Ron Paul

“Cut-n-run when the surge has made it possible to withdraw in victory?”

“Twenty seven million Iraqis were trying to close the shipping lanes? - uncliff

Sometimes it's hard to tell when you're doing your nonsense stuff and when you're actually trying to make a point.

80% cut in the military. USN keeps the sea lanes (i.e. trade) open. Nothing to replace the USN. Sea lanes in jeopardy = global economy in jeopardy. Google this, there's a lot of analysis out there on it.”

“Mutt, you're little show is amusing, but any intelligent being can see you're perfectly willing to make an accusation, but unable to back it up with specifics.

I'm telling you right now - I don't know what position of mine you think I flip-flopped on, so I can't answer your question as to why I flip-flopped.

If you want to give me the courtesy of simply telling me what specific position I've changed my mind on, I'd be glad to discuss that.

Otherwise, you're just flea on a wire. No substance.”

“so I can't answer your question as to why I flip-flopped - Sarge

I'm not asking you to. I said above you didn't have to 9 posts above. What I'm asking you to do - over and over - is something completely different.

Really, do you honestly think that people are that stupid? I'm hoping you think it's just me. LOL.”

“Which uncliff would say we don't need all this trade cause it artificially promotes the use of transportation that leads to too many people in places where they shouldn't be? I've so many objections to moving against nature rather than with it I can see how you all haven't a clue of which uncliff pushed the submitton.

I am dealing, in my own strange ways, with this weekends murder of my two kids friends.
last edited: 1/07/08 9:34:27 AM”

“Well, carry on then!”

“I'm not asking you to.

But you did. And when I originally asked you what specifically I flip-flopped on, YOU said that I was avoiding answering the question. So I want you to be sure on no uncertain terms that I am perfectly willing to answer that question - as soon as you provide me the details of the supposed discrepency.”

“But you did. And when I originally asked you what specifically I flip-flopped on, YOU said that I was avoiding answering the question. - Sarge

Again, it's painfully obvious that this has no bearing on your refusal and ability to provide a reasoned statement on the consistency of your political perspective.

I am perfectly willing to answer that question - Sarge

LOL. All you're doing is playing a schoolyard game. There's two essentially unrelated issues here. One is that I initially said you flip-flopped, which you desperately focus on to avoid the other issue: stating in plain English the consistency of your beliefs over time.

What's most funny is that the core of your supposed objection has already been answered by me when I clearly stated what I meant (several times actually), to which you responded "oh yeah, well links or it didn't happen". Keep moving those goalposts, buddy. I don't think anybody's noticed. LOL

Seriously, without personal integrity or honesty, you're at a real disadvantage in an argument like this.”

“Again, it's painfully obvious that this has no bearing on your refusal and ability to provide a reasoned statement on the consistency of your political perspective.

Again, on what specifically?

which you desperately focus on to avoid the other issue: stating in plain English the consistency of your beliefs over time.

You want me to post here all of my political beliefs? What in the heck? Are you high?

What's most funny is that the core of your supposed objection has already been answered by me when I clearly stated what I meant

I think you are confused. In this discussion? No. You have NOT told me what you think I've flip-flopped on. The most you've said is "Iraq". Again, that's not a position, that's a country. What about Iraq have I flip-flopped on?”

“You want me to post here all of my political beliefs? What in the heck? Are you high?- Sarge

LOL - now you're pretending you haven't heard the question, though it's been posted over and over.

What made you think that wouldn't make you look even more foolish?

You have NOT told me what you think I've flip-flopped on. - Sarge

So now YOU know what I meant better than I do.

LOL - looks like it's another Sarge meltdown. *grabs popcorn*”

“Mutt - you keep saying it's been posted.

Please, prove me wrong. Where? I keep asking for the question, and you keep saying you keep posting it over and over.

You're obviously just bored today. What is the question?

Better yet, forget the question - if I obviously have not seen the question - why is it so difficult for you to repost the question if it in fact does exist? Would doing so somehow be .... oh, I don't know ... impossible?”

“If Mutt is in fact saying something that is "painfully obvious", ... can ANYBODY on this forum tell me what he thought I flip-flopped on?

Anybody?

Anybody?

Is this thing on?
last edited: 1/07/08 10:51:03 AM”

“Mutt, I am sure somebody will come to your rescue soon and prove you right.

Hold on ... here they come ...”

“why is it so difficult for you to repost the question if it in fact does exist? Would doing so somehow be .... oh, I don't know ... impossible? - Sarge

You're really making this easy. Below are three repititions of the request just from this thread. LOL - this is enough ownage that I don't even need to search out the other threads from last week. But I can't take credit for this. You did this to yourself out of desperation. Self-Ownage/Cell-Phonage.



show your consistency between Iraq/Nonintervention
Mutt
8:21:47 AM
1/07/08

explain how you've been consistent between then and now.
Mutt
8:32:41 AM
1/07/08

stating in plain English the consistency of your beliefs over time.
mutt
10:34:09 AM
1/07/08”

“tell me what he thought I flip-flopped on - Sarge

Iraq. You were *very* for an intervention in Iraq, and now you're a Paulistinian noninterventionist.

Prediction: Sarge moves the goalposts and asks for a link of where he was ever for the Iraq war. LOL”

“Iraq. You were *very* for an intervention in Iraq, and now you're a Paulistinian noninterventionist.

Now we're getting somewhere. Specifically, you think I'm a noninterventionist when it comes to Iraq, even though I was before.

I'm not. What makes you think I am?”

“No wonder your 3 'examples' were meaningless. You assumed I was a noninterventionist. lol”

“I already posted long ago what I think you flip-flopped on. That would be your former advocacy of the Iraq war, with recent comments about cutting and running along Paulistinian lines.
Mutt
8:32:41 AM
1/07/08

That was from the first page of this thread today! And now Sarge is acting like I just posted it for the first time? Bwahaha!

You assumed I was a noninterventionist. - Sarge

Yeah, I kind of assumed your words mean things.

Okay, now we really ARE getting somewhere. You're flip flopping on supporting nonintervention. Got it! LOL - I was wondering how - if - you were going try to worm your way out of this.”

“Here's a new serious question Sarge:

Why would you support Ron's noninterventionism when you claim now to support "interventionism"?”

“That was from the first page of this thread today! And now Sarge is acting like I just posted it for the first time? Bwahaha!

No. You posted the exact discrepency for the first time. ONE of your other posts mentions the words "Iraq", and "noninterventionalist", but just asks me to show my consistency between them. Knowing what you know now ... that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Ok, you're obviously just trolling or whatever. I haven't said I support noninterventionalism in Iraq. I said Ron Paul does. I am not him. I have been very clear with my words about how I support what we're doing in Iraq - and have even given the REAL reasons we're in Iraq, instead of the ABC Katie "Legs" Kouric explanation.

I'd love to know why you think that I was/am a noninterventionalist when it comes to Iraq.”

“that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever - Sarge

Indeed - I didn't anticipate you doing a complete about face and hoping no one would notice. LOL

I'd love to know why you think that I was/am a noninterventionalist when it comes to Iraq - Sarge

Like I said, I made the mistake of assuming your words meant something.

and have even given the REAL reasons we're in Iraq, - Sarge

No, as I recall you were always pretty off base on that. I proved you wrong on several different issues regarding that, actually.”

“Hey Sarge - at least now you're admitting that supporting a Paulistinian policy would be intellectually inconsistent. That's a big step for you. Painful, too, considering the extent you tried to avoid admitting it. LOL”

“Like I said, I made the mistake of assuming your words meant something.

Which words? This is the heart of our discussion. You seem to think I have expressed a noninterventionalist policy for Iraq. When? Where? What? Anything? Hello? Do you just make this stuff up for fun?

No, as I recall you were always pretty off base on that. I proved you wrong on several different issues regarding that, actually.

What I've expressed on this have to do with our intelligence. You've disagreed with me that our primary mission in there is to build up our intelligence in the middle east? I don't recall you disagreeing with that.

Hey Sarge - at least now you're admitting that supporting a Paulistinian policy would be intellectually inconsistent. That's a big step for you. Painful, too, considering the extent you tried to avoid admitting it. LOL

Today is Mutt's Official Make Stuff Up Day! Yaaaah! Let's all have cupcakes.”

“You've disagreed with me that our primary mission in there is to build up our intelligence in the middle east? - Sarge

Intelligence was definitely a reason, but I wouldn't assign it "primary" status. That was the basis of our disagreement.

So Sarge, now that you've flip flopped, how about answering this question: what general guidelines would you have the US follow in regards to military intervention?”

“So Sarge, now that you've flip flopped, how about answering this question: what general guidelines would you have the US follow in regards to military intervention?

My views haven't changed.

That said ... in regards to what?

Your questions are ridiculous.

What's your policy on cornbread?

Can you be any more vague?”

“Sorry, I mistook you for someone who could deal with big picture concepts.

Here's a very specific question for starters: do you think there's any occasion to use military force on a sovereign nation when that nation does not provide a direct military and/or terror threat to the US mainland?”

“do you think there's any occasion to use military force on a sovereign nation when that nation does not provide a direct military and/or terror threat to the US mainland?

Yes, I do.”

“Do you agree - ignoring practical concerns - with an 80% cut in the military?”

“What do you mean, "ignoring practical concerns"?

Are you asking me if I ignore being practical, would I agree with an 80% cut? Sure, if I ignore practical concerns, I'd agree with almost anything.”

“Practical concerns being the zero chance Ron would actually have to enact an 80% cut if hell froze over and he was elected POTUS.”

“I would agree to an 80% cut in the military, if none of the MI was cut, and it was expanded, and what was cut was just waste (though massive consolidation of logistical resources).

I would not agree to an equipment reduction.

I would agree to a personnel reduction - assuming it was replaced with technology.

I think it would be next to impossible to do all of that.”

“Yes, it would be impossible. Particularly if you support prepositioning, keeping sea lanes open, or giving border security the priority it deserves.”

“Border security isn't necessarily the same thing.”

“You mentioned "The Princess Bride" on another thread and it got me thinking.....everytime I read exchanges like what you and Mutt just went through, it reminds me of this from "The Princess Bride"


Man in black: But if there can be no arrangement, then we are at an impasse.
Vizzini: I'm afraid so. I can't compete with you physically, and you're no match for my brains.
Man in black: You're that smart?
Vizzini: Let me put it this way: Have you ever heard of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates?
Man in black: Yes.
Vizzini: Morons!
Man in black: Really! In that case, I challenge you to a battle of wits.
Vizzini: For the princess? [Man in black nods] To the death? [Man in black nods again] I accept!
Man in black: Good, then pour the wine. [Vizzini pours the wine] Inhale this but do not touch.
Vizzini: [taking a vial from the man in black] I smell nothing.
Man in black: What you do not smell is Iocaine powder. It is odorless, tasteless, and dissolves instantly in liquid and is among the more deadly poisons known to man.
Vizzini: [shrugs with laughter] Hmmm.
Man in black: [turning his back, and adding the poison to one of the goblets] Alright, where is the poison? The battle of wits has begun. It ends when you decide and we both drink - and find out who is right, and who is dead.
Vizzini: But it's so simple. All I have to do is divine it from what I know of you. Are you the sort of man who would put the poison into his own goblet or his enemy's? Now, a clever man would put the poison into his own goblet because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you...But you must have known I was not a great fool; you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
Man in black: You've made your decision then?
Vizzini: [happily] Not remotely! Because Iocaine comes from Australia. As everyone knows, Australia is entirely peopled with criminals. And criminals are used to having people not trust them, as you are not trusted by me. So, I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you.
Man in black: Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.
Vizzini: Wait 'till I get going!! ...where was I?
Man in black: Australia.
Vizzini: Yes! Australia! And you must have suspected I would have known the powder's origin, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
Man in black: You're just stalling now.
Vizzini: You'd like to think that, wouldn't you! You've beaten my giant, which means you're exceptionally strong...so you could have put the poison in your own goblet trusting on your strength to save you, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But, you've also bested my Spaniard, which means you must have studied...and in studying you must have learned that man is mortal so you would have put the poison as far from yourself as possible, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me!
Man in black: You're trying to trick me into giving away something. It won't work.
Vizzini: It has worked! You've given everything away! I know where the poison is!
Man in black: Then make your choice.
Vizzini: I will, and I choose...[pointing behind the man in black] What in the world can that be?
Man in black: [turning around, while Vizzini switches goblets] What?! Where?! I don't see anything.
Vizzini: Oh, well, I...I could have sworn I saw something. No matter. [Vizzini laughs]
Man in black: What's so funny?
Vizzini: I...I'll tell you in a minute. First, lets drink, me from my glass and you from yours.
[They both drink]
Man in black: You guessed wrong.
Vizzini: You only think I guessed wrong! That's what's so funny! I switched glasses when your back was turned! Ha ha, you fool!! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders. The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia; and only slightly less well known is this: Never go in against a Sicilian, when death is on the line!”

“So you are saying Ron Paul is a sicilian? who started a land war in Asia?”

“everytime I read exchanges like what you and Mutt just went through - noncon

Good lord you must have been bored.”

“LMAO! I did a lot of skimming!”

“LOL - that's pretty good Noncon. I will definitely need to check that out now.

btw - Mutt and I just kid. We love each other. I look forward to the day when he becomes a born-again Christian so we can laugh at old times - which he obviously will, since no non-believer would wrestle with God's existence as much as he does.”

“LOL!”

“Why can't we survive NON INTERVENTION tactics in this nation?

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080108180457.hnkcijvo&show_article=1&catnum=1

Post 9/11 fears of terrorism are giving Americans heart problems even if they had no personal connection to the attacks on New York and Washington more than six years ago, researchers have found.
A study by the University of California, Irvine linked psychological stress responses to the attacks to a 53 percent increase in heart problems, such as high blood pressure and stroke in a three-years period after Sept 11, 2001.

Becuase the Society of VICTIMHOOD is rendering more and more Americans "Victim by proxy" we cannot afford to wait until another attack. Ron Paul would pull out, we would be attacked and then the government could demand more and more control over our lives and the SHEEPLE in this nation ran to their PSSSSSSYCHIATRIST for mommy's helpers.”

“Wowza. What part of anything Ron Paul makes you think his government would demand more and more control over your life?”

“Hey, islamofascist terrorists have *only* attacked countries who have bases in the ME. It was our fault, XL. Shame on you for making them blow innocent people up! You should be having heart problems!”

“Only have bases in the ME? Like Germany, France, Indonesia, India, ? (LOL) I see the sarcasm but wanted to add that.

Sarge, Ron Paul is talking some good stuff (except for those nasty little racists things) but he is also talking from a total lack of understanding of what WILL happen if we disengage from the World.

Sadly if and when we are attacked the only real solution most the SHEEPLE will want will be more government this and that.”

“He didn't say we'd disengage from the world. I think you and Mutt are confusing noninterventionalism with isolationalism.”

“So Sarge, do you agree with Ron that the reason the Islamofascist terrorists hit us on 9/11 is because we have bases in the ME?”

“I believe that is one of the reasons, as they feel threatened by us. There is no doubt that OBL feels threatened by us, not only from our traditions, but from our military power and where we deploy it.

Now, from past conversations from you, I feel it my duty to add this - That does not mean that it is our fault. It just means that (that we are a perceived as a thread to them) was behind their reasoning in attacking us.”

“I am sorry Sarge...WHAT'S the difference? Either way we walk away from defending our front door and wait till the killer is on it.

There was a great speech of FDR in 1939... part of it is

That is especially true in those lands where freedoms do not exist- where the purposes of our democracy and the characteristics of our country and of our people have been seriously distorted.

Such misunderstandings are not new. I remember that, a quarter of a century ago, in the early days of the first World War, the German Government received solemn assurances from their representatives in the United States that the people of America were disunited; that they cared more for peace at any price than for the preservation of ideals and freedom; that there would even be riots and revolutions in the United States if this Nation ever asserted its own interests.

Let not dictators of Europe or Asia doubt our unanimity now. Before the present war broke out on September 1, 1939, I was more worried about the future than many people‹indeed, than most people. The record shows that I was not worried enough.

That, however, is water over the dam. Do not let us waste time in reviewing the past, or fixing or dodging the blame for it. History cannot be rewritten by wishful thinking. We, the American people, are writing new history today.

http://history.sandiego.edu/GEN/text/us/fdr1941b.html

I suggest EVERYONE read this...it is FRIGHTENINGLY familiar in the light of the past 20 years.
its history guys, and I personally do not think we have the luxury to afford to repeat that period of our history. I do not think the American People as a group are strong enough to withstand death tolls in the hundreds of thousands. Where 3 and 4 thousand die in a single day. Sorry but I think too damn many citizens would be happy to live in a little controlled box where they are fed, clothed and given free everthing.”

“I am sorry Sarge...WHAT'S the difference? Either way we walk away from defending our front door and wait till the killer is on it.

Wowza. XL, pa-leeze take a look at Ron Paul's position on closing our borders, and compare that to any other candidate. If you know anything about him, he votes as he says. He's not about fluff or telling people what they want to hear.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-interventionism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolationism”

“They can't see that far Sarge, but thanks for the try.”