Post: #1

Could this taboo discussion point finally be turning the corner?

I have yet to scan the twitter feed for allegations of antisemitism but I'm sure they've begun in earnest. Still, glad to see someone relatively prominent is finally calling bullshit on aid to Israel.

Quote:Why Are We Sending $38 Billion to Rich and Powerful Israel?
written by ron paul
monday september 19, 2016

Last week’s announcement of a record-breaking US aid package for Israel underscores how dangerously foolish and out-of-touch is our interventionist foreign policy. Over the next ten years, the US taxpayer will be forced to give Israel some $38 billion dollars in military aid. It is money we cannot afford going to a country that needs no assistance to maintain its status as the most powerful military in the Middle East.

All US foreign aid is immoral and counterproductive. As I have often said, it is money taken from poor people in the US and sent to rich people overseas. That is because US assistance money goes to foreign governments to hand out as they see fit. Often that assistance is stolen outright or it goes to the politically connected in the recipient country.

Just as bad is the fact that much of what we call “foreign aid” is actually welfare for the wealthy here at home. The aid package to Israel is a very good example. According to the agreement, this $38 billion will all go to US weapons manufacturers. So the real beneficiaries are not the American people, and not even Israeli citizens. The real beneficiaries are the US military-industrial complex. Perhaps the money won’t even leave Washington – it may simply go across town, from the Fed to the Beltway bomb-makers.

While even US government aid to desperately poor countries should be opposed on moral and practical grounds, it is even harder to understand US aid to relatively rich countries. At a nominal per capita GDP of over $35,000, Israel is richer than Japan, Italy, and South Korea. Not long ago Business Insider published a report by the Institute for the Study of War showing that the Israel is the most powerful military force in the Middle East. We know they have hundreds of nuclear weapons, a sophisticated air force, drones, and even nuclear weapons-equipped submarines.

So why is the US giving a rich and incredibly well-armed country a record amount of military aid? Part of it is that the US government believes it can coerce Israel to do Washington’s bidding in the Middle East. History shows that this is a foolish pipe dream. If anything, US aid subsidizes Israeli human rights abuses in Gaza and elsewhere.

Another reason is a very powerful lobby in Washington, AIPAC, that pressures Members of Congress to focus on Israel’s interests instead of US interests. Members of Congress should look at our economy, with effectively zero interest rates, an anemic non-recovery from the 2008 crash, historically low participation in the work force, and inflation eroding the value of the dollar and conclude that this might not be the best time to start handing out billions of dollars in foreign aid. Unfortunately most Members of Congress find it impossible to say no to special interest groups like AIPAC. (edit: sing it, brother!)

Here’s a better aid package for Israel: free trade, travel, friendly relations, and no entangling alliances (edit: good luck with that, but wish it could happen!). Israel should be free to pursue its national interests and we should be free to pursue ours. If individual Americans feel compelled to provide assistance to Israel or any other country or cause overseas they should be allowed. But the rest of us should not be forced to do so. Trade, not aid.

Post: #2

Aren't he and his kid Rand known isolationists?

Post: #3

(09-22-2016 12:07 AM)MKDAWUSS Wrote:  Aren't he and his kid Rand known isolationists?

They advocate for a Non Interventionist policy.

Having relations with, trading and being friendly with other countries is not isolating.

Even if they were somewhat "isolationists" it's certainly a better option than what we've been doing.

Post: #4

Ron was and is and will remain the political hero of my lifetime.

An extremely sensible and ethical article.

Post: #5

(09-22-2016 12:07 AM)MKDAWUSS Wrote:  Aren't he and his kid Rand known isolationists?

It's one thing to merely be an isolationist, it's for (((them))) a completely other thing to be specifically ANTI-ISRAEL. The oy veying and kvetching will reach the high heavens

Post: #6

I was never a big Ron Paul fan.
I thought the way he lied about his newsletters was disqualifying.

But honestly, we could've done a lot worse, and we did.

Post: #7

Ron Paul was always a great man, he just had no chance with the (((media))).

Let's hope more people find the courage to speak up.

Post: #8

A big part of the reason we decided on Trump this cycle was because of the (((media's))) ability to hide candidates who do not attract enough attention.

Soft-spoken Ron Paul was completely ignored and generated no TV ratings, and Ron Paul didn't have the money to fly around the country and give speeches. He still needed donors who refused to back him because it went against their interests.

Trump has most of Ron Paul's foreign policy while being classically conservative on trade (pro-tariff) and immigration. Ron Paul by contrast is libertarian and wants low-taxes on everything and having relatively open borders.

That said, not even Trump can take on the Jewish lobby and the rest of the establishment. So he still had to kiss Israeli ass but he has said before that Israel would need to pay for US defense, which is encouraging. It makes you think he wouldn't give the aid to Israel, but doesn't say it directly to avoid pissing off Jews. I think a lot of Jews suspect this as well and are anti-Trump as a result of it.

Post: #9

Spot on Samseau.

Post: #10

I'll always have a soft spot for Ron Paul. He seems like a genuine, red-blooded American dude who wants the best for his country. We really missed a good chance by not electing him, not that he ever had a shot anyway.

I'm going to light a candle for his political career after this incident, though.

Post: #11

If women didnt have the vote, what would America's political landscape look like?

Post: #12

The Guy is an investment advice disaster.
Gold pumping/Fear porn loon.

Post: #13

(09-22-2016 07:46 AM)Pride male Wrote:  If women didnt have the vote, what would America's political landscape look like?

Maybe this will help.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...frage.html

Post: #14

It's Happening.

Post: #15

Unfortunately, the US and Britain as well as the EU, will never be able to rid itself of the hidden hand without a Hitler-like purge. That is why the constant holocaust reminders and laws against its denial.
You don't constantly hear about the Holomodor, Pol Pot's killing fields, Mao's The Great Leap Forward, King Leopold of Belgium's genocide in the Congo, the French killing 15% of the Algerian population in the Battle D'Algiers, Turkey's genocide of Armenians, etc, etc. Yet you never will hear the end of the brutal treatment of the Jews over 60 years ago, hell they just threw a 90 year old German man in jail a few months ago. They are way too entrenched into the US political system. For less than 2% of the population what they have achieved is downright astonishing, yet they still receive protected-minority status. If you watched the Republican debates, every single question asked on a myriad of subjects was answered with "I stand by Israel and let's start another war, this time in Iran."

Our political system is too easily controlled by monetary interests. Any US politician that considers himself an "Israel firster" deserves to be taken outback and put down for treason, IMO. Obviously, this will never happen. Donald Trump's administration will be no different. You think you can be a successful real estate magnate in the world capitol of Jewry, Manhattan, without their help? Really?
Even so, Congress decides who gets paid and who doesn't, not the POTUS. The money funelled to Israel gets funelled right back to their campaign funds and personal bank accounts through AIFPAC.

You cannot serve two masters. I am an American first and foremost. Any politician who puts another country's interest above our own is a treacherous POS that deserve the gallows.
Time to put America first. America already was great until (((they))) fucked us all over after helping them.

Post: #16

(09-22-2016 07:55 AM)onetouch Wrote:  The Guy is an investment advice disaster.
Gold pumping/Fear porn loon.

Do you have anything to back up your name calling or is this the type of crap posting/name calling quality we can look forward to?

Post: #17

I can't believe I forgot to mention the biggest human rights violation and war crime ever committed. The displacement and genocide against the Palestinians that has been ongoing since 1948.
Strange how you never hear about that one, huh?

Post: #18

(09-22-2016 12:23 PM)AboveAverageJoe Wrote:  I can't believe I forgot to mention the biggest human rights violation and war crime ever committed. The displacement and genocide against the Palestinians that has been ongoing since 1948.
Strange how you never hear about that one, huh?

I've heard about it. I've read about it. I just don't give a shit about it. I have no solidarity whatsoever with the Palestinians or the Israelis. I care about America.

They lost their land and many of their people. Tough shit. I just never understood why other Arab countries were never able to absorb the ~2 million Arabs living there today.

Post: #19

(09-22-2016 01:09 PM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  

(09-22-2016 12:23 PM)AboveAverageJoe Wrote:  I can't believe I forgot to mention the biggest human rights violation and war crime ever committed. The displacement and genocide against the Palestinians that has been ongoing since 1948.
Strange how you never hear about that one, huh?

I've heard about it. I've read about it. I just don't give a shit about it. I have no solidarity whatsoever with the Palestinians or the Israelis. I care about America.

They lost their land and many of their people. Tough shit. I just never understood why other Arab countries were never able to absorb the ~2 million Arabs living there today.

Fine if it doesn't bother you morally.
I just don't need to be subsidizing their killing spree and legitimizing their illegal occupation.

