Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: B4Ranch
In no way shape or form am I a an isolationist.

My main beef is with your earlier comment in response to my statement arguing that America should continue to prevent WMD proliferation:

This is one thing that I have never quite understood. Where do we get the right to demand no proliferation from another sovereign nation? We can have nukes but we don’t want anyone else to have them. My attitude towards this is; If our enemy launches a single nuke at us then we should launch five at them. --#67
We have an absolute right to defend America, its people, and our security. I do not want American leaders to take any chances in that regard. The majority of countries not already nuclear have no business whatsoever pursuing nuclear weapons. I give absolutely zero credence to the notion that they have "rights" versus the United States of America. That's why I read your comments as "globalist." I care more about each individual American life than the entire population of any particular nation pursuing nuclear weapons today. They have no "rights" as far as I'm concerned. This would be an anathema to the politically-correct, but it's how I see it.

Until Americans again believe what their forefathers once believed: that the American people have a destiny to accomplish, we will continue to die. We needn't be squeamish about preemptive attacks on Iran or Iraq, as long as we're willing to crush our enemies with the power we still have.

That said, I reject the current administration's globalist agenda, cloaked behind the war on an idea. You and I are in close agreement in that regard. Yes, I would support Ron Paul before I would support another globalist like Bush. An honest isolationist is at least going to do less domestic damage, and that's where the real battle for America's future is. Gladly, we have alternatives like Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo.

141 posted on 05/24/2007 3:31:44 AM PDT by James W. Fannin (Thanks, Cacique)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies ]


To: James W. Fannin

>The majority of countries not already nuclear have no business whatsoever pursuing nuclear weapons.<

You are saying;

The majority of countries not already nuclear have no business whatsoever pursuing nuclear technology.

The majority of countries not already nuclear have no business whatsoever pursuing nuclear medicine.

The majority of countries not already nuclear have no business whatsoever pursuing nuclear research.

Just who was it who made us the worlds mother and/or policeman? Do you understand the true meaning of sovereignty? For the life of me I don’t understand why we need our troops in every country in the world and I sure hate paying for them to be there.

If two countries want to fight it out why do we think we need to get in and pick sides thereby creating another enemy for our kids.


148 posted on 05/24/2007 8:37:44 AM PDT by B4Ranch (Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson