An interview with Ron Paul

My favorite radio host(sorry Fred) Mike Church interviewing Rep. Ron Paul this past weekend. This is one of the only people you will ever see give congressman Paul a fair interview instead of treating him like some old nutjob. Very insightful Q&A.

No votes yet

Ron Paul is a nutjob.

I have libertarian leanings but this guy is so off the deep end he needs a life jacket. I say this knowing there are several on here who believe him to be the second coming.

While I agree with him fiscally his foreign policy comes from the Wilsonian Isolationism which has been proven to be bad foreign policy and bad security policy. Ignoring a problem never means it goes away.

The only thing I will support Ron Paul in is an appearance in Bruno 2 if they make it.

MikeyA

Mike, when you can no longer afford to pay for the thing that you consider important, its importance becomes irrelevant.

The fact is that most people (like you) are terrified of Libertarians since you know full well that the military and major entitlement programs are the biggest part of the federal budget, are the biggest growth items in that budget, hence must be slashed deeply to get that budget back into balance before the USA has a debt-fueled government collapse.

Ron Paul would cut the military since we must cut the military. We've paid for military adventurism across the globe to steal oil, support our corporations, and basically make dark-skinned people hate us for generations (and rightfully so). For such absurd and irresponsible military activity, we will have to soon "pay" by withdrawing, since we will have bankrupted ourselves doing it. As with Peak Oil, we spent lavishly on the most foolish and evil things imaginable.

The entire idea of having a brain is to use it. Americans avoid using their brains until the last possible second, and often not even then. Little can be done to fix things in the last possible second, anyway. So why not put your provably wrong assertions aside, and swallow your pride or whatever it is in your head that stops you from seeing sense, and get on the wagon for cutting that year-on-year $1.5 trillion deficit before it literally kills us?

GZ

GZ, I have no problem with cutting the military budget. This knowing full well a large part of that will be my pay and benefits. But the isolationist policy has been tried several times in our history each to failed consequences.

Each time we have tried it not only did we get pulled into conflict eventually but when we were pulled in our state of readiness and of forces were so badly degenerated that it took massive government spending to get us to a point where we could actually fight effectively.

Cases in point: Battle of Midway June 1942, the first battle we won in the pacific came six months after the begining of the War. Operation Chromite came four months after North Korea crossed the 38th Parallel and this was with considerable ammounts of US forces in nearby Japan. Korea itself is a great case study for the need for forces that can immobilize quickly for fighting in several different types of terrain.

Additionally I can effectively argue that it is not the American military but the American military industry that has consistently pushed the US into the world leader in innovation. Cases in point: WWI greatly advanced air power and food preservation; WWII developed radar and sonar, jet propulsion, radio and t.v. transmission; Korean war developed helicopter transportation, cold weather clothing development, bulletproof vest development; the Vietnam War led to groundbreaking medical advancements and a continuation of those developed in Korea; Gulf War led to better cell phone technology and huge expansion in GPS technology. Thus far the GWOT has led to huge medical advances (ever hear of quik clot?) additionally I'd be willing to bet that the future of our cars/planes will be in unmanned technology, and we're using the military to expand nanotechnology.

The same thing has been true of NASA, the program libertarians/liberals hate. Ever see what a basic calculator cost before the first manned space flight vice what it cost 10 years later?

MikeyA

First off I have to say that I get really annoyed when people question the sanity of a person who is clearly head and shoulders above the average person's sanity experience. So I'm going to become fairly abrasive when dealing with people trash-talking about Ron Paul, one of our sanest politicians.

Mike, there's a big difference between this isolationism trigger word you like to use, and a retreat from running a worldwide imperial military machine.

Also, if the Republicans refuse to cut the military, and the Democrats refuse to cut the entitlements, then since they monopolize politics the end effect is that nothing gets cut, and now we're on a borrowing spree that is fatal to the national government. Talk about a threat to national security! The solution is to reject the major parties and to embrace the alternative under one unifying coalition of deep budget cutters.

Finally, we would have had calculators without using NASA as some sort of welfare pipeline for corporations. Calculators are handy and have market value from niches to general use.

"The same thing has been true of NASA, the program libertarians/liberals hate."

Not sure where you get the idea that liberals hate NASA. This is neither here, nor there--but it may point the idiocy of our priorities....I read somewhere that the US spends more on air conditioning in Iraq & Afghanistan than it spends on it's NASA budget. That's fucked up.

Pink Slip

at least not the current occupant of the oval office doesnt. He thinks NASA as a wonderful way to reach out to the muslim community.

Whatever the F that means

"While I agree with him fiscally his foreign policy comes from the Wilsonian Isolationism which has been proven to be bad foreign policy and bad security policy. Ignoring a problem never means it goes away."

Well being Isolationist does seem to be working too bad for the country that owns us. That would be China. Do you see anyone threatening China? Your " bad foreign policy and bad security policy", is based on events and technology from 100 years ago. No country is going to mess with another country that has nuclear bombs, its as simple as that. No one would attempt to mess with the us. The only reason we are in wars and have troops all over the world is because the big money people want it that way, its profitable. All those young boys of ours in the service killed overseas so the rich can get richer. How sickening.

So China is an isolationist? Why do you think they are constantly involved in our talks with N. Korea? Why do they have battleships patroling Japanese waters of the China Sea? Why are they negiotiating with Pakistan and Afghanistan for mineral rights? Who directly supported N. Vietnam with arms and troops?

China is and has been far from isolationist. This is why I am not against close relationships with China and why I don't believe their buying our debt is a conspiracy of war. The more Chinese and American interests are the same the less likely a confict is. Why would the Chinese attack us when they hold our debt and we could just stop paying and bankrupt them?

"Your " bad foreign policy and bad security policy", is based on events and technology from 100 years ago. No country is going to mess with another country that has nuclear bombs," So nuclear weapons stopped war? Did nuclear weapons deter China from crossing the Yalu river? Did nuclear weapons prevent 9/11? In fact I can use the last example to totally counter your statement "No one would attempt to mess with the us."

"The only reason we are in wars and have troops all over the world is because the big money people want it that way, its profitable." Actually the only reason we were attacked is because America has the money AND because we're a friend to Israel. Anything else is just spin. It wasn't because we supported Afghanistan in the 1980's. It wasn't because we intervened in Somalia or Yugoslavia. It is because our country is rich and powerful. That has been true of every country that has ever been rich and powerful reguardless of isolationist policy or not. India is doing well yet still faces nuclear war and terrorism threats from Pakistan yet India is Isolationist but has what???? oh yeah lots of money!!!

MikeyA

Hi Mikeya, interesting topic. Before I reply I just want to say that I am no expert on this subject. (you probably figured that out) and am just stating what I perceive to be true.
Feel free to set me straight!

"So China is an isolationist? Why do you think they are constantly involved in our talks with N. Korea? Why do they have battleships patroling Japanese waters of the China Sea? Why are they negiotiating with Pakistan and Afghanistan for mineral rights? Who directly supported N. Vietnam with arms and troops"

China sea = right off their coast? Duh
Negotiations & talks = just that talk. They are not sending in thousands of troops and spending billions of dollars.
China like the soviet union supported vietnam with aid. I didn't know they supplied troops though. Still over forty years ago.

"So nuclear weapons stopped war? Did nuclear weapons deter China from crossing the Yalu river? Did nuclear weapons prevent 9/11? In fact I can use the last example to totally counter your statement "No one would attempt to mess with the us."

Yalu river? You talking in 1950? Korea didn't have nukes then.
9/11? Please mike this is a terrible example. The better question would be did all those
troops we have over seas prevent 9/11? It wasn't any one country that pulled off 9/11. It was a bunch of renegade radicals from all over the middle east. The US knew all those bastards where in this country a year before 9/11 doing all kind of suspicious things but didn't take the potential threat seriously enough. Our Government dropped the ball on that one. Besides, our troups and presence in some of those middle east countries is what spurned those retards to pull off 9/11 in the first place.

"Actually the only reason we were attacked is because America has the money AND because we're a friend to Israel. Anything else is just spin. It wasn't because we supported Afghanistan in the 1980's. It wasn't because we intervened in Somalia or Yugoslavia. It is because our country is rich and powerful. That has been true of every country that has ever been rich and powerful reguardless of isolationist policy or not. India is doing well yet still faces nuclear war and terrorism threats from Pakistan yet India is Isolationist but has what???? oh yeah lots of money!!!"

Your comment about Israel could be correct. Many of the big money puppet masters are Jewish.
You make it sound as if we got invaded by another country. IT was 30 or so retards.
The only reason they did the 9/11 thingy was because we are rich and powerful?
Alrighty then.
The usa used to be rich, now we are broke because we wanted to be powerful.
India does have troops all over the world:)

Teddy Roosevelt said "walk quietly but carry a big stick"
Don't worry though mike, the usa will never go to isolationism. There is too much money to be made doing what were doing now. The Puppet Masters will not allow it:)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.