Replies

“I’m not sure what you are saying here. That policing the world is a good thing? The fact of the matter is, the primary reason the USSR collapsed was because its own economic flaws. Our military interventions in places like Korea, Vietnam, and Grenada did not help these matters.”

Ever heard of Afganistan...that little hub where the Russians failed to hold. You don’t think we had some involvement in keeping them from winning, did ya?

December 1979 – February 1989 (We played a huge role)

Of coarse there economics was a significant part, but indirect wars involve a lot financing. We had the dough...they didn’t. Instead of prolonging their envitable fall, and possibly furthering the chance of direct conflict...we starved them faster.

“If FDR was so adamant about going into WWII, it’s interesting that he had to wait for Pearl Harbor to get the support and still had to wait for Germany and Italy to declare war on the US and for Congress to then declare war on them.”

FDR’s constituency was ignorant, and they thought if they would just leave the world alone...it would be better for them. The vast majority of america held those stupid opinions. YES STUPID!

“That’s the constitutional way to go about it. How different things are now, when Congress washes its hands of military responsabilities. Paul would make Congress actually declare war before he, as Commander-in-Cheif, went to war. But he would not encourage unnecessary interventions in the internal affairs of other nations. What is wrong with that?”

In declaring war, yes, you have to get approval. Now I would prefer it to be the clear cut way.

I did NOT prefer our entrance in to Iraq. Does that surprise you? Did you think I was just another ‘Yeah for the war’ kind of guy?

Doesn’t mean I don’t support it now, though. I never follow the polls. Polls are for fools. The public tends to be wrong, anyways.

Refer to ‘Art of Contrary Thinking’...tells you how wrong the masses usually are.

Not holding on to Afghanistan prevented the Soviet Union from collapsing?

Maybe FDR's constituency realized that you had to have a Congressional declaration to go to war and that it's generally best not to get involved in foreign entanglements. In fact, it was our entanglement in WWI under Wilson that helped set the stage for the rise of Hitler and WWII. In any case, when it became clear that Japan and Germany were a threat and declared enemy we declared war against them and went to war the constitutional way.

I did NOT prefer our entrance in to Iraq....Doesn’t mean I don’t support it now, though.

Then I assume you support it because you fear the consequences of leaving. I think that our continued presence there actually destabilizes the region more than our leaving would in the end. For one thing, the resentment it causes helps make regimes like Iran's more popular and, thus, actually buttresses them. Unlike you, I actually supported the war early on, and only came around to my opinion after the years of hearing how the mission was over or nearly over, and now even Shrillary hints she to keep us their longer. Furthermore, its simply not a tenable foreign policy in general. The longer we stay there (and other places around the world) the weaker we grow in defense, in our economy, and in our international standing (and international standing is actually important in terms of our best interests). Meanwhile, we still haven't captured Bin Laden! Why?

Ever heard of Afganistan...that little hub where the Russians failed to hold. You don’t think we had some involvement in keeping them from winning, did ya?

That's pretty damn funny and a good reson why RP is popular. There was a guy we used to finance in Afghanistan against the Soviets called ... Osama bin Laden.

It's why RP does not support foreign intervention.