wkmac
Well-Known Member
On the one hand I can understand and appreciate where you are coming from, use to be there myself and then some. Coming from a Misean economic position as it relates to human action or praxeology, typically speaking when markets are free and individual and property rights respected allowing for self determination, these same actors will choose a peaceful means to co-exist because the larger costs of conflict are economically self defeating. Even to remove productive individuals from the marketplace to then place them on the battlefield inflicts a counter-productive cost on an economy and either that economy can somehow find an ability to not only make up the productive difference in lost productive manpower but then somehow increase capacity as economic means are shifted towards the needs of the state in prosecuting a war. Typically speaking, the Keynesian debt model is invoked and then over the longhaul, all citizens must labor even more in order to maintain present needs and then the debt service over time. Also apply Bastiat's Broken Window fallacy to the action of war.
One other thing in relation to Paul's foreign policy ideas, the big thing at the moment seems to be Iran and it's alleged capacity for nuclear arms. The allegations are that Iran is on the verge of a nuclear bomb but this is just not the facts on the ground as I see it. But for the sake of discussion, let's say right now at this very moment they have enough 90% enriched uranium for a low yield nuke. Can they launch a missile capable of carrying a nuke payload to US shores? No so mark that off as a threat. Can they load it up on a plane and reach US shores? No, no large capacity bombers or refueling ability so eliminate that. Could they sneak it in by other means? They could but consider the consequences. They pop their one nuke somewhere here in the US and does anyone here doubt for one second regardless who the President is that Iran will see a new sunrise the next day? Don't you think the Iranians know this? Everyone shakes in their boots at Ahmadinejad and he's great at scaring little ole ladies like Moreluck but he a pandering politician not unlike some of the one we have here. Talk big and bad to the home folks, kick some sand but on the big stage he's not much. Why else is news from outside the country filtered so much so that he can maintain illusions? Right now at this very moment there is growing decent within Iran against Ahmadinejad and even the revolutionary cleric council. But our current warmongering against Iran is driven by other interests and I'mabout to touch on that in the Iran thread so if interested, read it there.
The reality of the Iranian nuke threat is not in it's fact but rather in it's potential. They are producing 20% enriched uranium but even that production is problematic. On page 14 of the Feb. 2010' CIA Threat Assessment to the US Senate, the CIA re-affirmed the 2007' NIE assessment that there exists only the potential for weapons grade production and not that there is. Also found the Arms Control Association an interesting resource for information to further research. A report from a few days ago I found of interest. The underground facility at Qom does bare watching but in light of threats by various nationstates to bomb Iran's nuclear capacity and considering that Iran is a Shi'a Islamic nation surrounded entirely by Sunni nationstates, is it any wonder they are a bit paranoid these days? What would you do if you were Iran and wanted to preserve your self determination as a nationstate? You might build your stuff underground too so the Qom facility considering the eternal threat is not entirely irrational. Drilling down as best I can, I'm just not convinced that Iran is the threat it's being portrayed as being. To borrow the CIA term blowback and as well covered by the late Chalmers Johnson in his book Blowback, our current efforts stand to only generate this kind of negative outcome. And to go one step further, not unlike our efforts to provoke North Vietnam in the Gulf of Tonkin, I'm not convinced the current situation are efforts to do the very same thing. Again see my response in the Iran thread I will shortly post.
The greater question that must be asked, are individual and property rights as well as market rights something we in the west, specifically America only enjoy or is this an ideal that all across the planet should enjoy? What about the right of self defense? Hmmm, how do you declare your right to defend yourself and the right to bear arms if you deny the same for others? This would mean the right of self defense and even the right to life, liberty and property are not natural rights and instead are civil rights only and can be regulated in any manner including taking away that right from individuals, communities and yes even nationstates. I never said real freedom and liberty was easy or without taking some risks.
Ron speaks a bit on where he's coming from when speaking about our actions in Pakistan.
Just_another_day_at_work
Well-Known Member
The majority of the people don't get about sanctions is that when you place it in countries that the US don't like, you actually make the dictator or leader stronger by that. Let's say there is an opposition within the country against the leader, it vanishes as soon you have another country stepping in as a threat. The other thing it ALWAYS makes the regular citizens suffer more. Personal experience.
wkmac
Well-Known Member
Robert Scheer at the Progressive/Liberal website Truthdig Marginalizing Ron Paul
Things are sure getting interesting!
Things are sure getting interesting!
wkmac
Well-Known Member
TOS,
Your historical point is well made. Most people today who even call themselves conservative really fail to understand the historical roots of what it is they refer. They have little understanding of How The Interventionists Stole the American Right.
As to the holocaust issue, well just consider the source of the post and there you go. There are some brave, truthful and courageous jews willing to speakout on the ugliness of that era but before one goes off into some irrelevant issue today which can't happen anyway, maybe they'd be better served in doing a little study but then we're back to considering the source again aren't we!
moreluck
golden ticket member
Friday, December 30, 2011 @ 11:53 pm |
Worry about the country and jobs and the economy..........!!
