Skip to comments.
America First: Why we need to examine our insane Foreign policy
self
| 12/29/2001
| Demidog
Posted on 12/29/2001 9:27:49 AM PST by Demidog
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 841-860, 861-880, 881-900 ... 961-978 next last
To: Roscoe
The old America is the moral equivalent of the Taliban argument again? Bless yer little heart.
I am trying to like you, but you are making it hard to like you.
861
posted on
12/30/2001 6:09:46 PM PST
by
carenot
To: malador
Hmmm....glad I checked back in here......couldn't help but laugh at this post......he sure do seem to have an unnatural affection for Pravda, among other weird ideas!! LOL.
862
posted on
12/30/2001 6:12:47 PM PST
by
Rowdee
To: Chi-townChief,carenot
Isn't that the little action that effectively wiped out 2 city blocks?
863
posted on
12/30/2001 6:15:47 PM PST
by
Rowdee
To: exodus
You mean state parks that are administered by the government closer to the people; who are a lot more answerable to the people for how these parks and stuff are taken care of?
864
posted on
12/30/2001 6:18:31 PM PST
by
Rowdee
To: carenot
Sure that was one of the racing guys kids.....one of Al Unser's kids.
865
posted on
12/30/2001 6:20:30 PM PST
by
Rowdee
To: carenot
..."At whom was all this firepower aimed? The targets were four men, three women and
six children -- members of an anti-government, urban survivalist cult called MOVE."...
Well, this author certainly did miss with his thesis!!! He failed to report that this was done "for the chilrun"!
Seriously, Poe is more right on that he could possibly be off.
866
posted on
12/30/2001 6:26:54 PM PST
by
Rowdee
To: Roscoe
Can't bear leaving the plantation?By reading the discussion you will discover that we are talking about a legal issue that is -- he purports -- unaffected by physical location of the individual as well as their voluntary renunciation of citizenship.
To: exodus
We have no system. It is controlled by methods beyond your control. And agreeing with any government method displays your nakedness to the truth about America.
To: Roscoe
Hey Roscoe, I'm always interested in how people think, and why. You seem to think a lot differently than many people here, so I'd like your opinion on something and if you would be so kind to explain how you come to your views on this question, I'd be grateful:
In your opinion, in a civilized nation under what circumstances would a militant uprising or intifada be justified? Does it require conditions or a percentage of the population, what mixture of things? At what point would Roscoe pick up his gun to reclaim freedom? Give a brief outline and the logic supporting it.
Is "anything short of taking away guns or the vote" essentially permissible in your world-view?
When do "armed marches/protests" become appropriate?
To: mindprism.com
In your opinion, in a civilized nation under what circumstances would a militant uprising or intifada be justified? Does it require conditions or a percentage of the population, what mixture of things? Sounds like a Blue Book for parlor Revolutionaries.
870
posted on
12/30/2001 7:27:11 PM PST
by
Roscoe
To: exodus
You don't care about national parks. You care about a government that agrees with you.
To: karm
No problem. Thank you for referencing. I can't say that any of my ideas will make the world a "better place to live in". For some people they may not. However, not being so shaky on who we are allied with might do just that. Example being that while we pay foreign aid to Israel we
also pay foreign aid to her enemies. This is just odd to me, unless I am missing something. The fact that the money we hand out is also used by despots to wage war makes no sense to me.
Also, the U.S.A. is called in a lot to mediate between nations, if they ask for our help we should try our best to do so. Paying foreign aid to nations make us seem less impartial and more open to attack by smear agents looking to capitalize on that fact. Namely our media...
I hope this makes sense...as I am not sure of your own thoughts on the subject.
Comment #873 Removed by Moderator
Comment #874 Removed by Moderator
To: malador
Exactly.
What 'they' don't seem to understand is that the Anti-Federalists wanted to be even more restrictive....not more loose and open to ludicrous interpretation. To listen to them and the likes of Waters, Dingall, Rangel, Owens, and Kennedy, the Founding Fathers were to the left of them!!!
875
posted on
12/30/2001 9:09:06 PM PST
by
Rowdee
To: malador
Hmmm....I read what you said several times and it seemed to me like comparing apples and oranges. Maybe if you were to expound a little I might understand what you are getting at.
However, at face value you have a point. Although (unless I missed it) I haven't seen any strict examples of "nation building". Of course I haven't paid attention to how this new guy Korzai(sp?) was installed. I may be a little behind the times. :)
Comment #877 Removed by Moderator
Comment #878 Removed by Moderator
To: Roscoe
Sounds like a Blue Book for parlor Revolutionaries. Based on your response, does that mean you wouldn't have fought for the American Revolutionary War (had you lived then)?
To: Pay now bill Clinton
On December 16, 1773, Libertarians would have sided with the East Indian Company.
880
posted on
12/30/2001 11:56:06 PM PST
by
Roscoe
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 841-860, 861-880, 881-900 ... 961-978 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson