[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
No excuse for ignorance.
I with you on this issue kneedragger and I say it again: I wish my country had a rightwing politician who where against agressive imperialist warfare like ron paul are.
Still if you ron paul guys are taking the anti-militarist stance serious, you have allies on the far left on this issue and they have agitated against anti-militarism for decades.
florelius - I am glad you agree with me in this area. Candidates like Dr. Ron Paul have never been on the radar, at least in my thirty two years of experience. The good Dr. would just like to go for what the founding fathers started this country as, a Republic! I honestly believe Dr. Paul is the most consistent and honest candidate who has ran for the office, especially in recent times.
Many people claim that Dr. Ron Paul can never be president, on these boards and around the country. Yet when asked to back their claims, nothing of any value ever comes forward. They simply provide an opinion, like chocolate OR vanilla ice cream. I admit he is different than any candidate previously, but he seems to be the one who has the right ideas of getting this country out of the funk she is in! Like leaving the world alone, until Congress agrees that a war is in order.
ps - Would you like me to help you with your English? I am no English major, but I can help a little when time would allow shrug
[quote]florelius wrote:
I am with you on this issue kneedragger and I say it again: I wish my country had a right-wing politician who was against aggressive imperialist warfare, like Ron Paul is.
Still if you Ron Paul guys are taking the anti-militarist stance serious, you have allies on the far left on this issue and they have agitated against the anti-militarism for decades.
[/quote]
Edited slightly for florelius.
I was reviewing this thread today. SM are you going for sarcasm? Well man, you failed then. The border should remain open so immigrants will perform the so called remedial means jobs. Are you going to milk a dairy cow for seven days a week, during three hour shifts done two to three times a day? No?! Who will then? I know many dairies who have closed down because of numerous reasons, one being finding labor who would perform the task at the pay grade offered. Want to guess who WILL perform the labor? How about picking crops when the season finishes and be there after one season? Have you worked in the fields with your buddies? I have yet to see you provide any kind of solution to the problems Dr. Paul offers a solution to.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Ron Paul on immigration:
Closed borders = more illegal immigrants because they’re scared of guns or something see? Open borders means Mexicans won’t want to stay illegally in US anymore because they are no longer scared of the guns. And anyway, the border fence was designed to keep Americans in. Right?[/quote]
Edit - Correct me if I am wrong but you are attacking the guy on a claim he made back in '88. The claim wasn’t wrong them and Dr. Ron Paul is still saying the same thing today.
Learn what he says, not just your baseless claims! Dr. Paul wants the decision to be up to the individual States. Not fight a national war on drugs, especially a war that costs billions of dollars a year! And how is that battle going? Are we winning? Nope, so a different tactic won’t work . . . . ? Because YOU say so? Hell of a claim you are making SM! Evidence is where?
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
It’s not relevant really because it’s never going to happen. Ron Paul would never be able to get something like that through the Senate - nor much of the rest of the stuff he says he’s going to do. Even if he did manage to legalise drugs, all the other problems associated with sharing a porous border with a failed state still exist.
Anyway, it’s usual Ron Paul batshit logic. Legalise all drugs - coke, heroin everything - open up the border - how many more illegal migrants do you want? With all drugs legal in US, still illegal in Central and South America and a completely open border - you want every junkie in Latin America making stakes for the US along with every peon who knows he can earn more in US than in his/her own country?[/quote]
Nope, but SM DOES reach and stretch far to make a point! So tell me do you have a problem getting your hands on drugs that are considered ILLEGAL now? I sure don’t and those are not the people I associate with.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
Ah, correlation =/= causations.
[/quote][/quote]
That is why Ron Paul would let the States vote independent of each other and not a nationally funded independent organization.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I do not agree about being up diddly doody creek , I would be willing to bet drug use would go down [/quote]
Open Mexican border
Open Mexican border + legailise all drugs
Legalise all drugs
I’m not arguing against 3.[/quote]
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
florelius - I am glad you agree with me in this area. Candidates like Dr. Ron Paul have never been on the radar, at least in my thirty two years of experience. The good Dr. would just like to go for what the founding fathers started this country as, a Republic! I honestly believe Dr. Paul is the most consistent and honest candidate who has ran for the office, especially in recent times.
