Quote :

"I thought it was an ignorant statement because we know that Vietnam is basically controlled by China's deep pockets"

i guess you forgot about the war btw vietnam and china post US withdrawl from the vietnam war.

2/2/2008 2:08:58 AM

Yes, there was conflict between them. I think mostly because China wanted to take advantage of the aftermath of our war with Vietnam (a weakened country). Vietnam is pretty resilient. They held their ground.

There are still border issuse between them to this day. But, Vietnam relies heavily on China's economic success. As a matter fact, all of Southeast Asia relies on China's economic success. So, China and Vietnam have basically become buddy buddies. I don't think China would approve of a democratic Vietnam.

Anyways, the point is that Vietnam is not as democratic as Ron Paul would like to think. Yes, they've come a long way, but even 30 years after the war, they still hold strongly to their communist ways.

Since Ron Paul probably doesn't have a chance at the presidency... Obama is probably your last chance in high-tailing it out of Iraq. I don't think it will turn out good if we leave immediately. Iraq is very different from Vietnam. We were'nt fighting anti-government fundamentalist insurgents in Vietnam. So, we'll see what happens.

2/2/2008 10:06:53 AM

I dont think that was his point. His point was that the country is far better off today because we left it the hell alone, versus when we tried to force change and got people slaughtered. The best way to change a country's conditions is through trade.

And, I think it's hilarious that people even say this:

Quote :

"high-tailing it out of Iraq. I don't think it will turn out good if we leave immediately."

Even at MAXIMUM withdrawal rates, it will take 2-3 years to get our troops out safely. You're telling me we can't finish establishing a stable government in another 2-3 years? And the fighting going on in Iraq now we have very little effect on, its becoming much much more in-fighting between Iraqis and not insurgents from outside the country. Two big things, and the latter isn't our problem.

2/2/2008 3:46:00 PM

Quote :

"You're telling me we can't finish establishing a stable government in another 2-3 years?"

I don't know. That's to be determined. If the democrats manage to win the election, I guess you'll get part of your wish.

[Edited on February 2, 2008 at 4:12 PM. Reason : ?]

2/2/2008 4:11:22 PM

Quote :

"You're telling me we can't finish establishing a stable government in another 2-3 years? And the fighting going on in Iraq now we have very little effect on, its becoming much much more in-fighting between Iraqis and not insurgents from outside the country. Two big things, and the latter isn't our problem."

You're kidding, right? I would think in-fighting between Iraqis would be a huge roadblock in getting any kind of governmental stability.

We're talking in-fighting as "BOOM THERE WENT THE CAPITOL" rather than in-fighting as in "LOL LIBERALS ARE FAGS".

2/3/2008 2:56:11 AM

its more like "there goes the neighborhood". The infighting happening now is that same shit that has been going on for hundreds, if not thousands of years. It wasn't UNTIL Saddam came to power and brought brutal stability to the region that it stopped.

the whole idea that freedom and democracy = peace is an entirely western and american fabrication. when most repressed and supressed peoples gain freedom, they react violently. Whenever we leave its going to resort back to this, it's all a matter of how long we can afford to stay, and how many american lives are worth losing.

2/3/2008 4:13:38 AM

Great, so with all that said, what makes you think we're going to be able to get any kind of stability?

2/3/2008 12:25:07 PM

Well you see stein, when we switch to the Gold Standard and get rid of that evil Fiat currency, the Iraqi's will be amazed by our Purestrain Genius and simply decide that democracy and Coca Cola are for them.

[Edited on February 3, 2008 at 12:53 PM. Reason : PURESTRAIN >.<]

2/3/2008 12:52:31 PM

thank you for your valuable trolling.

2/3/2008 6:26:35 PM

is tomorrow the NC primary?

2/4/2008 9:23:29 AM

aaron

You talking about trolling is just purestrain irony.

2/4/2008 10:17:01 AM

Quote :

"Anyways, the point is that Vietnam is not as democratic as Ron Paul would like to think. Yes, they've come a long way, but even 30 years after the war, they still hold strongly to their communist ways."

It's not our job to force other countries to accept our political system.

2/4/2008 3:39:34 PM

Correct.

It's our mandate.

