----
not at all ... just the facts
the Soviets were clearly a threat. I was
living here in Germany in 1976 through 1979 as a young soldier
---
still haven't found a deprogrammer yet, eh?
when they
were a threat. I am too young to remember, (although I was alive)
but the
Soviets propping missiles up in Cuba ninety miles from my home in
Tampa was
clearly a threat. There are hundreds if not thousands of other
examples,
----
hardly a threat ... it was a clash between the Marshall Plan and
communism for control after wwII
but to suggest anything else is either Moonbattery and/or
RonPaulCrackpottery.
---
those who were 'red scared' are to be pitied
every attempt at interventionism by the USA has been a failure
the policy and those who support it need to be eliminated asap by any
means necessary
On Oct 3, 2:45 pm, Keith In Köln <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Revisionist history PlainOl', the Soviets were clearly a threat. I was
> living here in Germany in 1976 through 1979 as a young soldier when they
> were a threat. I am too young to remember, (although I was alive) but the
> Soviets propping missiles up in Cuba ninety miles from my home in Tampa was
> clearly a threat. There are hundreds if not thousands of other examples,
> but to suggest anything else is either Moonbattery and/or
> RonPaulCrackpottery.
>
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 9:41 PM, plainolamerican
> <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > We were not going to allow Soviet
> > expansionism throughout the world
> > ---
> > the birth of a term called culture of fear
> > the soviets were not a threat to the USA and everyone knew they were
> > headed for collapse .... yet, through exaggerated fear they were
> > demonized
>
> > every attempt by the US to intervene has been a disaster and seldom
> > has it ever led to a democracy
> > not that the US has an obligation to promote democracy
>
> > On Oct 3, 12:19 pm, Keith In Köln <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > You might want to read on down, with regard to what Truman had to say:
>
> > > *The very existence of the Greek state is today threatened by the
> > terrorist
> > > activities of several thousand armed men, led by Communists, who defy the
> > > government's authority at a number of points, particularly along the
> > > northern boundaries. A Commission appointed by the United Nations
> > security
> > > Council is at present investigating disturbed conditions in northern
> > Greece
> > > and alleged border violations along the frontier between Greece on the
> > one
> > > hand and Albania, Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia on the other. *
> > > * *
>
> > > *Meanwhile, the Greek Government is unable to cope with the situation.
> > The
> > > Greek army is small and poorly equipped. It needs supplies and equipment
> > if
> > > it is to restore the authority of the government throughout Greek
> > territory.
> > > Greece must have assistance if it is to become a self-supporting and
> > > self-respecting democracy. *
> > > * *
>
> > > *The United States must supply that assistance. We have already extended
> > to
> > > Greece certain types of relief and economic aid but these are inadequate.
> > *
>
> > > **
> > > **
> > > President Truman, March 12, 1947
>
> > >http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/trudoc.asp
>
> > > What Truman did, and what became known as the Truman doctrine, was a "tit
> > > for tat" scenario with the Soviets. We were not going to allow Soviet
> > > expansionism throughout the world, and we nipped it in the bud in South
> > > Korea, as well as Viet Nam for over a decade. I think it important to
> > note
> > > that we never lost a battle in Viet Nam, and I reject the notion that we
> > > lost a war in Viet Nam. We allowed for a liberal media to influence the
> > > political machinations of the era, and it was in fact a mistake for
> > > President Ford not to have gone back in and wiped Hanoi off of the map in
> > > 1975, but I digress. I could end up writing an epistle on this topic,
> > but I
> > > do opine that this was a defining moment in our Nation, and what was the
> > > initial split between conservative politics and the socialist/communist
> > > movement in this Nation.
>
> > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 6:57 PM, plainolamerican
> > > <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > > > I cannot think of any time in our history, where we "intervened" and
> > > > there
> > > > wasn't an argument for the protection of our sovereignty, including
> > > > Viet
> > > > Nam
> > > > ---
> > > > are you implying that communism was a direct threat to our
> > > > sovereignty?
> > > > if so, then wouldn't you say that socialism is a direct threat?
>
> > > > You may in fact disagree with the logic, (and like most
> > > > Moonbats, not comprehend the Truman Doctrine
> > > > ----
> > > > Truman:
> > > > I believe that we must assist free peoples to work out their own
> > > > destinies in their own way.
> > > > Speech to a joint session of the US Congress (12 March 1947),
> > > > outlining what became known as The Truman Doctrine.
>
> > > > All the president is, is a glorified public relations man who spends
> > > > his time flattering, kissing, and kicking people to get them to do
> > > > what they are supposed to do anyway.