Many people claim that Dr. Ron Paul can never be president, on these boards and around the country. Yet when asked to back their claims, nothing of any value ever comes forward. They simply provide an opinion, like chocolate OR vanilla ice cream. I admit he is different than any candidate previously, but he seems to be the one who has the right ideas of getting this country out of the funk she is in! Like leaving the world alone, until Congress agrees that a war is in order.
ps - Would you like me to help you with your English? I am no English major, but I can help a little when time would allow shrug
[quote]florelius wrote:
I am with you on this issue kneedragger and I say it again: I wish my country had a right-wing politician who was against aggressive imperialist warfare, like Ron Paul is.
Still if you Ron Paul guys are taking the anti-militarist stance serious, you have allies on the far left on this issue and they have agitated against the anti-militarism for decades.
[/quote]
Edited slightly for florelius.[/quote]
Well my english has improved alot alone from just arguing alot on this site( especially PWI ), so hopefully my english will improve more after plenty of future arguments with you guys 
Regarding your post conserning the topic ( ron paul ), I have allready heard all of zebs arguments to why Ron Paul has a low chance of getting elected and I kinda agree with Zeb on the issue, but not because I think badly of Paul, but because he`s to much of an idealist and in the political game you must be a slick mother fucker without any consistent ideology whatsoever to stay on top of the game. Regardless I think you should vote for Ron Paul even if Zeb say it is pointless and that it is hurting the GOP cause( why is this even a argument against him running lol ), its better to vote with integrity and hearth than to vote for the guy you think have the best chance. I myself vote for a small party with low chances of getting into parliament, but I be damn to trough my vote away on slick fuckers who send young men to kill in foreign lands and die themself there, or elitist scumbags who push for privatisation of public services because they are in with some continental mega corp who wants us to open up our public sector so they can make money of us. ( sorry about what where supposed to be a short reply, but who ended up as a rant )
I dont know if my post made any sense, but it was what I had to say about that.
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
I was reviewing this thread today. SM are you going for sarcasm? Well man, you failed then. The border should remain open so immigrants will perform the so called remedial means jobs. Are you going to milk a dairy cow for seven days a week, during three hour shifts done two to three times a day? No?! Who will then? I know many dairies who have closed down because of numerous reasons, one being finding labor who would perform the task at the pay grade offered. Want to guess who WILL perform the labor? How about picking crops when the season finishes and be there after one season? Have you worked in the fields with your buddies? I have yet to see you provide any kind of solution to the problems Dr. Paul offers a solution to.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Ron Paul on immigration:
Closed borders = more illegal immigrants because they’re scared of guns or something see? Open borders means Mexicans won’t want to stay illegally in US anymore because they are no longer scared of the guns. And anyway, the border fence was designed to keep Americans in. Right?[/quote]
Edit - Correct me if I am wrong but you are attacking the guy on a claim he made back in '88. The claim wasn’t wrong them and Dr. Ron Paul is still saying the same thing today.[/quote]
I guess it’s up to each person what they believe. I believe there are too many illegal immigrants in the US and that the border needs to be secured.
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Learn what he says,
[/quote]
Who…Ron Paul? I thought you meant someone else for a minute.
Baseless claims aren’t learned.
Yep.
Take another look at my posts. I specifically stated I’m not arguing against ‘ending teh war on drugs’ or whatever. Wasn’t my point.
You go on the same tirade, over the same points again and again so I will address your ‘points’ here.
There is nothing wrong with this, unless you refuse to look at another prospective and realize you could very well be wrong.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
I guess it’s up to each person what they believe. [/quote]
So with the current system in place now, how can our country remain free with an even more restricted border? I will even bold the following, the best part of your post.