2/4/2008 6:01:29 PM

Quote :

" Ron Paul, 2002.... A year has passed since the terrible September 11th terror attacks, yet still we seem unable to locate Osama bin Laden or his al Qaida associates. President Bush has made it clear that he intends to use "all appropriate means" to oust Saddam Hussein, although everyone concedes that Iraq had nothing to do with September 11th. So why is the same approach not justified for the al Qaida criminals directly responsible for 3000 American deaths? We seem to have forgotten that our primary objective in the war on terror is to capture or kill bin Laden and his henchmen. One year ago, the desire for retribution against bin Laden was tangible. President Bush referred to finding him "dead or alive." And while the hunger for vengeance was understandable, the practical need to destroy al Qaida before it mounted another terror attack was urgent. Yet we have allowed the passage of time and the false specter of an Iraq threat to distract us from our original purpose. We’re preoccupied with an invasion of Iraq, which actually will benefit bin Laden by removing a secular regime led by his enemy Saddam Hussein. This vacuum may well lead to a more fundamentalist Kurd government in Iraq that aligns itself with al Qaida. Our troops in Afghanistan, and defense secretary Rumsfeld himself, are becoming increasingly frustrated over the lack of progress in locating bin Laden. Clearly we need to provide President Bush with innovative new tools to bring these criminals to justice. The drafters of the Constitution provided just such a tool to retaliate against attacks on America by groups not formally affiliated with a government: letters of marque and reprisal. Letters of marque and reprisal are especially suited to our modern campaign against terrorism, which is fought against individuals rather than governments. Essentially, marque and reprisal authorizes the President to use private parties to find international terrorists wherever they hide. Conventional armed forces are ill-suited to tracking down international terrorists. Our military invasion of Afghanistan undoubtedly has scattered al-Qaida throughout the Middle East and Europe. Marque and reprisal would create an incentive for individuals close to bin Laden to kill or capture him and his associates. This method in effect places a bounty on the heads of international terrorists, who often travel between countries, melt into civilian populations, or hide in remote areas. The goal is to avail ourselves of the knowledge and expertise of private parties, especially given the lack of western intelligence in many of the countries likely to harbor bin Laden. Marque and reprisal could turn the tables on the terrorists, forcing them to live as marked men. Terrorist should fear us, not the other way around. Ultimately, letters of marque and reprisal could help us avoid a wider war by bringing terrorists to justice without the need for military action- saving American lives in the process. I recently wrote defense Secretary Rumsfeld, urging administration support for my legislation, the "Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001." Unless and until the administration puts the focus back on bin Laden and al-Qaida, the horrific crimes of September 11th will remain unpunished. "

http://youtube.com/watch?v=YSP9NteApqI

[Edited on February 4, 2008 at 11:16 PM. Reason : .]

2/4/2008 11:15:06 PM

Quote :

"I recently wrote defense Secretary Rumsfeld (because he doesn't take me seriously enough to answer my phone calls)"

2/4/2008 11:59:47 PM

i would vote for this guy - but it's basically a waste of a vote - shame

2/5/2008 12:02:47 AM

Quote :

" It's not our job to force other countries to accept our political system. "

Ron Paul mentioned it, not me. I'm just pointing out a statement he made on his webpage. There is a general consensus that we as Americans would love for the world to run under democratic rules, and Ron Paul is no exception to that.

Anyways, what's the point of this argument? Good 'ole SB chatter about moot points.

2/5/2008 12:06:12 AM

^
In its early stage, the American Revolution was also a real long-shot. Thomas Paine would've probably disagreed that "arguing" about liberty was a moot point.

2/5/2008 10:33:39 AM

good lord, RP is the main pic on cnn.com! truly a first.

2/5/2008 11:38:30 AM

^ isn't there now when I checked

2/5/2008 2:26:12 PM

Dear Ron Paul:

Please win something. SOMETHING!

2/5/2008 2:31:14 PM

^^Yeah I think they have been switching them around all day

2/5/2008 2:46:03 PM

Quote :

"good lord, RP is the main pic on cnn.com! truly a first."

This will sway all the uninformed internet voters. Talk about an untapped goldmine!

Waiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit

2/5/2008 6:13:38 PM

i like ron paul cause i feel as though he splits the repub party somewhat

2/6/2008 2:42:09 AM

Good thing the internet is a goldmine stein.

Gotta start restocking fort knox.

2/6/2008 10:11:27 AM

^in you're keen eagerness to troll, did you not realize he was already being sarcastic, or do you just not care?

2/6/2008 10:30:23 AM

2nd place in Montana WOOT!!

2/6/2008 3:24:02 PM

I thought we had alaska

2/6/2008 3:38:35 PM

wlb420

You can almost hear Stein and I going over your head.

2/6/2008 4:30:16 PM

Ahhh, trolling in tandem huh...

I guess y'all do have the little to no substance posts in common.

Quote :

"SandSanta All American 20759 Posts user info edit post Some cutting edge analysis is being done in this thread."

http://brentroad.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=512905

That's the best kind of comedy.

[Edited on February 6, 2008 at 4:41 PM. Reason : .]