Ron Paul Circus Turns Three Ring: Sheila Jackson Lee Demands He Apologize for Racist Statements or Leave the Race
Theatre of the Absurd.
Worry about the country and jobs and the economy..........!!
Ron Paul Circus Turns Three Ring: Sheila Jackson Lee Demands He Apologize for Racist Statements or Leave the Race
Theatre of the Absurd.
(Chron.com) — Among the racially charged newsletters published under Ron Paul’s name, one example is particularly odious to Houston Democrats.
One of the newsletter articles described Rep. Barbara Jordan, a Houston Democrat revered in the civil rights community, as “the archetypal half-educated victimologist, yet her race and sex protect her from criticism.”
The story was covered extensively by the Houston Chronicle and the San Antonio Express-News in 1996, when Paul sought to reclaim a seat in Congress, and 2007, when Paul was running for the Republican presidential nomination. But the newsletters did not receive significant media attention until last week, when the Texas congressman took the lead in theIowa presidential caucuses.
Today, the woman who represents the Houston congressional district long represented by Jordan demanded an apology.
“Ron Paul cannot continue to pursue the position of the presidency of the United States of America without formally apologizing and discussing his true positions regarding these newsletter writings,” Jackson Lee said in a statement.
Jackson Lee likened Paul’s situation to then-candidate Barack Obama’s predicament when controversial statements by his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, threatened to derail the Chicago Democrat’s 2009 presidential campaign.
Obama “gave a landmark speech on race to explain his views on race and the history of race in America,” Jackson Lee said. “Mr. Paul should do the same.”
One of the newsletter articles described Rep. Barbara Jordan, a Houston Democrat revered in the civil rights community, as “the archetypal half-educated victimologist, yet her race and sex protect her from criticism.”
The story was covered extensively by the Houston Chronicle and the San Antonio Express-News in 1996, when Paul sought to reclaim a seat in Congress, and 2007, when Paul was running for the Republican presidential nomination. But the newsletters did not receive significant media attention until last week, when the Texas congressman took the lead in theIowa presidential caucuses.
Today, the woman who represents the Houston congressional district long represented by Jordan demanded an apology.
“Ron Paul cannot continue to pursue the position of the presidency of the United States of America without formally apologizing and discussing his true positions regarding these newsletter writings,” Jackson Lee said in a statement.
Jackson Lee likened Paul’s situation to then-candidate Barack Obama’s predicament when controversial statements by his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, threatened to derail the Chicago Democrat’s 2009 presidential campaign.
Obama “gave a landmark speech on race to explain his views on race and the history of race in America,” Jackson Lee said. “Mr. Paul should do the same.”
texan
Well-Known Member
This is one voice. Not all Jews have this opinion. Maybe a Jew, but not "Jews." sir.
BrownMeetPurple
Well-Known Member
That's actually brilliant positive for Ron Paul side. The cat terrorizes the innocent rat all day long, the rat had enough and came back to bite. The cat being the bigger terrorist, well you know the rest.
It's time you Americans wake up from your dream, you live in this world with all of us, stop the illegal wars and bring real change. All your actions have consequences, not just on you, but us all. I am Canadian and tired of you Americans following like sheep to slaughter day by day. (btw not pointing at you you..)
Our own government only knows how to follow your government, fyi.
wkmac
Well-Known Member
Interesting POV and may have some merit but consider this. If Paul is so bad for working folk and so good for corporations, then why is so much corporate money not going to Paul in the first place? And on the flipside, if Obama is so good for working folk, how come so much corp. money ends up in his campaign pockets?
Ever venture outside the box to see the real world?
UnconTROLLed
perfection
Ron Paul and the racist newsletters.
Reality Check: The story behind the Ron Paul newsletters - FOX19 News and Weather - Greater Cincinnati Area
Update here:
Reality Check: The name of a 'Mystery Writer' of one of Ron Paul - FOX19 News and Weather - Greater Cincinnati Area
And what type of company does Powell keep?
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...OWMzNy00ZmZlLWI1MDUtNWQ4ZDA1ZTIxYTdi&hl=en_US
http://www.powellreport.com/section/aboutjim
Reality Check: The story behind the Ron Paul newsletters - FOX19 News and Weather - Greater Cincinnati Area
Update here:
Reality Check: The name of a 'Mystery Writer' of one of Ron Paul - FOX19 News and Weather - Greater Cincinnati Area
And what type of company does Powell keep?
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...OWMzNy00ZmZlLWI1MDUtNWQ4ZDA1ZTIxYTdi&hl=en_US
http://www.powellreport.com/section/aboutjim
Corporate america loves his laissez faire economics but fear his anti fed rhetoric (they need the fed to give out interest-free loans to them). They also see his anti imperialistic stance on the use of the military is a threat to military-industrial complex cash-cow!!
Similar threads
