Do you know who Ron Paul is?

[omniknight]

---

Wow, bryta nimo bro oi.. Si Woodrow Wilson parallel ni Ron Paul?

Amazing.. subrahan sad ka ka bryt bro, mag himo nalng kaha ug imong kaugalingon history bro, murag distorted kaayo imong reality dah.

[æRLO]

Wow, bryta nimo bro oi.. Si Woodrow Wilson parallel ni Ron Paul?

Amazing.. subrahan sad ka ka bryt bro, mag himo nalng kaha ug imong kaugalingon history bro, murag distorted kaayo imong reality dah.

Woodrow Wilson, banking on non-interventionism, even go as far as isolationism, to win the presidency. Ron Paul--one of the pillars of his campaign is non-interventionism.

Woodrow Wilson, sent munitions and war bonds to the British and the French while maintaining neutrality during WWI. Had also allowed American citizens as fighter pilots to fight for the RFC, RNAS, and ALA (Lafayette Escadrille). Ron Paul says he won't involve the U.S. in any war--Iran, Pakistan and Syria very volatile. You think the U.S. can afford to stay "neutral", bai? The U.S. has interests there, actually, everywhere. Even if he is genuinely an anti-interventionist, do you think the warhawks from GOP, his own party, won't pressure him? You must be living in La-La land. I'm not saying give up on Ron Paul, I'm saying get real. He can denounce W. Wilson's foreign policies, but the truth is he will be facing the same pressure from "warhawks", and with too much at stake for the U.S. in those areas, he has to intervene.

History will tell you, a lot of these campaign promises will be moot when term begins--does your reality say otherwise?

[MACACO]

Are you wearing a tin-foil hat as well?

I don't listen/read/watch mainstream media. CNN, Fox, NBC, CBS, BBC, Al Jazeera etc. But neither am I tool for conspiracy theorists. Let me correct you, before you choke on your paranoia. Woodrow Wilson, parallel to Ron Paul promised to keep the U.S. out of the war--they entered in 1914. FDR also maintained officially to be neutral--they entered. Because one way or the other a major power will be involved, especially when there have been intricate alliances laid down. Are you saying Pearl Harbor was staged? LMAO. You think the U.S. (reeling from an economic depression in the previous decade) would sacrifice a substantial amount of its Pacific Fleet to give rise to patriotism? FDR knew the U.S. was going to enter anyway. Hitler knew it, Tojo and Hirohito knew it. So they pre-emptively struck. I thought it was a dumb conspiracy, and it still is.

please refute my claims & countless others before throwing out the tin foil hat card. wilson's policy is different from ron paul's. isolationism isn't equal to non interventionism.

was it smart for the US to smuggle weapons in a commercial shipping vessel filled with innocent civilians? your argument is invalid & is based on "because they have too, herp-derp. war! derp."

[æRLO]

please refute my claims & countless others before throwing out the tin foil hat card. wilson's policy is different from ron paul's. isolationism isn't equal to non interventionism.

was it smart for the US to smuggle weapons in a commercial shipping vessel filled with innocent civilians? your argument is invalid & is based on "because they have too, herp-derp. war! derp."

how is that invalid? You don't understand the argument. Lack of comprehension perhaps? A substantial amount of W. Wilson's platform is the claim to non-interventionism--he promised his constituents that he will maintain non-intervention when war erupted in 1914. What he didn't tell them is the U.S. cannot afford to be a non-interventionist and must therefore aid partially--Why not? and let Germany retake its colonial possessions in China, possibly compromising U.S. and British interest. It's also economics, the British and French owed a lot of money to the U.S.--debt that would default if Britain and France lost the war, consequently collapsing the U.S. economy.

You think the Kaiser was oblivious to America's involvement prior to 1915? You also heard of the Zimmerman Telegram? Do you know why the U.S. had to make sure the Central Powers was kept in check (them being imperialists of the sort)? You are kidding yourself thinking Ron Paul's promises are realistic--another sheep buying into the popularity of "Anonymous", because it's "hip".

derp. You and I alike must be aware that Paul has denounced Wilson's foreign policy, what you aren't aware of is, it is impossible for the U.S. to not get involved with matters outside its borders. This country has lost its privilege to be a non-interventionist circa-1890s, when it became a legit power. Remember Sudan? Remember Rwanda?--The U.S. did not officially intervene in Sudan and Rwanda, guess what happened? it caught flak along with the other major nations. derp. Ron Paul's foreign policy is BS, and is much better applied for Scandinavian countries.

[diatabz]

Paul's an out-of-touch, extremist hack, pushing for a neo-libertarian agenda that's just as real as the promises of communists. Abolish FEMA and leave states to fend for themselves during disasters? Louisiana was practically paralyzed during Katrina, and the states themselves barely have enough money to keep schools running and subsidize funds for law enforcement, so how are they supposed to help each other out?

Ron Paul, the man who's so against government spending, even if it's for a natural disaster. And yet, he asks for earmarks because it benefits him. If his district was hit by a hurricane, he'd be foaming at the mouth asking for funds. The United States is UNITED for a reason dummy.

The only GOP candidate worth voting into office was Huntsman, but the far right would never accept his centrist policies.

[pinoy_09]

Paul's an out-of-touch, extremist hack, pushing for a neo-libertarian agenda that's just as real as the promises of communists. Abolish FEMA and leave states to fend for themselves during disasters? Louisiana was practically paralyzed during Katrina, and the states themselves barely have enough money to keep schools running and subsidize funds for law enforcement, so how are they supposed to help each other out?

Ron Paul, the man who's so against government spending, even if it's for a natural disaster. And yet, he asks for earmarks because it benefits him. If his district was hit by a hurricane, he'd be foaming at the mouth asking for funds. The United States is UNITED for a reason dummy.

The only GOP candidate worth voting into office was Huntsman, but the far right would never accept his centrist policies.

I agree.

The reason why he's still in the race is because he hopes to push his agenda and ideas to the public in benefit of his own son, Rand Paul, who's out making noises in the political arena. If not for him, he would have been out a long time ago.

[omniknight]

RON PAUL-FOX NEWS CANCELS FREEDOM WATCH FOR FAVOURING RON PAUL. - YouTube

Opinion ra pud na ninyo bro.. no proof.

[æRLO]

^tarung oi. He was booted for his comments about Israel's Mossad having involvement in 9/11. Karun nasad Ron Paul nsad hinungdan. proof2x pa ka.

So Napolitano is fired for being pro-Paul, samtang si Stossel ug si Beck wala ra hilabti? Both are cosidered (and consider themselves) libertarians. I dislke FOXNews, but Ron Paul is hardly the reason why they canned Nepolitano.

[blueleigh25]

i dont know Ron PAul until i finished readung ur comments. this has been a good thread to read. really.
but for me, Obama is still doing what he can do for US man.