poverty to college credentials and home ownership (and conservative Republicanism since they are already social conservatives and will be military conservatives) via six or so years active duty service in good behavior and reserve status thereafter.

As to Pakistan, a green light to India would do a lot. Otherwise, we will get there when we get there. What paleos think of the manhood of interventionists never has been a concern and never will be and there is no reason why it should be.

i & i: You have as much in the way of my researching for you as you are going to get. I will not honor your imagined authority to dictate what I supposedly owe you. Read despicable pantywaist Raimondo's anti-American and anti-Semitic blatherings on antiwar.com or Fleming's on Chronicles.com or not as you see fit. I owe you absolutely nothing. I personally hope that the wars place an especially heavy burden on you in material terms. I do not wish you well. You are NOT conservatives as anyone active in the movement would readily realize. Peddle your sniffles elsewhere. I will respond as I see fit or not as I see fit.

I now leave both of you to ninenot who may be closer to your views but is infinitely more rational.

[BlackElk]

In #112: Fleming's anti-American blatherings. I have no direct knowledge of anti-Semitism at the Institute.

[BlackElk]

You prefer, maybe, pro-tyranny groups, absolute monarchy groups, socialist, fascist or communist groups? You prefer the current UN??????

American sovereignty will take care of itself when we beef up the military to Reaganite levels and buy it all the new toys that are needed.

Is your slogan: Freedom for me but not for thee??????

[inquest]

You are NOT conservatives as anyone active in the movement would readily realize.

You're right, no "true conservative" would demand that fruit-loops who make wild charges should actually back them up, instead of rambling on about everything else under the sun and making paranoid statements about their questioners. I don't know what I could possibly have been thinking...

[BlackElk]

George Weigel????? George Dubya Bush????? Both conservatives unlike the paleos. Dubya is doing a Texas gubernatorial shuck and jive (See "OOOOH, I Like to Do a Little Sidestep" in Best Little Whorehouse in Texas) in response to the incessant pestilential whining of the ignorant and cowardly.

Run Ron Paul for President. See Ron Paul crushed again.

[inquest]

I prefer getting out of the UN and replacing it with nothing. I know this may be a difficult concept for you, so don't be discouraged if you don't get it on the first read. Just take it slow.

[BlackElk]

That presupposes that you are capable of thinking which is not suggested by paleopantywaistism or your posts.

[BlackElk]

I prefer getting out of the UN, replacing it with nothing, beefing up the American military, intervening unilaterally whenever and wherever the USA sees fit with the assistance of freedom-loving nations who want their part of the honor. I also favor refusing to acknowledge fraudulent claims of neo-NevilleChamberlains to the name "conservative" with or without prefixes. Cowardice as national policy is not conservatism. I also believe in aggressively attacking such fraudulent claims and claimants.

[BlackElk]

If you are looking for fruit loops try Raimondo or Andrew Sullivan. One is your foreign minister. The other is just so darned concerned about the lack of luxuries for the criminal prisoners at Guantanamo.