Ok, I maybe late, but.. it's better late than never, right? :D
|
SamuelRSmith said:
How the hell will a war improve the situation? That's too far in the wrong direction. The solution is very simple, Congress stops spending more than it takes in, and the Federal Reserve's monopoly grip is ended on the currency. How a war would help these, I have no idea. |
More on this in the post below.
|
SamuelRSmith said:
Under Paul, the military will still be, by far, the strongest in the world. It will, however be more focused within. Closing bases around the world, and reopening some within the USA. Focused on defending the borders. With a rising China, borders will be more important than ever. You're also forgetting Hawaii in the middle of the Pacific (China's future stomping ground) and Alaska being a stone's throw from Russia. The Mexican border is also a point of contention. It's a well known fact that the weak border is exploited by drug barons, who knows what other unsavoury characters are crossing. Wouldn't be too hard to believe that terrorist organisations would use the border to get people in, or if a country were to declare war on the USA, going via Mexico might be the path of least resistance.
Paul's policies will not make America weaker, it will only make them stronger. His views on foreign policy will also far improve its soft power (economic, diplomatic), which many argue is far more effective than hard (military) power.
|
I understand that "rising China" is new world's bugaboo in the mass-hysteria-media among others, but please leave it at that, any military confilct between China and the US will be decided in the South (or East) China Sea no further. Their "hands" are too short for anything else for the time being. Hawaii? Alaska? Who the f**k needs them :D
Stupidest thing to make NOW for the US is sit on the fence (literally and metaphorically).
|
SamuelRSmith said: Many of America's greatest threats come from a blowback from previous activities. Patching up relationships with other countries, and supporting liberty, without the use of force, would do a lot for America's security in the future, as well as buy it many allies in the future. |
This activates my hilarity unit :D Here's the best answer to your tirade:
"The English are well known throughout the world for their lack of political scruples. They are experts at the art of hiding their misdeeds behind a facade of virtue. They have been at it for centuries, and it has become such a part of their nature that they hardly notice it any longer. They carry on with such a pious expression and deadly seriousness that they even convince themselves that they are the exemplars of political virtue. They do not admit their hypocrisy to themselves. It never happens that one Englishman says to another with a wink or a smile “We don’t want to fool ourselves, do we now.” They do not only behave as if they were the model of piety and virtue - they really believe that they are. That is both amusing and dangerous."
"Englishman" is obviously a generalized character, so no offence (though the author of the quote did mean exactly what is written here) :D I wonder if you could guess the author not using Google or any other search engine?