2/6/2008 4:38:11 PM

^^ok now that one was good

2/6/2008 4:39:57 PM

OK, someone help me figure this out... On Paul's website, he keeps talking about "securing delegates" to the RNC. Are these not the same as the delegates being decided upon by the primaries and caucuses? what exactly am I missing here?

2/6/2008 5:42:34 PM

I think its something weird like

2/3 of the delegates are awarded from people voting in states
1/3 of the delegates are awarded at the national convention

2/6/2008 5:46:52 PM

Quote :

"I guess y'all do have the little to no substance posts in common."

What "of substance" would you like people to post?

Factoids like "Ron Paul has captured 16 delegates -- leaving him a mere 1,175 delegates short of becoming the Republican nominee for President of the United States"?

Or "While Ron Paul had a strong showing in Montana, finishing second in the voting, Montana seems to have a winner-take-all policy with their delegates, leaving Ron Paul shit out of luck"?

---------------------------

A serious question though -- what happens to all the money raised for a campaign after it goes belly up? I keep hearing that Paul's raised a ton of money, but that he's spent extremely little.

2/6/2008 6:27:15 PM

^ puts it toward his congressional reelection that he is doing at the same time. So if/when he drops out he can put it towards that, but not while he is still running (some kind of texas law)

2/6/2008 7:19:32 PM

haha, http://ncst.facebook.com/group.php?gid=8220023116

2/6/2008 8:05:12 PM

^^^it can go to his congressional bid OR it defaults back to the Republican national party for use in the general election. Some of it may be redirected into future exploratory committees

2/6/2008 8:26:38 PM

Romney's out. 7 down, 2 to go!

2/7/2008 2:01:03 PM

So now we are down to 5 candidates, yes?

A black dude
A woman
An old guy
A preacher
Some crazy guy who keeps going on about "freedom" and "liberty"

[Edited on February 7, 2008 at 3:31 PM. Reason : ]

2/7/2008 3:25:22 PM

With romney out, it changes everything. Not saying romney's people will go for ron paul, but most of his people were hardcore republicans and are against mccains moderate views. or people will see mccain as the automatic nominee and less people will go out to vote except the ron paul fanatics. Also the next debates won't be mccain and romney fighting the whole time. With all this I got a good feeling he can take his home state of texas.

2/7/2008 4:01:00 PM

Quote :

"With all this I got a good feeling he can take his home state of texas"

ahahahahahahahahahhaha
. . .
. . .
ahahahahahahahah

2/7/2008 4:02:02 PM

they've elected him 10 times before.

Also Montana and Nevada (the states he came 2nd in) were the ones Romney won. Just saying...

2/7/2008 4:05:12 PM

wait for mccain and huckabee to drop out, paul will win a state after that

2/7/2008 4:06:24 PM

Quote :

"So now we are down to 5 candidates, yes? A black dude A woman An old guy A preacher Some crazy guy who keeps going on about "freedom" and "liberty""

the crazy guy is older than the old guy fwiw

2/7/2008 4:18:54 PM

unfortunately, the next debate will be Feb28. That may be too far in the future for Paul to capitalize on Romney's departure...

2/7/2008 6:23:36 PM

Does anyone here honestly think Paul still has a chance? Huckabee doesn't even have a chance, unless McCain dies or something.

[Edited on February 7, 2008 at 6:38 PM. Reason : .]

2/7/2008 6:37:38 PM

Yeah theres still a chance

I mean, Im still voting Ron Paul

2/7/2008 7:02:03 PM

Actually, yes, he has a huge chance now. Huckabee is running low on cash, and he, frankly, would likely lean towards Paul as far as who to endorse. If Huckabee drops out before the next debate, then Paul, finally given some air time, would absolutely destroy McCain. So far, Paul has only been able to get in a word every now and then because the "top tier candidates" have been busy trading sound bites at the debates. Allow Paul and McCain to actually get past slogans and into any kind of detail, and Paul will murder McCain. Paul will thoroughly trounce McCain as far as being the "real conservative" in the debate, and that will build huge momentum.

If Huckabee stays in it up to the debate and into the RNC, then it still helps Paul, because it will prevent McCain from being able to get the "delegates" needed to secure the nomination. Then all hell will break loose at the convention, and I think Paul might be able to come out on top there. At the very least, we could see a ticket w/ Paul as the VP.

2/7/2008 8:22:44 PM

^ i don't think so

Paul comes off as fairly nutty, especially if someone brings up 9/11 or the whole gold standard thing. It would be easy for McCain, if he plans for it, to make Paul look ridiculous.

2/7/2008 8:26:03 PM

He still has my vote -- and I could care less if someone else thinks it's a waste.

2/7/2008 8:26:19 PM