• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Would you vote for the candidate that made this statement?

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Do you agree with this statement

  • Yes, the US should never interfere

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No, sometimes there is good reason to interfere

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
This is a quote from one of the Republican candidates for President

"America [should] not interfere militarily, financially, or covertly in the internal affairs of other nations"

Do you agree with this statement?
 

Traveler

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
5,328
Reaction score
2
Probably not, but would certainly lighten the UN's coffers.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Paul rejected the proposal for "[urging] the Administration to seriously consider multilateral or even unilateral intervention to stop genocide in Darfur should the UN Security Council fail to act." Paul argued the unrelatedness of the proposal to "the US national interest" or "the Constitutional function of [United States] military forces."

He then went on to question the very purpose of America's support for Israel, asking: "Is it really in the interest of the United States to guarantee the survival of any foreign country?"

In May 2011, Paul said he would not have ordered the raid that killed 9/11 mastermind Osama bin Laden, calling the operation "absolutely not necessary" [73]. Instead he would have done it differently, stating that America should have worked with the Pakistani Authorities who in the past had arrested Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other terrorists who were then tried in court. Paul also stated that other alternatives were viable that were less of a violation of Pakistan's sovereignty, such as the original bombing of the compound that was planned.



I'm not sure the general public in America are ready for a President that sees no reason to stop Genocide, has no interest in protecting friends from a common enemy or doesn't seem to have a problem bombing a compound where women and children are living verses sending in the SEALS and dealing with the true enemy. :?
 

MsSage

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2005
Messages
4,716
Reaction score
1
Location
NW Panhandle Texas
the quote says interfere, or in other words meddle, which is NOT coming to the aid.
I dont think we should meddle in any other countries affairs.
I support wholely going to the aid when asked by a "friend"

So how do I answer the poll?
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 4, 2009
Messages
5,855
Reaction score
0
Location
Venezuela
MsSage said:
the quote says interfere, or in other words meddle, which is NOT coming to the aid.
I dont think we should meddle in any other countries affairs.
I support wholely going to the aid when asked by a "friend"

So how do I answer the poll?

Paul questioned whether it was just for the US to go after bin Laden inside Pakistan without their permission.

That's about all I need to know on the subject.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
MsSage said:
Thats NOT meddling and it the US handling its own business.

I agree Sage. Meddling would be more like what's going on in Libya.

"Sanctions should have been given more time"
 

MsSage

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2005
Messages
4,716
Reaction score
1
Location
NW Panhandle Texas
I know shoer told me that Paul was getting more and more Libertarian almost an isolationist. Yeah that would be nice but in todays world we are all dependant on each other. I am not saying we need one world government oh HAIL NO.
 

Latest posts

Top