To Get Ron Paul's Insanity, You Have To Understand Libertarianism

Alias said:
So 9/11 was an understandable response. Okay. Then why did we spend billions bombing muslims and assassinating an innocent man named Osama Bin Laden?
Click to expand...

Are you being intentionally obtuse or are you actually this stupid?

Are you even aware of the shit we have been doing in the ME for decades? Do you know how the Shah came to power in Iran? Do you know how many times were have interferred with sovreign governments in the ME?

I didn't say it was understandable and no one I know has called bin Laden innocent, but thanks for a fresh strawman. Your last one was stale.


If you want to discuss Ron Paul's foriegn policy ideas I suggest you research them first. Because either you don't understand them or you are completely unconcerned with the truth.
 
Alias said:
So 9/11 was an understandable response. Okay. Then why did we spend billions bombing muslims and assassinating an innocent man named Osama Bin Laden?
Click to expand...

because bloody minded savages like you have an overdeveloped sense of vengeance with no respect for equal protection under the laws or the constitution.
 
WinterBorn said:
Are you being intentionally obtuse or are you actually this stupid?

Are you even aware of the shit we have been doing in the ME for decades? Do you know how the Shah came to power in Iran? Do you know how many times were have interferred with sovreign governments in the ME?

I didn't say it was understandable and no one I know has called bin Laden innocent, but thanks for a fresh strawman. Your last one was stale.


If you want to discuss Ron Paul's foriegn policy ideas I suggest you research them first. Because either you don't understand them or you are completely unconcerned with the truth.
Click to expand...

I understand this. When we are attacked by religious murderers then we need to eradicate them from the face of the earth and not spend our time trying to fix whatever problem we think made them do that to us. The USA is not the problem in the world. Islam is. Ron Paul doesn't get it and neither do his followers.
 
Alias said:
I understand this. When we are attacked by religious murderers then we need to eradicate them from the face of the earth and not spend our time trying to fix whatever problem we think made them do that to us. The USA is not the problem in the world. Islam is. Ron Paul doesn't get it and neither do his followers.
Click to expand...
apparently neither do you. what should a group of people do if a government across the world continually inflicts violence and economic harm upon them?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
because bloody minded savages like you have an overdeveloped sense of vengeance with no respect for equal protection under the laws or the constitution.
Click to expand...

Oh, yes, yes. I'm the bloody minded savage, not the Islamic murdering thugs who attacked us. Yes, yes, by all means.

Ron Paul is nuts and so are his followers.
 
Alias said:
So 9/11 was an understandable response. Okay. Then why did we spend billions bombing muslims and assassinating an innocent man named Osama Bin Laden?
Click to expand...

In this world there is things called repercussions.


Now just stating the fact that actions have repercussions does not place ANY value on wether the repercussions were justified or not does it?

If you poke a hole in your neighbors tire it will have repercussions.

One will be that the neighbor will be unhappy when he notices his tire is flat, he will be evern more angry when the tire guy tells him someone did it on purpose.

If the neighbor finds out it was you who did it that may have some repercussion too huh?


If he askes you to pay for it that would be a repercussion huh?


If he SHOOTS you for it that is a repercussion too.

Now stating there are repercussions doesnt mean that the person who stated actions have repercussions see the shoooting of someone fpor flatening a tire is justified.


What you do to defend BAD actions is to pretend people who recognise that actions have repercussions are praising the repercussions.


In short , YOU ARE LYING YOUR ASS OFF to defend your parties bad actions.
 
evince said:
In this world there is things called repercussions.


Now just stating the fact that actions have repercussions does not place ANY value on wether the repercussions were justified or not does it?

If you poke a hole in your neighbors tire it will have repercussions.

One will be that the neighbor will be unhappy when he notices his tire is flat, he will be evern more angry when the tire guy tells him someone did it on purpose.

If the neighbor finds out it was you who did it that may have some repercussion too huh?


If he askes you to pay for it that would be a repercussion huh?


If he SHOOTS you for it that is a repercussion too.

Now stating there are repercussions doesnt mean that the person who stated actions have repercussions see the shoooting of someone fpor flatening a tire is justified.


What you do to defend BAD actions is to pretend people who recognise that actions have repercussions are praising the repercussions.


In short , YOU ARE LYING YOUR ASS OFF to defend your parties bad actions.
Click to expand...

So now it is only Republican Presidents who have gotten involved in the Middle East and overseas? This is a new one. Please tell us more Desh.
 
Alias said:
And that govt would be the Islamic one they live under, not the USA. Idiot.
Click to expand...

who installed the shah of iran? idiot. who supported saddam hussein and his dictatorship? idiot.

your foreign policy knowledge is as blunt as your constitutional knowledge. I'd suggest you go back to school, but topspin has probably already done that. idiot.
 
evince said:
In this world there is things called repercussions.


Now just stating the fact that actions have repercussions does not place ANY value on wether the repercussions were justified or not does it?

If you poke a hole in your neighbors tire it will have repercussions.

One will be that the neighbor will be unhappy when he notices his tire is flat, he will be evern more angry when the tire guy tells him someone did it on purpose.

If the neighbor finds out it was you who did it that may have some repercussion too huh?


If he askes you to pay for it that would be a repercussion huh?


If he SHOOTS you for it that is a repercussion too.

Now stating there are repercussions doesnt mean that the person who stated actions have repercussions see the shoooting of someone fpor flatening a tire is justified.


What you do to defend BAD actions is to pretend people who recognise that actions have repercussions are praising the repercussions.


In short , YOU ARE LYING YOUR ASS OFF to defend your parties bad actions.
Click to expand...

something about sanctions in Iraq, Bill Clinton, Madeline Albright, and thousands of deaths being worth it spring to mind.
 
and abolish age of consent laws, which violate the rights of 24-year-olds to have sex with 14-year-olds.
Click to expand...

Ron Paul has never supported such a thing. While such talk may fly in certain circles, and was probably more common in the 70's when this guy was part of the movement, it has never been anywhere close to mainstream libertarian ideology.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top