Posted on 05/12/2007 2:23:18 PM PDT by Austin Willard Wright
Visit FireSociety.com sometime and read the 2008 Election forum. You'll find a whole boat load of Ron Paul worshipers over there. I'm not saying all Ron Paul supporters are mentally deranged or brainwashed but that bunch is for sure. They are all into conspiracy garbage to the point that they give the moonbats a run for their money. I go in there and support Fred Thompson and they jump on me like a pack of wolves. I'm too dumb to quit though I guess. :-) My defensive side comes out in there.
A “Mr. Silverback” (apparently a gorilla in the mist with a PC) and I went ‘round and ‘round about Ron, me defending a man I’ve known and respected for 30 years and Silverback declaring that Ron’s interpretation of the Constitution was a “suicide pact” for America.
The fighting force that this war requires is not one that would be helped by a draft. If anything a draft would be counter productive.
Last I noticed Ron wasn't even breaking 5% among Republicans. There is a reason for that. Ron is the wrong person for the Republicans and the wrong person for America.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
Really? You might say it’s a simple question but it’s not a stupid question. If Ron Paul believes that only those powers expressly numerated in the Constitution can be used to justify the expenditure of federal resources, then how does Ron Paul justify spending money to combat illegal immigration.
“I believe it would be Article 1, Section 8: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization...”
Really? Might apply to those immigrants applying for naturalization but how would this apply if there were no application?
or perhaps
“To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.”
Is the INS or the Border Patrol a part of the ‘militia’?
I’m trying to make a point here. Ron Paul claims that he is a great defender of the Constitution. Ron Paul says that if it not a power expressly enumerated in the Constitution, then no federal resources can be used. Where does it expressly say that the federal government has the power to control immigration? How does Ron Paul justify being ‘against immigration’ at the federal level?
How does Ron Paul justify being against ‘illegal immigration’ now and how does he justify being in favor of ‘open borders’ when he ran as a libertarian?
Hard to take anyone seriously that consorts with Alex Jones, 9/11 truthers and those of that ilk. And it’s REAL hard to consider anyone that doesn’t support our troops.
Please don't confuse me with the Cut-and Runners on here. I was responding to their "logic."
I am in no way a Cut-and Run Surrender Monkey.
I like Ron Paul a lot. I don’t think he’s realistic about the Islamofascist threat, so that rules him out for me. But it was great to have him in the debate actually (gasp) talking about Constitutional principles.
Well, aren't you a clever little n00B?
And about as wrong as you can be. Nice try, though. ;-)
It appears that you are doing a little revisionist work on history in order to make a point.
Ive noticed that's not an uncommon tactic.
If anybody is "touchy" on here, it's the Ron Paul cultists who start snarling defensively whenever someone suggests that their hero might be less than perfect.
Me? I'm just amused. And humorless people hate that, don't they? ;-)
That seems to be a common trait among Ron Paul cultists. I've only seen a few exceptions to that.
Yes.
Don’t worry, I wasn’t.
Can you provide a quote from the Constitution that expressly states that the INS and Border patrol are a part of the militia?
“The insurgents and terrorists can hide in Iraq because they are hiding among their own people. We’ve busted a few “terrorist” cells here in the US and they were total jokes — crazy people with crazy schemes and they didn’t even get out of the starting gate. The idea that we’ll be battling Islamic extremists in the streets of Anytown USA is hilarious. Where are they going to set up their base? In the alley behind the Wal*Mart?”
How then do you explain the terrorist cells who thrived in the US sufficiently long to launch 9/11? Were they ‘hillarious’?
I've made the comment recently that the Paulies are the new Buchanan Brigades. Same MO.
Since I am involved in designing and fielding parts of this system, I am qualified to speak on the subject.
Consider the US Army's Future Combat System as but a single example of what I am referring to. I can sight numerous others but this one will do. (For actual information on FCS, search on-line, or watch The History Channel's Future Weapons Series.)
FCS is a system of systems linked together by a secure, wireless, self-reforming, communications network. This ties together manned and un-manned sensors, manned and un-manned weapons delivery platforms, Army commanders (Brigade to platoon), other US services, non-US allied forces, and the boots on the ground. Eventually this will go down to the individual soldier via the Land Warrior system.
FCS is a great force multiplier. In some cases it can make a single squad equal to or superior to a full company of American WWII soldiers.
The motivation, intelligence, and training necessary to understand and use this system to full advantage is best obtained through a carefully screened, and trained volunteer force. This is not an AK-47. You can not effectively use this with 30 minutes or 30 days training.
The enemy has two great strengths, a large supply of willing, all be it, generally untrained fighters and a cadre of willing accomplices within the American media and politicians trying to undermine the will of the American public to prosecute this war to victory. (Note: I am not claiming that Ron Paul or any other anti-war person is deliberately aiding the enemy. But if they were, how would their actions be any different.)
The enemy has two great weaknesses, general lack of education, and far lower technology level the weapons available to them.
We have chosen to pit our strength against the enemy's weakness (Control of information flows and superior weapons technology). A draft might give us many more troops but then it would put our weakness against his strength. Furthermore, even with a draft and generally unlimited resources, it might still be close to two years to effectively field cohesive units ready to fight using the Army's combat doctrine. A large number of draftees would still only be suitable for stateside guard duty and hauling trash. It would be better to but them on our southern border.
Hope this answers your question. I can write a lot more.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
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.