'Bravo' ......... pure and simple !

SparrowHawk said:
When a nation decides to engage in an act of war sans a formal declaration then that nation is no different morally than ISIS.
 
Or it that to hard to grasp?
 
Your ignorance never ceases to amaze me.
 
Dog Wonder said:
Sanity requires a sense of humor.
does-the-joker-laugh-at-me-1.jpg
 
777 fixer said:
 
Your ignorance never ceases to amaze me.
Then I guess the COTUS is wrong too. Unless you're going to use Article Six as justification to go to war under the UN or one of the 166 other treaties we've signed. 
 
The perversion of Article Six has been used to justify our action for every war since WWII. The Liar in Chief has admitted his actions in Syria. Even the Liar in Chief's National Security Adviser Tony Blinken tacitly admitted the Obama Administration was following much of G W Bush's strategy now.
 
So now enlighten me as to why I'm ignorant of? T Jefferson warned about foreign alliances then, Ron Paul does now. Given the unrest and number of dead US Soldiers it would seem that perhaps a return to a more non interventionist approach may be in our best interests.
 
 “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety” 
 
SparrowHawk said:
Then I guess the COTUS is wrong too. Unless you're going to use Article Six as justification to go to war under the UN or one of the 166 other treaties we've signed. 
 
The perversion of Article Six has been used to justify our action for every war since WWII. The Liar in Chief has admitted his actions in Syria. Even the Liar in Chief's National Security Adviser Tony Blinken tacitly admitted the Obama Administration was following much of G W Bush's strategy now.
 
So now enlighten me as to why I'm ignorant of? T Jefferson warned about foreign alliances then, Ron Paul does now. Given the unrest and number of dead US Soldiers it would seem that perhaps a return to a more non interventionist approach may be in our best interests.
 
 “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety” 
 
Another thing.  Please stop pretending to be an expert in the Constitution.  No one one here is.  If we were we would'nt be arguing about it on a message board.
 
In addition, do not say an American pilot dropping a bomb on an MRAP full of ISIS fighters who probably either cut someones head off or executed prisoners is the moral equivalent of what those ISIS fighters did.  It is not. 
 
SparrowHawk said:
Any Questions as to why a policy of non intervention is abetter path
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sI0etqzbqDM
 
“It now appears that there were troops and advisers in Grenada from Libya, Cuba, Bulgaria, the Soviet Union, East Germany and North Korea,” Paul said on the House floor in 1983. “If that is the case, I fail to see how anyone can believe that Grenada posed no threat to our well-being.” He also acknowledged that “we have a legitimate national interest” in Grenada.
 
777 fixer said:
 
Another thing.  Please stop pretending to be an expert in the Constitution.  No one one here is.  If we were we would'nt be arguing about it on a message board.
 
In addition, do not say an American pilot dropping a bomb on an MRAP full of ISIS fighters who probably either cut someones head off or executed prisoners is the moral equivalent of what those ISIS fighters did.  It is not. 
 
First and foremost I do NOT take orders from you or anyone else for that matter. So I will speak my mind whether it appeals to you or not I can't control how you react, nor do I desire to.
 
I have studied the COTUS more then most less than others. Expert? I'll allow others to describe. Sounds to me like you don't care for or didn't know what Article Six was all about.
 
One of the most glaring perversions of Article Six was the obscure portion of the UN Charter Reagan used that America was exercising its right to self defense as defined by Article 51 of the UN charter. to bomb Libya.
 
Turned out to be the best shots ever fired in anger at another nation as it pretty much kept Khadafi Duck in line for close to 30 years until the Liar in Chief stuck his nose in.
 
SparrowHawk said:
 
First and foremost I do NOT take orders from you or anyone else for that matter. So I will speak my mind whether it appeals to you or not I can't control how you react, nor do I desire to.
 
I have studied the COTUS more then most less than others. Expert? I'll allow others to describe. Sounds to me like you don't care for or didn't know what Article Six was all about.
 
One of the most glaring perversions of Article Six was the obscure portion of the UN Charter Reagan used that America was exercising its right to self defense as defined by Article 51 of the UN charter. to bomb Libya.
 
Turned out to be the best shots ever fired in anger at another nation as it pretty much kept Khadafi Duck in line for close to 30 years until the Liar in Chief stuck his nose in.
 
Get it through your head.  It is not the moral equivalent.
 
SparrowHawk said:
.
 
One of the most glaring perversions of Article Six was the obscure portion of the UN Charter Reagan used that America was exercising its right to self defense as defined by Article 51 of the UN charter. to bomb Libya.
 
Turned out to be the best shots ever fired in anger at another nation as it pretty much kept Khadafi Duck in line for close to 30 years until the Liar in Chief stuck his nose in.
 
Wow, you managed to contradict yourself in the same paragraph. 
 
eolesen said:
Clearly, Dr. Paul's thinking evolved...
 
 
If memory serves me, Grenada invasion was in 1983 and Dr Paul was a HUGE supporter of much of Reagan's position regarding Grenada and other issues. By 1988 Ron Paul had become more and more Libertarian in his views both foreign and domestic. He did at one point resign as a member of the Republican Party to run for President as the Libertarian Party candidate in 1988.
 
Another common misconception is that those of us in the Liberty movement are isolationists or pacifists is just plain wrong. We favor a nation well armed and well prepared to defend itself. What we object to is the US and its Military sticking its colossal nose into every skirmish in the world.
 
777 fixer said:
 
Wow, you managed to contradict yourself in the same paragraph. 
 
 
Not really. The fact that the law of unintended consequences rose up when Colonel Khadafi's daughter was killed by an errant bomb could never have been anticipated. Sometimes luck intervene's as it did here.IF, we had stuck to the original terms of the COTUS the Libya raid would have required a vote in Congress.
 
SparrowHawk said:
 
 
Not really. The fact that the law of unintended consequences rose up when Colonel Khadafi's daughter was killed by an errant bomb could never have been anticipated. Sometimes luck intervene's as it did here.IF, we had stuck to the original terms of the COTUS the Libya raid would have required a vote in Congress.
 
Yes really.
 
The law of unintended consequences has ruled the day since 1953. The CIA calls it blowback.
 
The Iranian military, with the support and financial assistance of the United Statesgovernment, overthrows the government of Premier Mohammed Mosaddeq and reinstates the Shah of Iran. This government was democratically elected by the people of a sovereign nation.
 
 U.S. economic and military aid poured into Iran during the 1950s1960s, and 1970s. In 1978, however, anti-Shah and anti-American protests broke out in Iran and the Shah was toppled from power in 1979. Angry militants seized the U.S. embassy and held the American staff hostage until January 1981. Nationalism, not communism, proved to be the most serious threat to U.S. power in Iran.
 
The above would be "exhibit A" as to how .our foreign has gotten us to where we are today
 
Further the overthrow of the Shah led to us arming Saddam Hussein and an 8 year war there. Any wonder why radical Islam grew and flourished in the rubble?
 
Seeing a pattern starting to evolve? 
 
Back
Top