>
> > > > Had ten minutes conversation with Henry Morgenthau about Jewish
> > > > ship in Palistine. Told him I would talk to Gen[eral] Marshall about
> > > > it. He'd no business, whatever to call me. The Jews have no sense of
> > > > proportion nor do they have any judgement on world affairs. Henry
> > > > brought a thousand Jews to New York on a supposedly temporary basis
> > > > and they stayed. When the country went backward — and Republican in
> > > > the election of 1946, this incident loomed large on the DP [Displaced
> > > > Person] program. The Jews, I find are very, very selfish. They care
> > > > not how many Estonians, Latvians, Finns, Poles, Yugoslavs or Greeks
> > > > get murdered or mistreated as DP as long as the Jews get special
> > > > treatment. Yet when they have power, physical, financial or political
> > > > neither Hitler nor Stalin has anything on them for cruelty or
> > > > mistreatment to the under dog. Put an underdog on top and it makes no
> > > > difference whether his name is Russian, Jewish, Negro, Management,
> > > > Labor, Mormon, Baptist he goes haywire. I've found very, very few who
> > > > remember their past condition when prosperity comes.
>
> > > > On Oct 3, 11:08 am, Keith In Köln <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hey PlainOl',
>
> > > > > Israel is a conundrum, and not a good example of other hot spots in
> > the
> > > > > world, albeit they are right in the middle of several issues.
>
> > > > > To the point, if any Nation does any act that would threaten the
> > > > sovereignty
> > > > > of the United States, then I think we have the right to intervene.
> > Thus,
> > > > > when there are those who are not identified with a Nation-State, but
> > are
> > > > > devout on seeing Islam return to its glory of the 11th and 12th
> > > > centuries,
> > > > > then yes, I think we have every right to intervene. So was the case
> > with
> > > > > Afghanistan in 2001, Iraq (which we believed was a potential threat
> > in
> > > > > 2003) and Pakistan just last year, when we violated Pakistan's
> > > > soveriegnty
> > > > > to go in and emasculate Osama bin Laden.
>
> > > > > I cannot think of any time in our history, where we "intervened" and
> > > > there
> > > > > wasn't an argument for the protection of our sovereignty, including
> > Viet
> > > > > Nam, and Iraq. You may in fact disagree with the logic, (and like
> > most
> > > > > Moonbats, not comprehend the Truman Doctrine with the case of Viet
> > Nam)
> > > > > and/or be intent on revising contemporary history, but again, I can
> > think
> > > > of
> > > > > no incidents. (Maybe the Spanish American War....)
>
> > > > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 5:04 PM, plainolamerican
> > > > > <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > > > > > would we as a Nation have a right to interfere
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > yes ... even to the extent of dismantling their government, if
> > > > > > necessary
> > > > > > but, remember, this is not about controlling resources or
> > protecting
> > > > > > one foreign government from another
>
> > > > > > backatcha:
> > > > > > If the US stops providing military support to israel and their
> > enemies
> > > > > > attack them should we interfere?
> > > > > > remember, israel has spied on us, killed our soldiers, corrupted
> > our
> > > > > > politicians and promotes socialism in our nation
>
> > > > > > On Oct 3, 9:50 am, Keith In Köln <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hey PlainOl', (And Michael, Bruce, and all other Ron Paul
> > Supporters
> > > > > > here
> > > > > > > in PF!)
>
> > > > > > > I have a question, I think it's rather simple. I am going to
> > give a
> > > > > > > hypothetical:
>
> > > > > > > "If Mexico decides to revert back to 19th or early 20th century
> > > > > > technology,
> > > > > > > and the Nation chooses to dump all of its sewers, waste streams
> > both
> > > > > > > residential and commercial, (which would potentially include
> > > > chemical
> > > > > > waste
> > > > > > > and toxins, leachates, etc.) into a system that is untreated,
> > and
> > > > the
> > > > > > > stream of waste is dumped into the Gulf of Mexico, where the
> > Nation
> > > > of
> > > > > > > Mexico builds a pipe in international waters to divert this
> > stream
> > > > away
> > > > > > from
> > > > > > > its coast, where eventually, it is going to end up on American
> > > > beaches
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > shorelines, would we as a Nation have a right to interfere, or
> > to
> > > > stop
> > > > > > such
> > > > > > > a waste stream?"
>
> > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 4:20 PM, plainolamerican
> > > > > > > <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Beginning in the early part of the twentieth century, people
> > like
> > > > > > > > Woodrow Wilson began supposing that we had the right and duty
> > to be
> > > > > > > > the world's keepers, and they have proceeded to mess things up
> > > > around
> > > > > > > > the world ever since.
> > > > > > > > ----
> > > > > > > > spot on!
>
> > > > > > > > those who think the US should interfere in the internal affairs
> > of
> > > > > > > > other nations and fund their militaries should fight and fund
> > their
> > > > > > > > own charities without US tax dollars and soldiers
>
> > > > > > > > you're either an American or something else
>
> > > > > > > > On Oct 1, 10:05 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > The Cult of Reagan, and Other Neocon Folliesby Thomas E.
> > Woods,
> > > > Jr.
> > > > > > > > > Some time agoThe American Spectator's Jeffrey Lord claimed
> > Ron
> > > > Paul's
> > > > > > > > foreign policy of nonintervention was "liberal," and that
> > > > conservatives
> > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > supposed to be hawkish on foreign policy. Now to some extent,
> > no
> > > > one
> > > > > > really
> > > > > > > > cares about these labels, and who qualifies as what. But it is
> > > > > > obviously
> > > > > > > > false to say that
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment