Russian invasion of Georgia..

[Anttaru]

Personally, I think Ron Paul is well-spoken, but he ought to focus on political discourse rather then relying on the political machine. After the election people will forget about Ron Paul, or think of him as just another candidate who was going to run for president which isn't going to do much for his message. Especially if he continues to run in other elections without increasing his popularity tremendously in off years (see: Nader), people will just focus on him as some candidate with a minority vision rather than really take him seriously.

I wouldn't say anyone who knows what Ron Paul would preach, would consider his visions to be minor.

Also, if you rely on a president to show you a new world, I'd double take, no president should have that much power and moreover most candidates I think should just strive for something better, not completely new.

I'm not interested in a new world order or anything of that nature, what i said is pretty much the same thing you just said, when i say "a better world". Every US president has committed at least 1 act of war, and these actions do add the the extent of damage we're doing to ourselves as a civilization. Ron Paul address how the current war does not benefit America on a financial scale, and also how occupying Iraq is an illegal act. Ron Paul has been ridiculed for believing America is at fault and that they have struck first. That man would indeed restore how the rest of the world sees the United States government.

So what if Ron Paul was right then, when the War in Iraq started I was only in high school, and I was like verbatim "This will lead to a power vacuum, civil strife, and increased terrorism inside of Iraq" because it was glaringly obvious to anyone with any sense. What was even funnier was I was watching Bill Mahrer and he used the same analogy that I would use in debates, months later one of my professors used the same one does this make me someone with privileged information who really ought to be in public office, hell no, I just keep tabs on these things. Moreover, its easily turned, Obama opposed the Iraq war from the start because possibly he saw thing much like Ron Paul sees things in Georgia - if this intuitiveness is enough to assume Ron Paul would make a better president, it would apply to Obama as well (this is supporters logic here, not mine).

In my opinion, being able to recognize the consequence really does save us a lot of grief, this good judgment call is a very valuable attribute for a leader to have. Nothing good ever comes out of these wars. Barack Obama may suggest the same thing, but he's not half as passionate about it. Ron Paul is ridiculed, and even banned from some media for outlining the Presidents mistakes to the public.

The issues with Georgia and Russia, if any possible links at all, are small to the fact that we are at war and if anything peripheral, especially because Russia isn't pre-empting for the sake of combatting terrorism as much as what they see as invading a sovereign nation, while most the world community would view South Ossetia as lacking legitimacy in that sense. You'd be better to be making this type of case on Chechnya more than anywhere else as far as Russia is concerned.

Not necessarily. American government usually takes it upon themselves to assist their allies. A good example of this is when Trinidad was under siege by Terrorists (Who happen to be Muslim, just saying). Russia knows the US is in no condition to spend their resources on assisting Georgia while they are cleaning up their own mess. The reasons are different, but the concept of invading another country is the same.

If they weren't momentarily crippled, the US would defiantly take action like they always do, even if it's the Russians, America isn't having this type of thing go on on their planet, and that's pretty much why they are, the way they are.

 

[Skaw]

Yeah, this country really needs a new foreign policy. Not to say close our borders and shut the rest of the world out, but we really need to take our hand out of everybodies cookie jars unless specifically offered something.

 

[Mattaru]

I wouldn't say anyone who knows what Ron Paul would preach, would consider his visions to be minor.



I'm not interested in a new world order or anything of that nature, what i said is pretty much the same thing you just said, when i say "a better world". Every US president has committed at least 1 act of war, and these actions do add the the extent of damage we're doing to ourselves as a civilization. Ron Paul address how the current war does not benefit America on a financial scale, and also how occupying Iraq is an illegal act. Ron Paul has been ridiculed for believing America is at fault and that they have struck first. That man would indeed restore how the rest of the world sees the United States government.



In my opinion, being able to recognize the consequence really does save us a lot of grief, this good judgment call is a very valuable attribute for a leader to have. Nothing good ever comes out of these wars. Barack Obama may suggest the same thing, but he's not half as passionate about it. Ron Paul is ridiculed, and even banned from some media for outlining the Presidents mistakes to the public.



Not necessarily. American government usually takes it upon themselves to assist their allies. A good example of this is when Trinidad was under siege by Terrorists (Who happen to be Muslim, just saying). Russia knows the US is in no condition to spend their resources on assisting Georgia while they are cleaning up their own mess. The reasons are different, but the concept of invading another country is the same.

If they weren't momentarily crippled, the US would defiantly take action like they always do, even if it's the Russians, America isn't having this type of thing go on on their planet, and that's pretty much why they are, the way they are.

Numbers correspond to paragraphs.

1) I didn't say his vision is minor, I'm saying relying on the Washington machine for his vision is not the best place. In other words, being President isn't what he should focus on.

2) Ron Paul, it is no secret, asks for pretty radical changes. I mean his campaign slogan has "Revolution" in it. If Ron Paul was president, he'd sit in a chair w/o any consensus with Congress and nothing could get done. That is what I mean, he would preach major changes but the president simply does not and should not have that power. So he is wasting his time because his ideology becomes overshadowed by his failed bid to run for president among those who are not already his supporters.

3) Good attribute yes. Unique to Ron Paul, no. That is my point. Obama may not be so passionate about it, probably because he just does not dwell on it. Candidates who come off as dwelling on a particular point past the point of the American public getting the idea do not fare well imo (at least...amongst educated voters).

4) The US is supporting Georgia atm, just not militarily. No matter the case, the idea that the US would go to war with Russia over Georgia in a manner like wars on smaller countries is just comparing apples and oranges here. Its a totally different situation. If anything the US has been the preeminent military force in the world, if there is one thing they do not lack its international presence, while I'm not in support of this, its just a fact.

I do not shy away from pointing out the many things that are fucked up due to US FP, but this isn't one of them for the most part. I'm going to point people once again to Celv's post, and if anyone has some knowledge of geopolitics, these kind of actions are typical of Russia as the world pivot.

 

[Anttaru]

Just saying, I'm not trying to scold you or anything Mat, I'm just against the way those pricks run things. I understand you see things in that light, and it's probably true. I think the people need to speak up for how things should be and make it happen to the best of their abilities.

I didn't say his vision is minor, I'm saying relying on the Washington machine for his vision is not the best place. In other words, being President isn't what he should focus on.

Friend of mine thinks Ron is in the right place right now. He thinks he'll go after Bush Jr. as soon as he's not the president anymore and have him court marshaled for committing illegal acts of war. I don't think that'll happen cause Bush signed that bill that'll protect him from that.

Ron Paul, it is no secret, asks for pretty radical changes. I mean his campaign slogan has "Revolution" in it. If Ron Paul was president, he'd sit in a chair w/o any consensus with Congress and nothing could get done. That is what I mean, he would preach major changes but the president simply does not and should not have that power. So he is wasting his time because his ideology becomes overshadowed by his failed bid to run for president among those who are not already his supporters.

Radical change is the way to go if you ask me. I think if Ron was the president and if he ambitiously fails to do what he said he'd do, then the world can open their eyes to what is really going on. ( Illuminati things )

3) Good attribute yes. Unique to Ron Paul, no. That is my point. Obama may not be so passionate about it, probably because he just does not dwell on it. Candidates who come off as dwelling on a particular point past the point of the American public getting the idea do not fare well imo (at least...amongst educated voters).

Ron Paul on Obama


I think Obama knows better not to confront Ron Paul in public, Obama does believe in going to war by the way, except he said something along the lines of going to Afghanistan without the intent to hit Pakistan and even Iraq. Ron Paul says things along the lines of "What we've done is wrong and it was us that hit them first". And it's true.

The US is supporting Georgia atm, just not militarily. No matter the case, the idea that the US would go to war with Russia over Georgia in a manner like wars on smaller countries is just comparing apples and oranges here. Its a totally different situation. If anything the US has been the preeminent military force in the world, if there is one thing they do not lack its international presence, while I'm not in support of this, its just a fact.

I think America would go to war for small countries, as they did for Trinidad. Mind you it wasn't a major military force they had to deal with, but they did send Marines to go clean them out.

What's going on with the presidential election is unfortunate. Russia does wish to maintain their peace with the US, and it's clear the US is in no position to tell them what to do. Saddam was a dangerous man, but dethroning him only made Baghdad worse off and it goes to show how great a mistake the US's actions were.

If Russia and America went to war, it would be freaking ugly. The opportunity for Russia to do what they want without the US being aggressive about it is now, I think because the US military has their plate full.

 

[Sharpe]

If they weren't momentarily crippled, the US would defiantly take action like they always do, even if it's the Russians, America isn't having this type of thing go on on their planet, and that's pretty much why they are, the way they are.

I'm sorry it's America's planet now is it? It's exactly this sort of thinking that makes the majority of the world facepalm at America's government.

 

[Halifirien]

Check out this article: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/14/beck.georgia/index.html

"This is for America. This is for NATO. This is for Bush."

Supposedly, that is what was written on the bombs that were dropped over Georgia.

I'd have to see actual photos. Saakashvilli isn't the most impartial person out there at the moment when it comes to saying shit that would fire Americans up about war with Russia. The guy's an idiot anyway for thinking the U.S. had his back and would come charging in on a white horse to save him.

Not that it matters, because I don't think it matters a bit what some Russian soldiers scrawled on a bomb before they dropped it. Americans write idiotic slogans on their bombs all the time, and it doesn't give any kind of hard insight into the nation's foreign policy.

And the link is from Glenn-fucking-Beck. Ugh. Ugh and a half.

 

[Mattaru]

And the link is from Glenn-fucking-Beck. Ugh. Ugh and a half.

THIS and a half.

I'll respond to Anttaru's post by the end of today.

 

[Ruffyreborn]

found it

 

[Amidamaru]

What a fucking idiot.

 

[Mattaru]

I'm ADD, I could respond, but I want to make this post well researched. Can't find a good foreign policy issue that would be useful for this.