Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: monkeywrench
The chicoms want control of the sealanes/trade routes. The free world can't afford for that to happen.

And Buchanan doesn't want to trade with the world. Convenient, huh?

48 posted on 07/08/2006 3:31:02 PM PDT by Petronski (I just love that woman.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]


To: Petronski

Amazing...:)


49 posted on 07/08/2006 3:32:52 PM PDT by monkeywrench (Deut. 27:17 Cursed be he that removeth his neighbor's landmark)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

To: Petronski
"And Buchanan doesn't want to trade with the world. Convenient, huh?"

Limiting our government's entangling alliances with other nations does not imply (nor has Buchanan ever implied) that we should also limit trade among ourselves and the companies and individuals of other countries.

A quasi-isolationist foreign policy does not, and has never meant, pulling up the drawbridges and becoming completely self-reliant.

It means limiting government to those few necessary functions and allowing individuals and corporations relatively free reign in their interactions with others.

Just because the neocons seem to be able to come up with dozens of reasons why we desperately need to expand our entangling alliances, does not mean that we should do so.

52 posted on 07/08/2006 5:21:02 PM PDT by who_would_fardels_bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson