Runnybabbit Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 It's interesting (to me, anyway) that Dennis Kucinich once said that if he had to choose a running mate from the GOP, he would choose Ron Paul. This is a guy who believes in a national health service, a minimum wage and all manner of state intervention. Why? Because libertarians "meet around the back" on a lot of issues. A lot of what Paul says will appeal to those who would otherwise be considered on the left, because some issues transcend left-right dogma, i.e. the issue of liberty, whether it be positive or negative liberty, i.e. military interventionism, corporatism, cronyism, bailing out failed institutions rather than the people directly affected... Americans could do a lot worse than Ron Paul, and considering that their halls of government have become little more than a mass orgy of Madison Avenue salesmen and Wall Street whores, perhaps it's time to shake things up. Well said Epiphany Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runnybabbit Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Hey peeps, I just got back from reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society I admit I don't know everything and I had never heard of this group until just now. If this is the best the anti Ron Paul crowd can do to bad mouth him they are barking up completely the wrong tree. I can fully understand why he might support the John Birch Society. It seems many of their ideas (certainly not all) are quite similar to mine. They are the same kind of ideas that got me supporting Ron Paul in the first place. I don't agree with all the anti socialist rhetoric and I am slightly more in favor of wealth redistribution than these guys but I completely understand the arguments these people are making. I have those same disagreements with Ron Paul himself but I still know an honest politician when I see one. I consider myself to be a socialist yet I am drawn to this "ultra right wing" and ardently "anti communist" group because a lot of what they seem to be saying makes sense to me. As it is with Ron Paul. I couldn't find anything in the wikipedia page about them being racist other than their opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, claiming it violated the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which it does. Am I missing something? According to the article one of the founders of the John Birch Society said.... "both the U.S. and Soviet governments are controlled by the same furtive conspiratorial cabal of internationalists, greedy bankers, and corrupt politicians. If left unexposed, the traitors inside the U.S. government would betray the country's sovereignty to the United Nations for a collectivist New World Order, managed by a 'one-world socialist government." Yup....That about sums up my understanding of the situation too. It is also that kind of reasoning that gets you blacklisted and branded racist in the traitor controlled media too. Please can somebody tell me what I'm missing here? Is one of the founders of this group a pedophile or something? What exactly is your problem with this society Longcol? Can you point me in the direction of something they have said or done that makes them so unacceptable to you. Something racist perhaps? There may indeed be something but I haven't seen it yet. Wikipedia is usually quite thorough about such things. I am prepared to stand corrected on this as so far I have only read the single wiki page but from what I can tell there is nothing surprising about Ron Paul's support for this group. It certainly doesn't change anything for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runnybabbit Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Hey...I might be missing something about the NDAA and torture too. If you can point me in the direction of something that justifies the indefinite detention of American citizens without trial and shows why it's a good thing, I would appreciate that insight too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppins Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Hey...I might be missing something about the NDAA and torture too. If you can point me in the direction of something that justifies the indefinite detention of American citizens without trial and shows why it's a good thing, I would appreciate that insight too. Runnybabbit, where do you live ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runnybabbit Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 131 Dartmouth Street Boston, MA Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppins Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 131 Dartmouth Street Boston, MA Why? Because I want to know, thats all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 So we should stay at war and keep murdering people because we don't have enough houses to house all the servicemen? Keep trying. I cant figure you out. You support a Republican yet talk like a wildly way out far left quasi revolutionary. Paul should have run as an independent and not a Republican. A strange bird by any measure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 So we should stay at war and keep murdering people because we don't have enough houses to house all the servicemen? Keep trying. Are you simply not very well informed, or are you merely simple-minded? What are you talking about now? I don't understand what your argument is? Are you saying Obama hasn't expanded the war in to Pakistan, Yemen and Libya? Are you saying he isn't about to invade Iran or Syria? What exactly is your point? If you'd read my post before you chose to reply to it you might have been able to understand my point and wouldn't (perhaps) have made such a silly and irrelevant reply. I said - in the post you appear to have been unable to understand - that Gen Jones' drawdown plan was designed, inter alia, to reduce the number of soldiers AND THEIR Families and support personnel AND THEIR FAMILIES in Asia and in Europe. I suggested that that plan was going more slowly than had been intended because of the lack of accommodation for the people who would be returned to the US. How do you get from there to "So we should stay at war and keep murdering people because we don't have enough houses to house all the servicemen?" What has Obama 'expand[ing] the war in to Pakistan, Yemen and Libya? ' or your suggestion that he is 'about to invade Iran or Syria?' got to do with reducing the number (and cost) of US forces (and their families) based permanently overseas? Do you think US Servicemen in Afghanistan have their families with them? If you want to return 60 or 70,000 people from Europe and about the same number from Asia (and in Dec 2009 there were just over 41,000 people AND THEIR FAMILIES in Japan and somewhere around 35000 people AND THEIR FAMILIES in Korea, so if you cut levels by half, you would need to accommodate a little more than 70,000 people from Asia) then you are going to need new towns, with hospitals, schools, shops, jobs for the spouses and those family members who need them and people to supply all the other services which 70,000 people might need. You're not going to do that overnight. It will take a lot of land and a large amount of money. Many of the people you are going to move around have votes, too. Returning large numbers of US military and DOD personnel to the US will boost the US economy - but the investment needed to make that move smoothly is immense. It will (already has) damaged the local economy in the 'host nations' - who make a significant amount of money in both direct payments and through jobs generated by US Forces. That too has to be managed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runnybabbit Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I cant figure you out. You support a Republican yet talk like a wildly way out far left quasi revolutionary. Paul should have run as an independent and not a Republican. A strange bird by any measure. Stop trying to figure me out. Listen to what I say instead. It's very arrogant to assume you can figure me out, then put me in a pidgin hole and dump everything I say in to that hole with me. I agree with some of Ron Paul's policies. Not everything comes down to the false left/right paradigm. Just because people are right about some things, doesn't mean they are right about everything. Paul is a conservative and a member of the republican party. If he ran as an independent he would get nowhere as you full well know. The system is rigged to ensure only the two main parties (the two pro-business parties) have any chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runnybabbit Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 If you'd read my post before you chose to reply to it you might have been able to understand my point and wouldn't (perhaps) have made such a silly and irrelevant reply. I said - in the post you appear to have been unable to understand - that Gen Jones' drawdown plan was designed, inter alia, to reduce the number of soldiers AND THEIR Families and support personnel AND THEIR FAMILIES in Asia and in Europe. I suggested that that plan was going more slowly than had been intended because of the lack of accommodation for the people who would be returned to the US. How do you get from there to "So we should stay at war and keep murdering people because we don't have enough houses to house all the servicemen?" What has Obama 'expand[ing] the war in to Pakistan, Yemen and Libya? ' or your suggestion that he is 'about to invade Iran or Syria?' got to do with reducing the number (and cost) of US forces (and their families) based permanently overseas? Do you think US Servicemen in Afghanistan have their families with them? If you want to return 60 or 70,000 people from Europe and about the same number from Asia (and in Dec 2009 there were just over 41,000 people AND THEIR FAMILIES in Japan and somewhere around 35000 people AND THEIR FAMILIES in Korea, so if you cut levels by half, you would need to accommodate a little more than 70,000 people from Asia) then you are going to need new towns, with hospitals, schools, shops, jobs for the spouses and those family members who need them and people to supply all the other services which 70,000 people might need. You're not going to do that overnight. It will take a lot of land and a large amount of money. Many of the people you are going to move around have votes, too. Returning large numbers of US military and DOD personnel to the US will boost the US economy - but the investment needed to make that move smoothly is immense. It will (already has) damaged the local economy in the 'host nations' - who make a significant amount of money in both direct payments and through jobs generated by US Forces. That too has to be managed. Sorry Rupert, I didn't think you could possibly be so stupid as to have meant that. Now you have clarified it for me that you simply are that stupid. It would seem that your grasp of logistics is worse than your grasp of economics. There are 18.5 million vacant homes in the U.S. http://www.infowars.com/ratio-3-5-million-homeless-and-18-5-million-vacant-homes-in-the-us/ Presumably the well paid men and women of the armed forces stationed abroad can afford to buy a house. If they can't then they can always rent a home. As for schools and hospitals and stuff, I suggest they look at the local amenities when choosing a place to live like everybody else does. They won't all be moving to the same place after all. There will be vacant school places left in those neighborhoods with vacant houses. If not then some of the money saved from paying for garrisoned troops in Europe can be used to employ a teacher or two. I don't see any reason why they would have to build entire towns from scratch. Consider the fact that there are 4 million new people born in the U.S. every year. http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005067.html That's four million not thousand. And before you say "yes but they are all babies and babies are only very small...." also consider that in 2010 there were over a million legal migrants to the united states and who knows how many illegal ones. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States In fact in total the U.S. population has grown by approximately 2.7 million people every year for the last ten. Prior to that it was growing even faster. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States I'm pretty sure the largest super power on the planet can provide the infrastructure needed for 70,000 people and their families. Heck we can provide that infrastructure in a matter of months when it comes to sending them out there in the first place. I don't see why the personal circumstances of the soldiers even comes in to it anyway. They simply say "We're shutting the base. Here's your discharge papers and here's your BFH." and that's that. It is up to the newly unemployed soldier and his family what they do after that. (If they are smart they will stay in Germany so they don't get arrested under NDAA for harboring belligerent ideas about the U.S.) If my company decided to up sticks and move to the U.S. I would be told that I can either move to the U.S. under my own steam or stay here and get a new job. My employer would be under no obligation to buy me a house. Likewise it isn't the D.O.D's responsibility to house redundant soldiers. True if you were to keep all those soldiers on the payroll twiddling their thumbs in the U.S. then you would have to build barracks to house them all but you can do that with all the money you make from selling the barracks in Germany right? In fact you'd even save money because now they're back home in the U.S. there's no reason to accommodate all the families any more. This is such utter rubbish I'm not even going to debate it with you ....at least not until you furnish us all with a copy of General Jones's plan so we can all see where you are getting your ludicrous facts from. I think you've been listening to too many war mongering generals making excuses for murdering people. Have you been watching CNN again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.