Skip to comments.Smearing Ron and Rand Paul
Posted on 02/18/2011 7:24:57 PM PST by Ex-expromissor
Another day, another vitriolic and personal David Horowitz attack on a conservative who doesn't meet his purity test. Today he amplifies Gary Bauer's call to action against a proposal from Rep. Ron Paul, R-Tex., to cut foreign aid to Israel.
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
Thank you for such a well thought out post... Yaaaayyyy for sanity! There is hope!
You’re not entirely wrong. When you come up with a perfect foreign policy let us know.
Put yourself in Reagan’s position. You’d think that saving Afghanistan from the Soviets would be rewarded, like most intelligent humans. We weren’t. So stopping the USSR from taking over state after state is wrong?
At what level of communistic control should we form a committee? You are dense, the Paul’s are dense. You can use the Ostrich defense. I won’t.
"You can use the Ostrich defense. I wont."
IMO you just did...
You assume way too much... If you saved a "gang" in your neighborhood from being waxed by another "gang" in your neighborhood. After the bloodshed was over do you seriously think that the "gang" you just saved would just welcome you and your "goody goody" morals continuing hanging around "their" hood??? How naive can you be?
The Pauls suggest we turn a blind eye. This is why we have to deal with “Muslims for Ron Paul.”
If you don’t arm your allies, respectable or not, then your enemies will win. You’re being simplistic. I know you don’t like that implication but 6000 years of humanity prove you wrong. All countries are interwoven with each other, especially now. Withdrawing all aid borders on stupidity. It doesn’t make up that much of our budget.
Sticking our nose in everyone’s business in the name of globalism and “democracy” is going to be the cause of WWIII. We need to reel ‘em (the elite) in.
However, I think we should stand by Israel, just the same. Too many bad guys after her.
The Soviets take over Afghanistan. It’s another resource and labor. Not very hard to understand.
Wrong wrong wrong... The Paul's simply suggest that we quit arming people who hate US. I know, I know... Too simple to comprehend... I guess I need to try to make this more complicated...
I agree with your take but check out the followers he has inspired. The ones I see on the internet are very anti-Israel. As many are left-libertarians as are right-libertarians. "Stop all foreign aid"--- To a certain extent that is code for "stop aid to Israel". They don't like Israel and have bought into the leftist/Muslim narrative on it
Left-libertarians are a confused bunch as a general rule. How one can be libertarian on the one hand and a near totalitarian statist on the other is a mystery, or should be to anyone with an ounce of logic in their system.
They’ve latched onto Paul because they’re reflexively “anti-war” and perceive him to be as well. In this, they are mistaken. He supported Afghanistan. If the dolts had ever bothered to look at what Paul actually advocates across the board, they’d hate him. They’re nearly the antithesis of one another.
We don’t have the capital to fund any nation. Boortz offered figures today on our deficit, claiming when broken down, each taxpayer owes about 1.7 million.
If his calculations are correct, I think we’re gonna need more taxpayers.
OMG... Arming the so called allies I have mentioned has created enemies... Not allies...
"Youre being simplistic"
Yes I am and you still don't get it!
" I know you dont like that implication but 6000 years of humanity prove you wrong. All countries are interwoven with each other, especially now. Withdrawing all aid borders on stupidity. It doesnt make up that much of our budget."
Hoo Boy... With logic like this... you are going to need a hell of a lot more than "Two Swords" pal... You're going to need at least a couple dozen to survive... let alone win any battles on this field...
I don’t understand why we have to provide money to our allies. If the alliance is mutually beneficial,why do we have to give them money? Isn’t the mutual benefit good enough? That’s what I don’t get about foreign aid. If they are truly our allies,why do we have to pay them? I don’t mean just Israel,I mean any allies to whom we send money.
I saw an interview of Ron Paul in which he was asked if he would have reservations about retaliating in kind if nuclear weapons were used against us. He said no.
There was another interview in which he said that if we have to go to war,Congress should declare war and then we should fight to win. I don’t know why the anti-war crowd clusters around him.
You are the perfect Paulbot.
I don’t agree with some of the gambits suggested by this observer, but he is pretty good at analyzing the global chessboard, and therefore worth a close look.
The author of the acclaimed New York Times bestseller The Next 100 Years now focuses his geopolitical forecasting acumen on the next decade and the imminent events and challenges that will test America and the world, specifically addressing the skills that will be required by the decades leaders.
The next ten years will be a time of massive transition. The wars in the Islamic world will be subsiding, and terrorism will become something we learn to live with. China will be encountering its crisis. We will be moving from a time when financial crises dominate the world to a time when labor shortages will begin to dominate. The new century will be taking shape in the next decade.
In The Next Decade, George Friedman offers readers a provocative and endlessly fascinating prognosis for the immediate future. Using Machiavellis The Prince as a model, Friedman focuses on the worlds leadersparticularly the American presidentand with his trusted geopolitical insight analyzes the complex chess game they will all have to play. The book also asks how to be a good president in a decade of extraordinary challenge, and puts the worlds leaders under a microscope to explain how they will arrive at the decisions they will makeand the consequences these actions will have for us all.
The old quip about left libertarians is-— they simply are liberals who don’t like paying taxes.
“They don’t like Israel and have bought into the leftist/Muslim narrative on it.”
If you understand the Al Qaeda / Muslim Brotherhood program, you will realize that buying into their narrative implies great joy when the US pulls the plug on support for any of its client states in the historical territories occupied by Islam: whether Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Tunisia, Yemen, Iraq, or traditional NATO ally Turkey. They also have designs on states like Algeria, Libya, and Syria, whose rulers are not congenial to their program. As the US pulls back, AQ and MB influence will grow and their potential for eliminating the secular rulers in the various client states, and those that are secular and less visibly “US pawns” will grow. They’ve made considerable progress in Turkey, and now Egypt, though there is ‘less than meets the eye’ so far in Egypt.
While the circumstances at first glance appear dire for most of the regimes, each of these states also has unique circumstances. While Tunisia can be considered a largely organic, successful uprising, for most of these states, the regimes retain the tools to suppress dissent, divide the opposition and maintain power. In others, those engaging in the civil unrest are pawns in behind-the-scenes power struggles. In all, the assumed impenetrability of the internal security apparatus and the loyalties and intentions of the army remain decisive factors in determining the direction of the unrest.
The author of the acclaimed New York Times bestseller “The Next 100 Years” now focuses his geopolitical forecasting acumen on the next decade and the imminent events and challenges that will test America and the world, specifically addressing the skills that will be required by the decades leaders. The next ten years will be a time of massive transition. The wars in the Islamic world will be subsiding, and terrorism will become something we learn to live with. China will be encountering its crisis. We will be moving from a time when financial crises dominate the world to a time when labor shortages will begin to dominate. The new century will be taking shape in the next decade.