Autocrat Putin backs Russia out of arms treaty

ironhead

ironhead

anarcho-capitalist
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113000221_pf.html

Russia grows ever more dangerous, anti-democratic, and fascist each day. Now, Putin is taking steps toward what could be seen as cavalier in Europe and the West. Do we really want someone like Giuliani, Hillary, or Romney at the helm when the shit comes down with Russia? We need Ron Paul, who will keep us out of wars of empire; who will talk and trade with all nations. We need to stop interfering with Iran and engage these nations in peaceful talk and trade.

Moreover, how can we criticize Russia's autocracy when our own President and Congress consistently gangfuck our own constitution?
 
According to previous threads, we shouldn't be talking about Russia while we have health care to cover. And we shouldn't be talking about health care while there is a war on in Iraq.
 
If Russia did become increasingly troublesome it would be interesting to witness the rapid change of position which would occur in France, Germany, etc. having relied entirely on the benevolence of the US armed forces for the last 50 years and taking that as a cue to reduce their own defence spending to a virtual pittance.

The downside would be, from a selfish British point of view, that we'd be equally fucked despite yapping when we were told to and fetching all the sticks your Presidents have thrown us over the past 60 years.
 
Well Putin can Bring up Bush bashing.
After all Bush said he did see a kindred soul in Rootin Tootin Putin.
 
This was such a shitty time in history for us to have an idiot for a president. I know there is no GOOD time but dammit this admin has just been unable to take ANY steps in the right direction to benifit us.
 
Hummm..........

ironhead said:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113000221_pf.html

Russia grows ever more dangerous, anti-democratic, and fascist each day. Now, Putin is taking steps toward what could be seen as cavalier in Europe and the West. Do we really want someone like Giuliani, Hillary, or Romney at the helm when the shit comes down with Russia? We need Ron Paul, who will keep us out of wars of empire; who will talk and trade with all nations. We need to stop interfering with Iran and engage these nations in peaceful talk and trade.

Moreover, how can we criticize Russia's autocracy when our own President and Congress consistently gangfuck our own constitution?
Click to expand...


are you now professing that RP is a closet Communist?
 
uscitizen said:
RP might come closest to be ing a corporatist than anything.
Click to expand...
Rubbish. He proposes an end to Corporate Welfare. There is a reason that they aren't jumping to give him money and promote him for the WH. It isn't because they think they'd do better under Doctor Paul.
 
Battleborne said:
are you now professing that RP is a closet Communist?
Click to expand...

Dear god, you are vapid. Ron Paul is an ardent capitalist, as am I. There is nothing 'communist' about wanting to trade and talk with all nations - it is the advice of Washington, Jefferson, and most of our founders. You really ought to learn to read better and more often if you want to save face.

As for Dr. Paul being a 'corporatist', nothing could be further from the truth. You're describing fascism, of which libertarians want nothing to do. Many of the regulations governing commerce are written by the largest corporations themselves. We already have, essentially, corporatist government as it stands. Distancing the Federal gov't from the corporate lobby by ending corporate welfare, slashing the Pentagon budget, and returing to the gold standard are what Ron Paul wants to do - that's populist libertarianism, arguably the opposite of corporatism.
 
Last edited:
You're confusing me with another poster....!

ironhead said:
Dear god, you are vapid. Ron Paul is an ardent capitalist, as am I. There is nothing 'communist' about wanting to trade and talk with all nations - it is the advice of Washington, Jefferson, and most of our founders. You really ought to learn to read better and more often if you want to save face.

As for Dr. Paul being a 'corporatist', nothing could be further from the truth. You're describing fascism, of which libertarians want nothing to do. Many of the regulations governing commerce are written by the largest corporations themselves. We already have, essentially, corporatist government as it stands. Distancing the Federal gov't from the corporate lobby by ending corporate welfare, slashing the Pentagon budget, and returing to the gold standard are what Ron Paul wants to do - that's populist libertarianism, arguably the opposite of corporatism.[/QUOTE]



As for the opener...I just asked a question as you said RP would basically support the USSR born again...sorry I live in the USA not Switzerland...Ya want Paul...cool,ask him to relocate to Switzerland and you can be his VP...
Click to expand...
 
Battleborne said:
As for the opener...I just asked a question as you said RP would basically support the USSR born again...sorry I live in the USA not Switzerland...Ya want Paul...cool,ask him to relocate to Switzerland and you can be his VP...
Click to expand...

Again, your ignorance is only overshadowed by your blind nationalism. Trading and talking with all nations is what a free republic does - that doesn't amount to "supporting" how other nations conduct their affairs. By your absurd standard, we support communism in China by trading with the Chinese.

As for the bit about corporatism, I was responding to US Citizen's erroneous slander against Ron Paul.
 
Yes...............!

ironhead said:
Again, your ignorance is only overshadowed by your blind nationalism. Trading and talking with all nations is what a free republic does - that doesn't amount to "supporting" how other nations conduct their affairs. By your absurd standard, we support communism in China by trading with the Chinese.

As for the bit about corporatism, I was responding to US Citizen's erroneous slander against Ron Paul.
Click to expand...



But you attached it to my quote...which was disingenuous....and I have called you no names or attacked your credibility...I asked a simple question and you overreacted and started a rant! and by the way I am against trading with the enemy no matter who they are...Switzerland did this during WWII...they were everybodies friend...RP wants us to become Switzerland...no thank you! and he is no Andrew Jackson...thank you very much!
 
Battleborne said:
But you attached it to my quote...which was disingenuous....and I have called you no names or attacked your credibility...I asked a simple question and you overreacted and started a rant!
Click to expand...

You're splitting hairs here. I found it quite clear that he was addressing both posts.

Gotta get the grill warmed up, afternoon garlic chicken and sushi pupus are calling. Maybe I'll have a beer too seeing as I'm out of Maui Wowee. :cof1:
 
Damocles said:
Rubbish. He proposes an end to Corporate Welfare. There is a reason that they aren't jumping to give him money and promote him for the WH. It isn't because they think they'd do better under Doctor Paul.
Click to expand...

Garbage.
corps are not wanting to throw money away on a candidate that is going no where.
 
uscitizen said:
Garbage.
corps are not wanting to throw money away on a candidate that is going no where.
Click to expand...
Even if he was, they would not largely support him if they feel they couldn't get support from him in return. One does not purchase access with a person that they will not get access from.
 
Damocles said:
Even if he was, they would not largely support him if they feel they couldn't get support from him in return. One does not purchase access with a person that they will not get access from.
Click to expand...

Yes, and if ne is not electable then no access.
What I said, But as usual you have to restate it ;)
 
uscitizen said:
Yes, and if ne is not electable then no access.
What I said, But as usual you have to restate it ;)
Click to expand...
Not particularly. Even Kucinich gets some of that support. There is a reason, even when he is likely to win, that corporations do not give to Ron Paul.

He is elected regularly to Congress yet gets most of his money from individuals and less than almost all other congressmen in Texas. There is a reason for this. Corporations do not like him much as he proposes taking away government largesse to them, and they know that giving him money isn't going to gain them access.

But heck, you can pretend that the Presidential debate takes place in a vacuum and we can't look at where he gets his money in elections he wins and is likely to win...

:rolleyes:
 
It would be nice if the Republican debates took place in a vacuum.
No more republican candidates alive :clink:
And no more usleless republican noise :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top