[quote] I BELIEVE there are too many illegal immigrants in the US and that the border needs to be secured.[/quote] You believe. So just in your opinion this country should be a Democracy? Or do have a better knowledge base everyone can pull from? History maybe. Where again are the small and remedial jobs going to get done, all while they are NOT happening now? Robots bought from China maybe shrug How much higher can our debt ceiling go? Quad-trillion dollars, in your opinion?
Thread title SM.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Who…Ron Paul? I thought you meant someone else for a minute. [/quote]
Where do you pull them from? A source would be nice, at least one. And please avoid wiki.
I looked again and still never saw or point or even a solution. Just opinions.
SM, did you watch this video?
former link failed, here is another site - Have Trouble With Ron Paul’s Foreign Policy? - LDS Freedom Forum
You should.
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
So with the current system in place now, how can our country remain free with an even more restricted border? I will even bold following, the best part of your post.
[/quote]
Because the border does not have to be restrictive for US citizens - they can all come and go as they please.
I’m just giving my opinion. I’m happy to hear Ron Paul’s opinion if you have anything to say.
You can’t understand current events without context - history.
Why not get control over the border and let in exactly the number of migrant workers the country needs and check who they are and if they are of good character and so forth. Sounds crazy I know.
[quote]florelius wrote:
I wish my country had a rightwing politician who where against agressive imperialist warfare like ron paul are.
[/quote]
You were just born at the wrong time florelius. There was a fella called Quisling who gave some great speeches on the need for peace and ending UK/French imperialist warmongering. He had some help from the Nazis who had established Norwegian-German “friendship” socieities throughout your land. Here’s what the warmongering imperialist Winston Churchill had to say:
'For many generations Norway, with its homely, rugged population engaged in trade, shipping, fishing, and agriculture, had stood outside the turmoil of world politics. Far off were the days when the Vikings had sallied forth to conquor or ravage a large part of the then known world. A large proportion of the people had hitherto thought of neutrality and neutrality alone. A tiny army and a population with no desires except to live peaceably in their own mountainous and semi-Arctic country now fell victims to the new German aggression.
It had been the policy of Germany for many years to profess cordial sympathy and friendship for Norway. After the previous war some thousands of German children had found food and shelter with the Norwegians. These had now grown up in Germany, and many of them were ardent Nazis. There was also the Major Quisling, who with a handful of young men had aped and reproduced in Norway on an insignificant scale the Fascist movement. For some years past Nordic meetings had been arranged in Germany to which large numbers of Norwegians had been invited. German lecturers, actors, singers, and men of science had visited Norway in the promotion of a common culture. All this had been woven into the texture of the Hitlerite military plan, and a widely-scattered internal pro-German diplomatic or consular service, every German purchasing agency, played its part under directions from the German Legation in Oslo. The deed of infamy and treachery now performed may take its place with the Sicilian Vespers and the massacre of St. Bartholomew. The President of the Norwegian Parliament, Carl Hambro, has written:
In the case of Norway the Germans under the mask of friendship tried to extinguish the nation in one dark night, silently, murderously…without any warning given. What stupified the Norwegians more than the act of aggression itself was the national realisation that a great Power, for years professing its friendship, suddenly appeared as a deadly enemy, and that men and women with whom one had had intimate business or professional relations, who had been cordially welcomed in one’s home, were spies and agents of destruction. More than by the violation of treaties and every international obligation, the people of Norway were dazed to find that for years their German friends had been elaborating the most detailed plans for the invasion and subsequent enslaving of their country.’
Yes, you’d like Quisling’s peace speeches.
Yes, the Germans had an ‘ally’ on the far-left between September 1939 and June 1941. They were both very effective at starting ‘peace’ parties in other countries across Europe. There were many in Britain like the “Peace Society” - their main platform was to stop the warmongers in Stanley Baldwin’s and Chamberlain’s administrations from re-arming and threatening peace-loving Germany. Many of them had German names and promoted “peace” between Britain and Germany and started Anglo-German “friendship” societies. They helped expose the armaments industry profiteering which they believed was controled by Jews and Freemasons as was the rest of Europe apparently. Yes, you’d like Quisling my friend.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]florelius wrote:
I wish my country had a rightwing politician who where against agressive imperialist warfare like ron paul are.
[/quote]
You were just born at the wrong time florelius. There was a fella called Quisling who gave some great speeches on the need for peace and ending UK/French imperialist warmongering. He had some help from the Nazis who had established Norwegian-German “friendship” socieities throughout your land. Here’s what the warmongering imperialist Winston Churchill had to say:
'For many generations Norway, with its homely, rugged population engaged in trade, shipping, fishing, and agriculture, had stood outside the turmoil of world politics. Far off were the days when the Vikings had sallied forth to conquor or ravage a large part of the then known world. A large proportion of the people had hitherto thought of neutrality and neutrality alone. A tiny army and a population with no desires except to live peaceably in their own mountainous and semi-Arctic country now fell victims to the new German aggression.
It had been the policy of Germany for many years to profess cordial sympathy and friendship for Norway. After the previous war some thousands of German children had found food and shelter with the Norwegians. These had now grown up in Germany, and many of them were ardent Nazis. There was also the Major Quisling, who with a handful of young men had aped and reproduced in Norway on an insignificant scale the Fascist movement. For some years past Nordic meetings had been arranged in Germany to which large numbers of Norwegians had been invited. German lecturers, actors, singers, and men of science had visited Norway in the promotion of a common culture. All this had been woven into the texture of the Hitlerite military plan, and a widely-scattered internal pro-German diplomatic or consular service, every German purchasing agency, played its part under directions from the German Legation in Oslo. The deed of infamy and treachery now performed may take its place with the Sicilian Vespers and the massacre of St. Bartholomew. The President of the Norwegian Parliament, Carl Hambro, has written:
In the case of Norway the Germans under the mask of friendship tried to extinguish the nation in one dark night, silently, murderously…without any warning given. What stupified the Norwegians more than the act of aggression itself was the national realisation that a great Power, for years professing its friendship, suddenly appeared as a deadly enemy, and that men and women with whom one had had intimate business or professional relations, who had been cordially welcomed in one’s home, were spies and agents of destruction. More than by the violation of treaties and every international obligation, the people of Norway were dazed to find that for years their German friends had been elaborating the most detailed plans for the invasion and subsequent enslaving of their country.’
Yes, you’d like Quisling’s peace speeches.
Yes, the Germans had an ‘ally’ on the far-left between September 1939 and June 1941. They were both very effective at starting ‘peace’ parties in other countries across Europe. There were many in Britain like the “Peace Society” - their main platform was to stop the warmongers in Stanley Baldwin’s and Chamberlain’s administrations from re-arming and threatening peace-loving Germany. Many of them had German names and promoted “peace” between Britain and Germany and started Anglo-German “friendship” societies. They helped expose the armaments industry profiteering which they believed was controled by Jews and Freemasons as was the rest of Europe apparently. Yes, you’d like Quisling my friend.[/quote]
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
I believe there are too many illegal immigrants in the US and that the border needs to be secured.[/quote]
So, in your opinion what would it take to do this?
A sort of DMZ like in NK filled with land mines?
Or a really deep and wide moat filled with bitey creatures, perhaps?
Unmanned aerial drones armed with 50mm cannons?!
Oh, I know! A Great Wall of The USSA (imagine how superior to the Chinese wall it will be, and oh, the jobs it will create! Do you think we will have enough manpower to build it or will we need to employ some Mexican migrant workers to help out?)
Sexmachine: quisling supported the agressive and imperialist politics of germany, so no he doesnt cut it.
I am curious what the Republican party will do if Paul actually wins the primary, man would that be awkward 