You said their were no connections to the left. So you must claim antiwar.com as Libertarian. The commentators and bloggers posting on it espouse Libertarian philosophy.
http://www.libertariansforpaul.com/category/libertarians-for-ron-paul/
Posted on 11/11/2007 12:39:35 PM PST by PlainOleAmerican
I hate wasting this much press time on Ron Paul. But the Paul campaign is becoming a real threat to the Republican primary process and if allowed to continue, he will take votes away from the most conservative Republican candidates in the party, not the most liberal. This is bad for the party and the country.
(snip)
So, how Republican is Republican candidate Ron Paul?
If he’s funded largely by anti-war leftists, from Democrat stronghold districts and counting on Democrats, Libertarians and members of the Green Party to win the Republican nomination, not very…
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbull.com ...
I don't know what wars he would have been for or against.
But that is why Congress is suppose to declare war, to go on record of its commitment to it.
As for a 'self-centered' policy, all nations policies are suppose to be 'self-centered' and that was exactly what Washington warned us about when he told us about 'entangling alliances'.
The American Gov't has a responsiblity to the American people and no others.
Our power is not unlimited and we had better recognize that before we go the way of Persia, Greece, Rome, Spain, and Britain.
Our greatest asset to the world is our very existance as the freest nation on earth and that is what will need to export to the world, the American ideal of freedom.
We cannot force it on the world.
ROFL. That thread, my reply was just a general statement to Iwo Jima. It had nothing to do with you specifically.
If you're already on the thread I don't have to PING you anyway, FYI.
I believe we had a declaration of war against Germany after they declared war on us
We invaded Afghanistan to attack those who were sheltering terrorists who had attacked the United States.
See the pattern?
If the United States is attacked we can strike back.
Now, you want to go through a list of combat actions since WW2 that the United States had no business engaging in and many were in fact, UN operations?
By the way, when is the United States going to get around to freeing Tibet?
No we should just stand by and watch nation after nation fall into darkness.
Antiwar.com was begun in opposition to Clinton's Kosovo War. You know, the war that FReepers & Republicans opposed then and called it foreign-policy meddling and nation-building?
It's purpose now is irrelevant to the discussion.
“If the United States is attacked we can strike back.”
And if the attack could have been prevented and we lose NY, Boston and DC next time? Will your policy stand up to criticism of the American people?
We declared war the very next day after Pearl Harbor (Germany declared war on us). Paul supported going into Afghanistan. If Bush would've asked Congress to declare war on 09/12, all of this would be moot.
And you think the United States can save every nation?
The U.S. has to recognize it has limitations.
We have to protect our interests and in doing so that protects the interests of other nations as well.
So, are you saying that there is a Constitutional ban against America owning and manning military installations outside of the country?
Nice strawman
And if the attack could have been prevented and we lose NY, Boston and DC next time? Will your policy stand up to criticism of the American people?
Do you mean 'not' prevented?
We have the ability to respond to any attack with overwhelming force.
That is what kept the Soviets from striking us.
Now, what we have to be concerned with is defending the U.S. which means, putting up a missle defense system and getting our own immigration policy in order.
You said their were no connections to the left. So you must claim antiwar.com as Libertarian. The commentators and bloggers posting on it espouse Libertarian philosophy.
http://www.libertariansforpaul.com/category/libertarians-for-ron-paul/
I was an intel SNCO at 9/11 if you asked me who was responsible I would of told you "I don't know". At the time we had no proof that it was Bin Laden, only speculation. It took us several days before we could prove it was Bin Laden.
Be careful of posting reports stating otherwise they are hindsight reports.
I’m simply asking because Paul wants to remove all American troops from South Korea, Japan and Germany.
“We have the ability to respond to any attack with overwhelming force. That is what kept the Soviets from striking us. “
The Soviets were somewhat rational. The Jihadists are not.
You are saying we should never intervene.
Ergo, Paul's foreign policy isn't liberal. It's actually old-right Taft conservative.
A missile defense system is a nice idea if we are dealing with intercontinental missiles.
Most likely we will not have that option.
Paul has said plenty of times that had our troops been withdrawn from Korea, the peninsula would be united much like Vietnam is now. A Seoul newspaper a few days ago endorsed this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.