Video on the "Blowback" of our Foreign Policy

[Zarn]

http://youtu.be/I8NhRPo0WAo

Yes, it's a Ron Paul video. No, I'm not making you watch it. But if you don't, you don't get dessert... it's ice cream tonight.

[Free Palestine]

This video speaks the truth.

However, I'm not really that non-interventionist anymore.  I oppose actions such as what we did in Iran, f-cking around with other nations for our own profit, but I support actions such as the intervention in Libya.

[CJK]

Stupid.

Terrorists should never have a veto on our foreign policy, and any candidate who says so is unfit for the Presidency.

[fezzyfestoon]

There's no doubt our haphazard, ignorant, arrogant foreign policy is our biggest enemy. What bothers me the most about our modern military-industrial complex is the massively successful efforts by our government to shift focus after 9/11. Instead of reflecting as a nation on what could have caused this, we reacted as though it were a random isolated event. We thrust our noses higher in the air and our heads further into the sand simultaneously. Our anger should have been channeled towards fixing our problems rather than foaming at the mouth. We have so many enemies and so many problems yet we refuse to take responsibility for any of the problems that we cause worldwide. It's because we're constantly told we're so great and do nothing wrong, America is noble and protecting the world, there's nothing anyone could possibly disagree with us about...DON'T doubt our leaders or their superiority, it's anti-American. We live with our heads so deep up our own asses and our government is sitting there raking it in, chuckling at our complete unawareness of what's going on. Yes, Ron Paul is correct on "blowback" and I for one would support him primarily because of his foreign policy should I vote for him. Ironically, his fiscal positions (and weakness on important social issues) are what hold me back.

[CJK]

There's no doubt our haphazard, ignorant, arrogant foreign policy is our biggest enemy. What bothers me the most about our modern military-industrial complex is the massively successful efforts by our government to shift focus after 9/11. Instead of reflecting as a nation on what could have caused this, we reacted as though it were a random isolated event. We thrust our noses higher in the air and our heads further into the sand simultaneously. Our anger should have been channeled towards fixing our problems rather than foaming at the mouth. We have so many enemies and so many problems yet we refuse to take responsibility for any of the problems that we cause worldwide. It's because we're constantly told we're so great and do nothing wrong, America is noble and protecting the world, there's nothing anyone could possibly disagree with us about...DON'T doubt our leaders or their superiority, it's anti-American. We live with our heads so deep up our own asses and our government is sitting there raking it in, chuckling at our complete unawareness of what's going on. Yes, Ron Paul is correct on "blowback" and I for one would support him primarily because of his foreign policy should I vote for him. Ironically, his fiscal positions (and weakness on important social issues) are what hold me back.

Anyone who thinks that the appropriate response to 9/11 would have been to give into the terrorist's demands is beyond despicable. Maybe if you hate your country so much you should get out.

[CJK]

Oh, and if Ron Paul is so understanding about this, why did he vote for the resolution that authorized force in Afghanistan?

[fezzyfestoon]

Anyone who thinks that the appropriate response to 9/11 would have been to give into the terrorist's demands is beyond despicable. Maybe if you hate your country so much you should get out.

Haha yes! That's exactly what I'm talking about. A critical look at our own actions equates to hatred for America, "terrorist demands", leave the country, blah blah blah. And yes, you're right, an appropriate response to anything is to do the opposite of what's beneficial in the sole interest of being "right" or "in charge".

[colovia]

There's no doubt our haphazard, ignorant, arrogant foreign policy is our biggest enemy. What bothers me the most about our modern military-industrial complex is the massively successful efforts by our government to shift focus after 9/11. Instead of reflecting as a nation on what could have caused this, we reacted as though it were a random isolated event. We thrust our noses higher in the air and our heads further into the sand simultaneously. Our anger should have been channeled towards fixing our problems rather than foaming at the mouth. We have so many enemies and so many problems yet we refuse to take responsibility for any of the problems that we cause worldwide. It's because we're constantly told we're so great and do nothing wrong, America is noble and protecting the world, there's nothing anyone could possibly disagree with us about...DON'T doubt our leaders or their superiority, it's anti-American. We live with our heads so deep up our own asses and our government is sitting there raking it in, chuckling at our complete unawareness of what's going on. Yes, Ron Paul is correct on "blowback" and I for one would support him primarily because of his foreign policy should I vote for him. Ironically, his fiscal positions (and weakness on important social issues) are what hold me back.

Anyone who thinks that the appropriate response to 9/11 would have been to give into the terrorist's demands is beyond despicable. Maybe if you hate your country so much you should get out.

That's a strawman. The Ron Paul argument is that it was morally wrong for us to install repressive regimes throughout the Middle East and we never should have done that in the first place. Insofar as the terrorists' demands include things that we should have done anyway (like not supporting repressive regimes), we should do those things.

No one thinks that the US should give into all of the terrorists' demands (such as converting to Islam), or that the US should give into demands because of of 9/11.

[© tweed]

<--- seriously thinking about becoming a non-ironic, critically self-aware supporter of Paul 2012.

[Jacobtm]

Imagine if China invaded us.

[© tweed]

Imagine if China invaded us.

the History Channel the other day said FDR was afraid the Japanese were going to ground-invade the United States (and that we wouldn't be able to mount a serious defense until they had made their way to Chicago).  the whole idea of an occupied USA is quite alien.

[Bull Moose Base]

I predict the blowback is going to blow this thread all the way to a different board.

[fezzyfestoon]

Imagine if China invaded us.

the History Channel the other day said FDR was afraid the Japanese were going to ground-invade the United States (and that we wouldn't be able to mount a serious defense until they had made their way to Chicago).  the whole idea of an occupied USA is quite alien.

Very much so. I think that probably contributes to the ability of our government's fear-mongering to stick so well. We have no idea how a full-scale attack on the US would go so any suggestion that it could be successful for the enemy goes a long way.

[Zarn]

Paul is a candidate. This is his stance. Is this not where the presidential election stuff goes?

There's no doubt our haphazard, ignorant, arrogant foreign policy is our biggest enemy. What bothers me the most about our modern military-industrial complex is the massively successful efforts by our government to shift focus after 9/11. Instead of reflecting as a nation on what could have caused this, we reacted as though it were a random isolated event. We thrust our noses higher in the air and our heads further into the sand simultaneously. Our anger should have been channeled towards fixing our problems rather than foaming at the mouth. We have so many enemies and so many problems yet we refuse to take responsibility for any of the problems that we cause worldwide. It's because we're constantly told we're so great and do nothing wrong, America is noble and protecting the world, there's nothing anyone could possibly disagree with us about...DON'T doubt our leaders or their superiority, it's anti-American. We live with our heads so deep up our own asses and our government is sitting there raking it in, chuckling at our complete unawareness of what's going on. Yes, Ron Paul is correct on "blowback" and I for one would support him primarily because of his foreign policy should I vote for him. Ironically, his fiscal positions (and weakness on important social issues) are what hold me back.

Anyone who thinks that the appropriate response to 9/11 would have been to give into the terrorist's demands is beyond despicable. Maybe if you hate your country so much you should get out.

Paul never advocated giving in to any demands. Why don't you support the troops?

[CJK]

Anyone who thinks that the appropriate response to 9/11 would have been to give into the terrorist's demands is beyond despicable. Maybe if you hate your country so much you should get out.

Haha yes! That's exactly what I'm talking about. A critical look at our own actions equates to hatred for America, "terrorist demands", leave the country, blah blah blah. And yes, you're right, an appropriate response to anything is to do the opposite of what's beneficial in the sole interest of being "right" or "in charge".

Dude, I'm being serious. If you truly hate your country to the extent that your reaction to 9/11 is that its all our fault for not listening to the terrorists, you have no business being here. No one has any problem with you (or Ron Paul) disagreeing with this or that policy on it's own merit, it's this whole "let's just give people who hate us whatever they want to make them stop" nonsense that turns people off.

If I burned down your house, would you agree that your forum posting policies were at fault?

[CJK]

There's no doubt our haphazard, ignorant, arrogant foreign policy is our biggest enemy. What bothers me the most about our modern military-industrial complex is the massively successful efforts by our government to shift focus after 9/11. Instead of reflecting as a nation on what could have caused this, we reacted as though it were a random isolated event. We thrust our noses higher in the air and our heads further into the sand simultaneously. Our anger should have been channeled towards fixing our problems rather than foaming at the mouth. We have so many enemies and so many problems yet we refuse to take responsibility for any of the problems that we cause worldwide. It's because we're constantly told we're so great and do nothing wrong, America is noble and protecting the world, there's nothing anyone could possibly disagree with us about...DON'T doubt our leaders or their superiority, it's anti-American. We live with our heads so deep up our own asses and our government is sitting there raking it in, chuckling at our complete unawareness of what's going on. Yes, Ron Paul is correct on "blowback" and I for one would support him primarily because of his foreign policy should I vote for him. Ironically, his fiscal positions (and weakness on important social issues) are what hold me back.

Anyone who thinks that the appropriate response to 9/11 would have been to give into the terrorist's demands is beyond despicable. Maybe if you hate your country so much you should get out.

That's a strawman. The Ron Paul argument is that it was morally wrong for us to install repressive regimes throughout the Middle East and we never should have done that in the first place. Insofar as the terrorists' demands include things that we should have done anyway (like not supporting repressive regimes), we should do those things.

No one thinks that the US should give into all of the terrorists' demands (such as converting to Islam), or that the US should give into demands because of of 9/11.

Al-Qaeda is a crusader for democracy? Who knew! Thanks for the enlightenment. You and them must have been a big supporter of the Iraq War, given how it removed a repressive regime. 

To get serious, al-Qaeda stated that it's specific beef with the U.S. was 1) troops in Saudi Arabia 2) sanctions against Iraq and 3) support for Israel. All of those policies were supported by the American people and only 2 was somewhat controversial.

[CJK]

Paul is a candidate. This is his stance. Is this not where the presidential election stuff goes?

There's no doubt our haphazard, ignorant, arrogant foreign policy is our biggest enemy. What bothers me the most about our modern military-industrial complex is the massively successful efforts by our government to shift focus after 9/11. Instead of reflecting as a nation on what could have caused this, we reacted as though it were a random isolated event. We thrust our noses higher in the air and our heads further into the sand simultaneously. Our anger should have been channeled towards fixing our problems rather than foaming at the mouth. We have so many enemies and so many problems yet we refuse to take responsibility for any of the problems that we cause worldwide. It's because we're constantly told we're so great and do nothing wrong, America is noble and protecting the world, there's nothing anyone could possibly disagree with us about...DON'T doubt our leaders or their superiority, it's anti-American. We live with our heads so deep up our own asses and our government is sitting there raking it in, chuckling at our complete unawareness of what's going on. Yes, Ron Paul is correct on "blowback" and I for one would support him primarily because of his foreign policy should I vote for him. Ironically, his fiscal positions (and weakness on important social issues) are what hold me back.

Anyone who thinks that the appropriate response to 9/11 would have been to give into the terrorist's demands is beyond despicable. Maybe if you hate your country so much you should get out.

Paul never advocated giving in to any demands. Why don't you support the troops?

They demanded that we change our policies and Ron Paul agres with them. Or at least sometimes he does. Why did he vote for the war in 2001 again?

[© tweed]

Imagine if China invaded us.

the History Channel the other day said FDR was afraid the Japanese were going to ground-invade the United States (and that we wouldn't be able to mount a serious defense until they had made their way to Chicago).  the whole idea of an occupied USA is quite alien.

Very much so. I think that probably contributes to the ability of our government's fear-mongering to stick so well. We have no idea how a full-scale attack on the US would go so any suggestion that it could be successful for the enemy goes a long way.

Reagan actually implied it as a justification for bombing the sh**t out of Nicaragua in the 80s (the Sandinstas are only x miles from Texas, etc.) fing joke.

[Bull Moose Base]

To get serious, al-Qaeda stated that it's specific beef with the U.S. was 1) troops in Saudi Arabia 2) sanctions against Iraq and 3) support for Israel. All of those policies were supported by the American people and only 2 was somewhat controversial.

Doubtful Bin Laden genuinely cared much about those except number 1, and doubtful >10% of Americans knew we had troops stationed in Saudi Arabia.  We no longer do anyway.

[fezzyfestoon]

Dude, I'm being serious. If you truly hate your country to the extent that your reaction to 9/11 is that its all our fault for not listening to the terrorists, you have no business being here. No one has any problem with you (or Ron Paul) disagreeing with this or that policy on it's own merit, it's this whole "let's just give people who hate us whatever they want to make them stop" nonsense that turns people off.

If I burned down your house, would you agree that your forum posting policies were at fault?

I don't care how serious you are, what you're saying is complete garbage and I don't take any of it seriously. If you can't form a political thought without spazzing yourself into a talking point vomit, then you shouldn't be posting on a political forum. If you seriously think what I said means I support terrorists' agendas then your understanding of anything I could post is far below the threshold for being taken at all seriously.

To humor the general discussion of my actual style of foreign policy, I will say that your spastic vitriol is in a similar vein to my thoughts. We shouldn't base our policy on what anyone else says, we should base in on what's right. It doesn't matter what the terrorists think, we should be leaving because it's beneficial to us and it's right. Who cares what they want us to do? Staying for the sake of avoiding their preferences is worse than leaving and that is letting them dictate our policies in an even worse way. Even if I did think we should leave because they want us to it's better than staying because they want us to leave. At least leaving is in our best interest. Staying is just a multi-trillion dollar middle finger that does no one any good. I personally don't think they're worth so much of our resources. If you think they're that important and worthy of all that American attention and resources, maybe it's time you reflected on your own anti-American foreign policies, buddy.

[Jacobtm]

Of course, with there being 9 guns for every 10 Americans, I don't think anyone would have a chance at ''occupying'' us.

Though it certainly doesn't help that our whole military is half way around the world...

[colovia]

There's no doubt our haphazard, ignorant, arrogant foreign policy is our biggest enemy. What bothers me the most about our modern military-industrial complex is the massively successful efforts by our government to shift focus after 9/11. Instead of reflecting as a nation on what could have caused this, we reacted as though it were a random isolated event. We thrust our noses higher in the air and our heads further into the sand simultaneously. Our anger should have been channeled towards fixing our problems rather than foaming at the mouth. We have so many enemies and so many problems yet we refuse to take responsibility for any of the problems that we cause worldwide. It's because we're constantly told we're so great and do nothing wrong, America is noble and protecting the world, there's nothing anyone could possibly disagree with us about...DON'T doubt our leaders or their superiority, it's anti-American. We live with our heads so deep up our own asses and our government is sitting there raking it in, chuckling at our complete unawareness of what's going on. Yes, Ron Paul is correct on "blowback" and I for one would support him primarily because of his foreign policy should I vote for him. Ironically, his fiscal positions (and weakness on important social issues) are what hold me back.

Anyone who thinks that the appropriate response to 9/11 would have been to give into the terrorist's demands is beyond despicable. Maybe if you hate your country so much you should get out.

That's a strawman. The Ron Paul argument is that it was morally wrong for us to install repressive regimes throughout the Middle East and we never should have done that in the first place. Insofar as the terrorists' demands include things that we should have done anyway (like not supporting repressive regimes), we should do those things.

No one thinks that the US should give into all of the terrorists' demands (such as converting to Islam), or that the US should give into demands because of of 9/11.

Al-Qaeda is a crusader for democracy? Who knew! Thanks for the enlightenment. You and them must have been a big supporter of the Iraq War, given how it removed a repressive regime.  

To get serious, al-Qaeda stated that it's specific beef with the U.S. was 1) troops in Saudi Arabia 2) sanctions against Iraq and 3) support for Israel. All of those policies were supported by the American people and only 2 was somewhat controversial.

Support for Israel was uncontroversial? Seriously? Israel is one of the most controversial countries in the world. Although they have legitimate security interests and critics may pay too much attention to them compared to other countries, the fact is that Israel is basically the only country in the world that has a significant number of foreign people under its long-term military rule.

Moreover, democracy doesn't lend legitimacy to what a country does in foreign affairs. That's because the foreigners that you are killing don't get to vote in your elections. The fact that the UK was a democracy doesn't justify the famine that it imposed on the Bengal, for instance. The famine doesn't become less wrong because a few million people a continent way decided to impose it rather than a single person a continent away. So the fact that the American people broadly support a policy might be a relevant factor in whether a domestic policy is legitimate, but it is irrelevant in foreign affairs.

