Really think about it, do we need to be meddling in every other country around the world. Shouldn't those countries have self determination? I think he is right and we should be worrying about our own house instead of helping the multinational companies make money. We should put the USA first and if some bo honk country wants to be commies who really gives a rats ***.
2007-10-06 07:46:08 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Absolutely, he believes in a non-interventionist foreign policy (not isolating ourselves) We should try to solve our problems through diplomacy and trade.. War is only necessary in extreme cases i.e. Hitler, I agree with him completely, Even if there was a just reason to fight in countries like Iran and Iraq (which there isn't) we cannot afford it.. Our economy has sunk into debt? who is going to pay for this? There is too much at risk, we need to focus on securing our own borders
2007-10-06 07:55:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 7⤋
I lost each desire some transition returned to earlier 2008, that is been plenty legislative exchange is purely 3 years, and an entire nationalization of the U. S. financial equipment. yet no remember what take place i'm proud to know a real patriot like Ron Paul, and that i'm pleased with the individuals that help him no remember how distinctive their comments are on specific matters or agree or disagree. RON PAUL = in uncomplicated terms honest guy or woman IN GOVERMENT
2016-12-28 17:38:25 · answer #2 · answered by laurella 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, the best way for us to help out other countries is to become a shining example to them. At this point we need a good house cleaning of professional politicians. Once we take care of home here, we will be helping other countries see that we have a great system of liberty and justice. Then if they choose they can become more like us, but we cannot make demands on countries to become capitalist or a republic, like us. How can we send troops to a foreign land, if we do not have those things in order at home?
Plus, the trend of war bringing a very few select companies "war contracts", that bring them money hand over fist. Halliburton and Black Water make more money during war time, just as IBM did for the Nazi's, and Dow Chemical made napalm during Vietnam.
The problem is, these huge companies lobby or are part of lobbying groups. War is profitable to a select few, we do not get weapons contracts, or the spoils of war, we float the bill with taxes. People need to wake up and understand, how these multi-national companies work, and take our country back.
2007-10-07 02:54:46 · answer #3 · answered by Xenu 2 · 2⤊ 3⤋
I think it's a lovely sentiment. Realistic? No, of course not. We are capable of doing both at once. Attending to our own house, and being involved in world affairs. I think people have forgotten that after the last seven years of George Bush. I think it's extremely unrealistic to think we can stay out of world affairs and adopt a policy of isolationism. We passed the point of being able to be isolationists when we got into WW I. That set the stage that made us a world power and we have since escalated to being the world power that has become the world police. Since when was Iraq a communist country? Not sure where that came from lol. I don't like nation building, it's not what we should be doing, that I agree with. But we will have to remain involved in world affairs, to think otherwise is dangerously naive.
2007-10-06 08:15:58 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
Ron Paul is absolutely right!
Why do we still have Troops guarding S. Korea's border for *56* years now and none on our border with Mexico?
Our "foreign aid" budget (not including military operations) is now an astounding *$34.6 BILLION*.
And most of that money gets stolen!
Half of our embasseys should be closed. They function only as outposts for "foreign aid" and third world immigration to the U.S.
Everytime some countries have a war we end up with "refugees" that the Taxpayers end up supporting.
We could fix a lot of bridges and build a lot of hospitals and schools with that money right here in the U.S.
"We should not involve ourselves in foreign entanglements."
-George Washington-
2007-10-06 08:14:53 · answer #5 · answered by tom p 3 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Isolationism was our strategy for a while, but then we saw how the rest of the world impacted us, and how we're dependent on the rest of the world for commerce (both to supply raw materials but also to buy our finished products). Then came oil. Now we need to get involved anywhere if it could have an impact on our national security - which is often defined to include anything we want it to.
Obviously we've made many mistakes over the years, such as supporting oppressive dictatorships that opposed communism. We've entered into wars where the outcome had no effect on us. We've intervened in some genocides, and stood idly by while others occurred unabated.
Ron Paul is a Libertarian, and they believe in more of a free-for-all, where you don't collect taxes or do anything. They think it's every man for himself, and that extends to foreign policy. Sadly, it's a naive view that conflicts with reality.
We ought to get involved, but do so in a constructive way with no double standards.
2007-10-06 07:59:38 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 5⤋
I agree. I like how you think. Yes, we should put the U.S. first for a change. We need to build the fence and begin kicking out all the illegals. Start with the drug dealers and criminals first. Everything they own would be confiscated and sold on a government auction. All monies would be placed back into the treasury. Kick em out now.
2007-10-06 11:25:10 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
I think Ron Paul is absolutely right!
I hope he runs (I) and wins the Presidency with votes from BOTH major political party!!
He has a huge following in people from every political walk of life!
There's a few social issues I disagree with but when it comes to returning the constitution to it's grandeur Ron Paul's the man!!!
2007-10-06 08:22:50 · answer #8 · answered by Kelly B 4 · 4⤊ 4⤋
He is more right than wrong. I think that Paul has some interesting inititatives, however I don't agree that we should pull out all of our interests in other countries. I believe we need to rebuild a manufacturing base in our country but we also need resources from other countries. I do believe we are far too beholden to international corporations and we don't do enough to support our own.
Paul is an opponent to Globalization which puts me and him in the same corner.
2007-10-06 07:53:41 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 5⤋
Yes I had a hard time swallowing what he said. I was all Gungho about killing terrorists, but I realize that if they really wanted to kill these terrorist groups they would have gone with Ron's legislation of Letters of Marquee and Reprisal and got it done.
2007-10-06 08:49:06 · answer #10 · answered by Beauty&Brains 4 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Of course we should live and let live, but the companies that benefit from wars are the ones who give politicians money.
You can't serve two masters. You will love one and hate the other. Politicians (both sides) love the money boys and treat the people like cattle
2007-10-06 07:50:03 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 5⤋