Posted on 05/16/2007 9:36:19 AM PDT by K-oneTexas
An argument. Not THE argument. Just AN argument. Why is it so stupid anyway? We are deeply in debt as a nation. This might be an area to save some money, reduce expenses. Why not talk about it?
But for him to make a real argument, would be to admit also that, for all their problems, there are also legitimate strategic reasons for supporting one or both organizations.
Strategic reasons for supporting? Ok, let's hear them---from YOU.
Your choice of the word strategic is interesting. Would a non-bank employee choose that word? Who do you work for, WB, or IMF? Inquiring minds want to know! Afraid such talk might result in your rice bowl being taken away? Here is why outdated useless institutions persist: government JOBS; government is its own interest group; plus each job provides a revenue stream to the IRS, a constituency, a political power base.
My, my. What a predictable rejoinder.
Yeah, that Ronnie was a regular Robert Taft/Sarc.
I think thou doth protest too much. In fact, when I see protestations such as yours towards anyone who questions the actions of anyone who is or may be a Jew, it reminds me of the reaction of islamic zealots to anyone who wants to investigate any interesting point that that group might consider embarassing, the age of Mo's wife Aisha, the fact that islam is spread by the sword is another one they try to hide. Always, you must not question! You must not question! I wonder whom they learned that tactic from?
I think increasing numbers of people are starting to see that it isn't right that certain individuals are able to exercise extraordinary privileges protected behind a wall of interference put up by people like you.
In fact, your objections and name calling make me more suspicious. Now I want to know more about what he did, to see what all the fuss is about.
Growing up the neighborhood kids had a joke, a name called out, the person would say back, "that's my name, don't wear it out." Anti-semite. That is getting very worn out. It is losing its effect. Good enlightened people don't want to be bigoted but at the same time you call us anti-semite too many times and I begin to wonder what it is you have to hide. People are willing to bend backwards only so many times. Personally I hope you continue overusing that slur, it would be good for you to wear it out even faster.
Pat's article; stands on its own merits. Very good.
It's also worth pointing out that our allies in NATO joined us in going after Afghanistan, so NATO hasn't outlived it's usefulness for us (though I'd boot out the French).
However, I also agree with the vast majority of what Buchanan wrote in this article, which is extremely rare.
Going to dodge the question? You know something Pat doesn't?
Well since you aren’t supposed to be questioning them anyway, why do you need to refer to them at all?
The UN has long been useless because Russia and China veto any meaningful resolution in the Security Council, and the French have joined in in both the political obstruction and in selling weapons to our enemies.
I have little doubt that Russia would go back to it's own games if it had the power to do so and there wasn't opposition to keep them from doing so.
Pat Buchanan is delusional as the left when it comes to believing that the problems of the world are all our fault, and everyone would get along just fine if we minded our own business.
However, that doesn't mean that his points about withdrawing from useless and corrupt international institutions aren't valid.
Not to mention his declaring NATO to have had no purpose for the last 15 years, despite the fact that it was our allies in NATO that came to our aid after 9/11 and joined us in going after Afghanistan, and who are still fighting there. Obviously some allies proved more true than others, but declaring NATO useless when they are currently fighting effectively in OUR defense is more than a bit rude.
I don’t agree with Buchanan 100 percent of the time, but I do agree with 100 percent of this particular article.
There are a lot of people in the Republican party - especially Buches 41 and 43 - who are trying to move America towards a one world government. The elder Bush even loved using the phrase “new world order”. Problem is, most of the rest of the world is socialist or totalitarian. I have no intention of being subjected to their laws.
Best is the devolution of power. Get out of the IMF, the world bank, the UN, and NATO. They have outlived their usefulness, as Buchanan points out. Then force the federal government to start living under their enumerated power.
It is no mistake that in 3 years of law school, my ultralib professors never mentioned the 10th amendment. The were far more interested in just how far you can stretch the 14 amendment and commerce clauses instead. For lawyers, libs, and “one world order” Repubs, government is all about putting all power into as few hands as possible.
Would that have happened outside the NATO or not? Did we have alliances with those countries before NATO or not?
Anybody who opposes the establishment of an American Empire is anti-semitic?
So criticism of anybody who is jewish is “anti-semitic”?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.