Also, I will note that the Saudi regime is obviously repressive, and Israel is repressive towards the Palestinians, and cutting off a country from trade thereby causing famine falls within the typical meaning of repression as well. So insofar as Al-Qaeda demanded those three things, Al-Qaeda was demanding that the US stop supporting repression in the Middle East. There's a reason Al-Qaeda chose to publish those three demands--because all of them are very reasonable and easy to defend on the merits. Of course, what makes Al-Qaeda evil is that what they really wanted was for the US to convert to Islam and adopt Sharia law--which we should never do, and which not even the most adamant Ron Paul supporter has suggested we should do.

[Free Palestine]

Hurrdurr, I wonder who's right -- CIA operatives and veterans, or some dumb internet chickenhawks.

[Zarn]

Paul is a candidate. This is his stance. Is this not where the presidential election stuff goes?

There's no doubt our haphazard, ignorant, arrogant foreign policy is our biggest enemy. What bothers me the most about our modern military-industrial complex is the massively successful efforts by our government to shift focus after 9/11. Instead of reflecting as a nation on what could have caused this, we reacted as though it were a random isolated event. We thrust our noses higher in the air and our heads further into the sand simultaneously. Our anger should have been channeled towards fixing our problems rather than foaming at the mouth. We have so many enemies and so many problems yet we refuse to take responsibility for any of the problems that we cause worldwide. It's because we're constantly told we're so great and do nothing wrong, America is noble and protecting the world, there's nothing anyone could possibly disagree with us about...DON'T doubt our leaders or their superiority, it's anti-American. We live with our heads so deep up our own asses and our government is sitting there raking it in, chuckling at our complete unawareness of what's going on. Yes, Ron Paul is correct on "blowback" and I for one would support him primarily because of his foreign policy should I vote for him. Ironically, his fiscal positions (and weakness on important social issues) are what hold me back.

Anyone who thinks that the appropriate response to 9/11 would have been to give into the terrorist's demands is beyond despicable. Maybe if you hate your country so much you should get out.

Paul never advocated giving in to any demands. Why don't you support the troops?

They demanded that we change our policies and Ron Paul agres with them. Or at least sometimes he does. Why did he vote for the war in 2001 again?

Paul believes Bin Laden did something very wrong. That has nothing to do with bombing innocent people and occupying their lands.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

Paul is a candidate. This is his stance. Is this not where the presidential election stuff goes?

There's no doubt our haphazard, ignorant, arrogant foreign policy is our biggest enemy. What bothers me the most about our modern military-industrial complex is the massively successful efforts by our government to shift focus after 9/11. Instead of reflecting as a nation on what could have caused this, we reacted as though it were a random isolated event. We thrust our noses higher in the air and our heads further into the sand simultaneously. Our anger should have been channeled towards fixing our problems rather than foaming at the mouth. We have so many enemies and so many problems yet we refuse to take responsibility for any of the problems that we cause worldwide. It's because we're constantly told we're so great and do nothing wrong, America is noble and protecting the world, there's nothing anyone could possibly disagree with us about...DON'T doubt our leaders or their superiority, it's anti-American. We live with our heads so deep up our own asses and our government is sitting there raking it in, chuckling at our complete unawareness of what's going on. Yes, Ron Paul is correct on "blowback" and I for one would support him primarily because of his foreign policy should I vote for him. Ironically, his fiscal positions (and weakness on important social issues) are what hold me back.

Anyone who thinks that the appropriate response to 9/11 would have been to give into the terrorist's demands is beyond despicable. Maybe if you hate your country so much you should get out.

Paul never advocated giving in to any demands. Why don't you support the troops?

They demanded that we change our policies and Ron Paul agres with them. Or at least sometimes he does. Why did he vote for the war in 2001 again?

If a guy kills someone else's family and then the survivor shoots up a mall and gets the killer in the process, is the first guy justified?

No one but an idiot would claim Al Qaeda was justified, but they aren't evil for the sake of being evil. They have a variety of reasons, and the ones that make them an actual threat (rather than being like those five man crackpot "terrorist" bands in Africa) are legitimate grievances with American foreign policy. They committed an act that justifies retaliation (hence the approval of Afghanistan, though Paul preferred alternate methods eg. letters of marque and reprisal), but the reasons they did it should be kept in mind to prevent it from happening again.