Post: #20

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. As an American the only foreign, and military policy I want to emulate is that of the Swiss. Neutral, peaceful, prosperous, but ready to unleash about half a million snipers and designated marksmen to defend their home soil.

Post: #21

(09-22-2016 01:51 PM)vinman Wrote:  I've said it before, and I'll say it again. As an American the only foreign, and military policy I want to emulate is that of the Swiss. Neutral, peaceful, prosperous, but ready to unleash about half a million snipers and designated marksmen to defend their home soil.

I wish we would be more like China or Russia in foreign matters not domestically, of course.
It seems that they are both on a race to secure vital natural resources around the world while Obama plays another 19 holes. (The last one is his caddies.)

Post: #22

(09-22-2016 06:44 AM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  I'll always have a soft spot for Ron Paul. He seems like a genuine, red-blooded American dude who wants the best for his country. We really missed a good chance by not electing him, not that he ever had a shot anyway.

I'm going to light a candle for his political career after this incident, though.

From what I recall though, a lot of the college kids who cheered him on and shouted his name at the GOP conventions later wound up supporting Obama. Same kids would read Atlas Shrugged cover to cover, love it to death, then support all things socialist - the exact opposite of what's contained in any of Ayn Rand's writings. I think they were only hoping for a shot at legalized pot by supporting Paul.

Post: #23

(09-22-2016 09:22 PM)SlickyBoy Wrote:  

(09-22-2016 06:44 AM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  I'll always have a soft spot for Ron Paul. He seems like a genuine, red-blooded American dude who wants the best for his country. We really missed a good chance by not electing him, not that he ever had a shot anyway.

I'm going to light a candle for his political career after this incident, though.

From what I recall though, a lot of the college kids who cheered him on and shouted his name at the GOP conventions later wound up supporting Obama. Same kids would read Atlas Shrugged cover to cover, love it to death, then support all things socialist - the exact opposite of what's contained in any of Ayn Rand's writings. I think they were only hoping for a shot at legalized pot by supporting Paul.

Disagree, most the Paul supporters are the driving force of the Trump meme war.

Post: #24

While a lot of Ron Paul guys (like myself) are big Trump supporters, a lot of them are firmly in the "Trump will end democracy, and is a 'statist authoritarian' camp". They are either supporting Johnson, or not voting at all.

A lot of them are looking at stuff said in this NRO (CuckReview) article as arguments against Trump.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/43...ion-powers

Anyone have thoughts on countering these arguments?

(09-22-2016 09:38 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

(09-22-2016 09:22 PM)SlickyBoy Wrote:  

(09-22-2016 06:44 AM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  I'll always have a soft spot for Ron Paul. He seems like a genuine, red-blooded American dude who wants the best for his country. We really missed a good chance by not electing him, not that he ever had a shot anyway.

I'm going to light a candle for his political career after this incident, though.

From what I recall though, a lot of the college kids who cheered him on and shouted his name at the GOP conventions later wound up supporting Obama. Same kids would read Atlas Shrugged cover to cover, love it to death, then support all things socialist - the exact opposite of what's contained in any of Ayn Rand's writings. I think they were only hoping for a shot at legalized pot by supporting Paul.

Disagree, most the Paul supporters are the driving force of the Trump meme war.

Post: #25

Still arguing with that guy, huh?

It's a written gish gallop, man. It would take me all day to respond to the points, and it would be pointless. Some of them are right, many are twisted.

I think the best response is rejecting the premise to begin with. Does Mr. Trump have some ideas that are unconstitutional? Yep. But 99% of what the government does is unconstitutional. It's not as if Mr. Trump will be breaking some longstanding tradition of respecting it!

We have real problems that need to be fixed. Most of those problems were directly caused by the blatant disregard of the Constitution. How on earth is Mr. Trump supposed to fix the problems others have made over generations of ignoring the Constitution if he immediately shackles himself with it? It's not as if the government hits a reset button and starts at 100% Constitutional Purity every time a president is elected, and only presidential action can erode that purity. And Mr. Trump certainly can't wave a wand and make the whole rest of the government start following the Constitution.

As much as I hate to say it, the US Constitution as written is long dead. Checks and balances and assignment of power have been broken for about 100 years. And the people who demand that we slavishly adhere to it when nobody else will are infantile. They are the very personification of the phrase "the perfect is the enemy of the good."

Quote:In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.

These dumb fucks who demand purity are the sort who will never even consider the "wrong" option if the right option isn't available. They would prefer to do nothing, and lose.

So really, I suppose this is the best response to them: