Total Posts:238|Showing Posts:181-210|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Furthest Right Political Compass Score

Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 6:06:38 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 5:48:12 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 12/31/2011 5:44:43 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 5:41:56 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 12/31/2011 5:40:20 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 5:37:59 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 12/31/2011 5:33:24 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 5:30:20 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 12/31/2011 5:10:07 PM, Lordknukle wrote:

Fending off=/=Condemning
I would welcome ANY country trying to take over the US.

What is this I don't even..

What don't you understand?

You're arguing that the U.S. should be allowed to take over any country it wants because no one can do anything about it. I have a feeling I'm being trolled right now.

I never said any country and I never said that nobody can do anything about it. I support imperialism in the ancient European sense. Try to conquer countries. If you fail, you get conquered or screwed over.

That's the most retarded thing I've ever heard.

Why? That is the basic concept of imperialism.

First, you've failed to provide any reason why a country possesses the right to attack another country simply for their resources. Second, in so advocating your position, you automatically cannot condemn when another country attacks the U.S. Third, the entire idea is arbitrarily distinguished. Why only countries? Why can't a person go out and kill and rob? After all, it's the basic concept of imperialism.

1. A country should only take their own self-interests into account when deciding how to govern foreign affairs. If it benefits them to do this and they are willing to accept the risks, then go right ahead.

2. I never did. I merely stated that self-defence would be necessary.

3. Because a person has a central authority that will condemn them if they do this. Countries do not.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,041
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 6:13:52 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 6:06:38 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 5:48:12 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 12/31/2011 5:44:43 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 5:41:56 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 12/31/2011 5:40:20 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 5:37:59 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 12/31/2011 5:33:24 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 5:30:20 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 12/31/2011 5:10:07 PM, Lordknukle wrote:

Fending off=/=Condemning
I would welcome ANY country trying to take over the US.

What is this I don't even..

What don't you understand?

You're arguing that the U.S. should be allowed to take over any country it wants because no one can do anything about it. I have a feeling I'm being trolled right now.

I never said any country and I never said that nobody can do anything about it. I support imperialism in the ancient European sense. Try to conquer countries. If you fail, you get conquered or screwed over.

That's the most retarded thing I've ever heard.

Why? That is the basic concept of imperialism.

First, you've failed to provide any reason why a country possesses the right to attack another country simply for their resources. Second, in so advocating your position, you automatically cannot condemn when another country attacks the U.S. Third, the entire idea is arbitrarily distinguished. Why only countries? Why can't a person go out and kill and rob? After all, it's the basic concept of imperialism.

1. A country should only take their own self-interests into account when deciding how to govern foreign affairs. If it benefits them to do this and they are willing to accept the risks, then go right ahead.

2. I never did. I merely stated that self-defence would be necessary.

3. Because a person has a central authority that will condemn them if they do this. Countries do not.

Don't worry, I agree with you. I'm a strong supporter of Jingoism.
No one normal accomplished anything meaningful in this world.
thett3
Posts: 15,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 6:32:55 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
You imperialists (lordknuckle and conservatviepolitico) are making me not want to be conservative.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 6:35:27 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 6:32:55 PM, thett3 wrote:
You imperialists (lordknuckle and conservatviepolitico) are making me not want to be conservative.

Yes. Good point.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 6:39:48 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 6:32:55 PM, thett3 wrote:
You imperialists (lordknuckle and conservatviepolitico) are making me not want to be conservative.

lol.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
thett3
Posts: 15,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 6:40:35 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 6:39:48 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:32:55 PM, thett3 wrote:
You imperialists (lordknuckle and conservatviepolitico) are making me not want to be conservative.

lol.

Of course, this is coming from the guy currently in a debate arguing that the US should invade Africa :)
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 6:42:09 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 6:40:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:39:48 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:32:55 PM, thett3 wrote:
You imperialists (lordknuckle and conservatviepolitico) are making me not want to be conservative.

lol.

Of course, this is coming from the guy currently in a debate arguing that the US should invade Africa :)

Another great point.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 6:46:42 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 6:42:09 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:40:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:39:48 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:32:55 PM, thett3 wrote:
You imperialists (lordknuckle and conservatviepolitico) are making me not want to be conservative.

lol.

Of course, this is coming from the guy currently in a debate arguing that the US should invade Africa :)

Another great point.

Care to add something productive?
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 6:49:32 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 6:46:42 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:42:09 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:40:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:39:48 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:32:55 PM, thett3 wrote:
You imperialists (lordknuckle and conservatviepolitico) are making me not want to be conservative.

lol.

Of course, this is coming from the guy currently in a debate arguing that the US should invade Africa :)

Another great point.

Care to add something productive?

Yeah. What is the point of taking back Africa. It is not our business to mettle in their affairs. We do not have the resources or the manpower to take all of Africa, or even all of the Middle East. And even if we only conquered a few countries, one, thousands of soldiers on both sides will needlessly die, and two, the rest of the world will hate us for being the "bad guy". Colonialization, Imperialism, and Conquering are dead. And have been dead for over 60 years.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 6:53:04 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 6:49:32 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:46:42 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:42:09 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:40:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:39:48 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:32:55 PM, thett3 wrote:
You imperialists (lordknuckle and conservatviepolitico) are making me not want to be conservative.

lol.

Of course, this is coming from the guy currently in a debate arguing that the US should invade Africa :)

Another great point.

Care to add something productive?

Yeah. What is the point of taking back Africa.
Resources.
It is not our business to mettle in their affairs.
We aren't meddling in their affairs. We are completely taking them over.
We do not have the resources or the manpower to take all of Africa
I beg to differ. Also, I never said that we have to take all of Africa lol.
, or even all of the Middle East.
Never said anything about taking them over.
And even if we only conquered a few countries, one, thousands of soldiers on both sides will needlessly die,
That's usually what happens in war. Deal with it.
and two, the rest of the world will hate us for being the "bad guy".
Germany started 2 world wars and killed over 100+ million people as a result. The world doesn't hate them.
Colonialization, Imperialism, and Conquering are dead. And have been dead for over 60 years.
Sources?
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 6:56:27 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 6:53:04 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Germany started 2 world wars and killed over 100+ million people as a result. The world doesn't hate them.

That's because they lost and all those responsible were jailed and/or executed.
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 6:58:27 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 6:53:04 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:49:32 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:46:42 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:42:09 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:40:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:39:48 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:32:55 PM, thett3 wrote:
You imperialists (lordknuckle and conservatviepolitico) are making me not want to be conservative.

lol.

Of course, this is coming from the guy currently in a debate arguing that the US should invade Africa :)

Another great point.

Care to add something productive?

Yeah. What is the point of taking back Africa.
Resources.
It is not our business to mettle in their affairs.
We aren't meddling in their affairs. We are completely taking them over.
We do not have the resources or the manpower to take all of Africa
I beg to differ. Also, I never said that we have to take all of Africa lol.
, or even all of the Middle East.
Never said anything about taking them over.
And even if we only conquered a few countries, one, thousands of soldiers on both sides will needlessly die,
That's usually what happens in war. Deal with it.
and two, the rest of the world will hate us for being the "bad guy".
Germany started 2 world wars and killed over 100+ million people as a result. The world doesn't hate them.
Colonialization, Imperialism, and Conquering are dead. And have been dead for over 60 years.
Sources?

We don't need the resources. Plus, we can buy them. Much more productive. Taking them over is completely mettling in their affairs. Soldiers shouldn't have to die for resources in this day in age. Buy them you lunatic. Yeah. Because they are no the "towering, scary, bad guy superpower". That is why the world does not like us. And what do you mean sources? There hasn't been any in 60 years. Just revolutions and wars against terrorism and communism.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 7:04:39 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 6:58:27 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:53:04 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:49:32 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:46:42 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:42:09 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:40:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:39:48 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:32:55 PM, thett3 wrote:
You imperialists (lordknuckle and conservatviepolitico) are making me not want to be conservative.

lol.

Of course, this is coming from the guy currently in a debate arguing that the US should invade Africa :)

Another great point.

Care to add something productive?

Yeah. What is the point of taking back Africa.
Resources.
It is not our business to mettle in their affairs.
We aren't meddling in their affairs. We are completely taking them over.
We do not have the resources or the manpower to take all of Africa
I beg to differ. Also, I never said that we have to take all of Africa lol.
, or even all of the Middle East.
Never said anything about taking them over.
And even if we only conquered a few countries, one, thousands of soldiers on both sides will needlessly die,
That's usually what happens in war. Deal with it.
and two, the rest of the world will hate us for being the "bad guy".
Germany started 2 world wars and killed over 100+ million people as a result. The world doesn't hate them.
Colonialization, Imperialism, and Conquering are dead. And have been dead for over 60 years.
Sources?

We don't need the resources.
Yes, we kind of do. The more resources, the better.
Plus, we can buy them. Much more productive.
The country has to make a profit. Therefore, we are overpaying.
Taking them over is completely mettling in their affairs.
Meh.. whatever. Doesn't really matter.
Soldiers shouldn't have to die for resources in this day in age. Buy them you lunatic.
Conquering and obtaining is much more effective.
Yeah. Because they are no the "towering, scary, bad guy superpower". That is why the world does not like us. And what do you mean sources? There hasn't been any in 60 years. Just revolutions and wars against terrorism and communism.

The world likes us.... And even if they didn't, there is nothing that they could do about it.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 7:07:02 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 7:04:39 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:58:27 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:53:04 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:49:32 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:46:42 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:42:09 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:40:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:39:48 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:32:55 PM, thett3 wrote:
You imperialists (lordknuckle and conservatviepolitico) are making me not want to be conservative.

lol.

Of course, this is coming from the guy currently in a debate arguing that the US should invade Africa :)

Another great point.

Care to add something productive?

Yeah. What is the point of taking back Africa.
Resources.
It is not our business to mettle in their affairs.
We aren't meddling in their affairs. We are completely taking them over.
We do not have the resources or the manpower to take all of Africa
I beg to differ. Also, I never said that we have to take all of Africa lol.
, or even all of the Middle East.
Never said anything about taking them over.
And even if we only conquered a few countries, one, thousands of soldiers on both sides will needlessly die,
That's usually what happens in war. Deal with it.
and two, the rest of the world will hate us for being the "bad guy".
Germany started 2 world wars and killed over 100+ million people as a result. The world doesn't hate them.
Colonialization, Imperialism, and Conquering are dead. And have been dead for over 60 years.
Sources?

We don't need the resources.
Yes, we kind of do. The more resources, the better.
Plus, we can buy them. Much more productive.
The country has to make a profit. Therefore, we are overpaying.
Taking them over is completely mettling in their affairs.
Meh.. whatever. Doesn't really matter.
Soldiers shouldn't have to die for resources in this day in age. Buy them you lunatic.
Conquering and obtaining is much more effective.
Yeah. Because they are no the "towering, scary, bad guy superpower". That is why the world does not like us. And what do you mean sources? There hasn't been any in 60 years. Just revolutions and wars against terrorism and communism.

The world likes us.... And even if they didn't, there is nothing that they could do about it.

They don't like us. Believe me, they hate us. Buying them is much more productive. Do you think the price of resources is worth thousands of human lives?
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 7:09:13 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 7:07:02 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:04:39 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:58:27 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:53:04 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:49:32 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:46:42 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:42:09 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:40:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:39:48 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:32:55 PM, thett3 wrote:
You imperialists (lordknuckle and conservatviepolitico) are making me not want to be conservative.

lol.

Of course, this is coming from the guy currently in a debate arguing that the US should invade Africa :)

Another great point.

Care to add something productive?

Yeah. What is the point of taking back Africa.
Resources.
It is not our business to mettle in their affairs.
We aren't meddling in their affairs. We are completely taking them over.
We do not have the resources or the manpower to take all of Africa
I beg to differ. Also, I never said that we have to take all of Africa lol.
, or even all of the Middle East.
Never said anything about taking them over.
And even if we only conquered a few countries, one, thousands of soldiers on both sides will needlessly die,
That's usually what happens in war. Deal with it.
and two, the rest of the world will hate us for being the "bad guy".
Germany started 2 world wars and killed over 100+ million people as a result. The world doesn't hate them.
Colonialization, Imperialism, and Conquering are dead. And have been dead for over 60 years.
Sources?

We don't need the resources.
Yes, we kind of do. The more resources, the better.
Plus, we can buy them. Much more productive.
The country has to make a profit. Therefore, we are overpaying.
Taking them over is completely mettling in their affairs.
Meh.. whatever. Doesn't really matter.
Soldiers shouldn't have to die for resources in this day in age. Buy them you lunatic.
Conquering and obtaining is much more effective.
Yeah. Because they are no the "towering, scary, bad guy superpower". That is why the world does not like us. And what do you mean sources? There hasn't been any in 60 years. Just revolutions and wars against terrorism and communism.

The world likes us.... And even if they didn't, there is nothing that they could do about it.

They don't like us. Believe me, they hate us. Buying them is much more productive. Do you think the price of resources is worth thousands of human lives?

Where did you get the number "thousands"?
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 7:28:23 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 7:09:13 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:07:02 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:04:39 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:58:27 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:53:04 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:49:32 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:46:42 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:42:09 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:40:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:39:48 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:32:55 PM, thett3 wrote:
You imperialists (lordknuckle and conservatviepolitico) are making me not want to be conservative.

lol.

Of course, this is coming from the guy currently in a debate arguing that the US should invade Africa :)

Another great point.

Care to add something productive?

Yeah. What is the point of taking back Africa.
Resources.
It is not our business to mettle in their affairs.
We aren't meddling in their affairs. We are completely taking them over.
We do not have the resources or the manpower to take all of Africa
I beg to differ. Also, I never said that we have to take all of Africa lol.
, or even all of the Middle East.
Never said anything about taking them over.
And even if we only conquered a few countries, one, thousands of soldiers on both sides will needlessly die,
That's usually what happens in war. Deal with it.
and two, the rest of the world will hate us for being the "bad guy".
Germany started 2 world wars and killed over 100+ million people as a result. The world doesn't hate them.
Colonialization, Imperialism, and Conquering are dead. And have been dead for over 60 years.
Sources?

We don't need the resources.
Yes, we kind of do. The more resources, the better.
Plus, we can buy them. Much more productive.
The country has to make a profit. Therefore, we are overpaying.
Taking them over is completely mettling in their affairs.
Meh.. whatever. Doesn't really matter.
Soldiers shouldn't have to die for resources in this day in age. Buy them you lunatic.
Conquering and obtaining is much more effective.
Yeah. Because they are no the "towering, scary, bad guy superpower". That is why the world does not like us. And what do you mean sources? There hasn't been any in 60 years. Just revolutions and wars against terrorism and communism.

The world likes us.... And even if they didn't, there is nothing that they could do about it.

They don't like us. Believe me, they hate us. Buying them is much more productive. Do you think the price of resources is worth thousands of human lives?

Where did you get the number "thousands"?

You don't think that the African countries are going to allow to be taken over do you? Africans are great at Guerrilla Warfare. They fight like the Taliban. It will be an endless war.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 7:29:04 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 7:28:23 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:09:13 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:07:02 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:04:39 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:58:27 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:53:04 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:49:32 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:46:42 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:42:09 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:40:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:39:48 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:32:55 PM, thett3 wrote:
You imperialists (lordknuckle and conservatviepolitico) are making me not want to be conservative.

lol.

Of course, this is coming from the guy currently in a debate arguing that the US should invade Africa :)

Another great point.

Care to add something productive?

Yeah. What is the point of taking back Africa.
Resources.
It is not our business to mettle in their affairs.
We aren't meddling in their affairs. We are completely taking them over.
We do not have the resources or the manpower to take all of Africa
I beg to differ. Also, I never said that we have to take all of Africa lol.
, or even all of the Middle East.
Never said anything about taking them over.
And even if we only conquered a few countries, one, thousands of soldiers on both sides will needlessly die,
That's usually what happens in war. Deal with it.
and two, the rest of the world will hate us for being the "bad guy".
Germany started 2 world wars and killed over 100+ million people as a result. The world doesn't hate them.
Colonialization, Imperialism, and Conquering are dead. And have been dead for over 60 years.
Sources?

We don't need the resources.
Yes, we kind of do. The more resources, the better.
Plus, we can buy them. Much more productive.
The country has to make a profit. Therefore, we are overpaying.
Taking them over is completely mettling in their affairs.
Meh.. whatever. Doesn't really matter.
Soldiers shouldn't have to die for resources in this day in age. Buy them you lunatic.
Conquering and obtaining is much more effective.
Yeah. Because they are no the "towering, scary, bad guy superpower". That is why the world does not like us. And what do you mean sources? There hasn't been any in 60 years. Just revolutions and wars against terrorism and communism.

The world likes us.... And even if they didn't, there is nothing that they could do about it.

They don't like us. Believe me, they hate us. Buying them is much more productive. Do you think the price of resources is worth thousands of human lives?

Where did you get the number "thousands"?

You don't think that the African countries are going to allow to be taken over do you? Africans are great at Guerrilla Warfare. They fight like the Taliban. It will be an endless war.

Not with nuclear weapons.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 7:31:20 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 7:29:04 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:28:23 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:09:13 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:07:02 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:04:39 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:58:27 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:53:04 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:49:32 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:46:42 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:42:09 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:40:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:39:48 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:32:55 PM, thett3 wrote:
You imperialists (lordknuckle and conservatviepolitico) are making me not want to be conservative.

lol.

Of course, this is coming from the guy currently in a debate arguing that the US should invade Africa :)

Another great point.

Care to add something productive?

Yeah. What is the point of taking back Africa.
Resources.
It is not our business to mettle in their affairs.
We aren't meddling in their affairs. We are completely taking them over.
We do not have the resources or the manpower to take all of Africa
I beg to differ. Also, I never said that we have to take all of Africa lol.
, or even all of the Middle East.
Never said anything about taking them over.
And even if we only conquered a few countries, one, thousands of soldiers on both sides will needlessly die,
That's usually what happens in war. Deal with it.
and two, the rest of the world will hate us for being the "bad guy".
Germany started 2 world wars and killed over 100+ million people as a result. The world doesn't hate them.
Colonialization, Imperialism, and Conquering are dead. And have been dead for over 60 years.
Sources?

We don't need the resources.
Yes, we kind of do. The more resources, the better.
Plus, we can buy them. Much more productive.
The country has to make a profit. Therefore, we are overpaying.
Taking them over is completely mettling in their affairs.
Meh.. whatever. Doesn't really matter.
Soldiers shouldn't have to die for resources in this day in age. Buy them you lunatic.
Conquering and obtaining is much more effective.
Yeah. Because they are no the "towering, scary, bad guy superpower". That is why the world does not like us. And what do you mean sources? There hasn't been any in 60 years. Just revolutions and wars against terrorism and communism.

The world likes us.... And even if they didn't, there is nothing that they could do about it.

They don't like us. Believe me, they hate us. Buying them is much more productive. Do you think the price of resources is worth thousands of human lives?

Where did you get the number "thousands"?

You don't think that the African countries are going to allow to be taken over do you? Africans are great at Guerrilla Warfare. They fight like the Taliban. It will be an endless war.

Not with nuclear weapons.

Nuclear weapons don't kill everybody. Plus, the world will really hate you.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 7:32:48 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 7:31:20 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:29:04 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:28:23 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:09:13 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:07:02 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:04:39 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:58:27 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:53:04 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:49:32 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:46:42 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:42:09 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:40:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:39:48 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:32:55 PM, thett3 wrote:
You imperialists (lordknuckle and conservatviepolitico) are making me not want to be conservative.

lol.

Of course, this is coming from the guy currently in a debate arguing that the US should invade Africa :)

Another great point.

Care to add something productive?

Yeah. What is the point of taking back Africa.
Resources.
It is not our business to mettle in their affairs.
We aren't meddling in their affairs. We are completely taking them over.
We do not have the resources or the manpower to take all of Africa
I beg to differ. Also, I never said that we have to take all of Africa lol.
, or even all of the Middle East.
Never said anything about taking them over.
And even if we only conquered a few countries, one, thousands of soldiers on both sides will needlessly die,
That's usually what happens in war. Deal with it.
and two, the rest of the world will hate us for being the "bad guy".
Germany started 2 world wars and killed over 100+ million people as a result. The world doesn't hate them.
Colonialization, Imperialism, and Conquering are dead. And have been dead for over 60 years.
Sources?

We don't need the resources.
Yes, we kind of do. The more resources, the better.
Plus, we can buy them. Much more productive.
The country has to make a profit. Therefore, we are overpaying.
Taking them over is completely mettling in their affairs.
Meh.. whatever. Doesn't really matter.
Soldiers shouldn't have to die for resources in this day in age. Buy them you lunatic.
Conquering and obtaining is much more effective.
Yeah. Because they are no the "towering, scary, bad guy superpower". That is why the world does not like us. And what do you mean sources? There hasn't been any in 60 years. Just revolutions and wars against terrorism and communism.

The world likes us.... And even if they didn't, there is nothing that they could do about it.

They don't like us. Believe me, they hate us. Buying them is much more productive. Do you think the price of resources is worth thousands of human lives?

Where did you get the number "thousands"?

You don't think that the African countries are going to allow to be taken over do you? Africans are great at Guerrilla Warfare. They fight like the Taliban. It will be an endless war.

Not with nuclear weapons.

Nuclear weapons don't kill everybody. Plus, the world will really hate you.

Yeah... they kind of do.

Also, screw the world.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 7:34:40 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 7:32:48 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:31:20 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:29:04 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:28:23 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:09:13 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:07:02 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:04:39 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:58:27 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:53:04 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:49:32 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:46:42 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:42:09 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:40:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:39:48 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 6:32:55 PM, thett3 wrote:
You imperialists (lordknuckle and conservatviepolitico) are making me not want to be conservative.

lol.

Of course, this is coming from the guy currently in a debate arguing that the US should invade Africa :)

Another great point.

Care to add something productive?

Yeah. What is the point of taking back Africa.
Resources.
It is not our business to mettle in their affairs.
We aren't meddling in their affairs. We are completely taking them over.
We do not have the resources or the manpower to take all of Africa
I beg to differ. Also, I never said that we have to take all of Africa lol.
, or even all of the Middle East.
Never said anything about taking them over.
And even if we only conquered a few countries, one, thousands of soldiers on both sides will needlessly die,
That's usually what happens in war. Deal with it.
and two, the rest of the world will hate us for being the "bad guy".
Germany started 2 world wars and killed over 100+ million people as a result. The world doesn't hate them.
Colonialization, Imperialism, and Conquering are dead. And have been dead for over 60 years.
Sources?

We don't need the resources.
Yes, we kind of do. The more resources, the better.
Plus, we can buy them. Much more productive.
The country has to make a profit. Therefore, we are overpaying.
Taking them over is completely mettling in their affairs.
Meh.. whatever. Doesn't really matter.
Soldiers shouldn't have to die for resources in this day in age. Buy them you lunatic.
Conquering and obtaining is much more effective.
Yeah. Because they are no the "towering, scary, bad guy superpower". That is why the world does not like us. And what do you mean sources? There hasn't been any in 60 years. Just revolutions and wars against terrorism and communism.

The world likes us.... And even if they didn't, there is nothing that they could do about it.

They don't like us. Believe me, they hate us. Buying them is much more productive. Do you think the price of resources is worth thousands of human lives?

Where did you get the number "thousands"?

You don't think that the African countries are going to allow to be taken over do you? Africans are great at Guerrilla Warfare. They fight like the Taliban. It will be an endless war.

Not with nuclear weapons.

Nuclear weapons don't kill everybody. Plus, the world will really hate you.

Yeah... they kind of do.

Also, screw the world.

I now present you with the title Hitler.
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 7:46:48 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 7:45:22 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
Do you agree with Ron Paul's insane isolationist policies then?

Yes. And they are not insane, they are genius.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,041
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 7:50:32 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 7:46:48 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:45:22 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
Do you agree with Ron Paul's insane isolationist policies then?

Yes. And they are not insane, they are genius.

Genuis?

Ron Paul - We'll just leave! Let's pull every American back to America then everyone will love us again :D who cares if we have enemies or economic interests? If we go isolationist then it will all just work out.

...
No one normal accomplished anything meaningful in this world.
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 7:53:46 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 7:50:32 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:46:48 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:45:22 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
Do you agree with Ron Paul's insane isolationist policies then?

Yes. And they are not insane, they are genius.

Genuis?

Ron Paul - We'll just leave! Let's pull every American back to America then everyone will love us again :D who cares if we have enemies or economic interests? If we go isolationist then it will all just work out.

...

One, his isolationist polices do not mean pulling completely out of all foreign relations and affairs. His policies want to get US bases out of some countries. The United States Military has at least one base in over 150 different countries, at one time was fighting three seperate wars, and made hundreds of foreign relation screw-ups. It does not mean complete isolation. It means a gradual decrease in the United State's presense on the World Stage. We hold to big of a power in the world.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,041
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 7:55:58 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 7:53:46 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:50:32 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:46:48 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:45:22 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
Do you agree with Ron Paul's insane isolationist policies then?

Yes. And they are not insane, they are genius.

Genuis?

Ron Paul - We'll just leave! Let's pull every American back to America then everyone will love us again :D who cares if we have enemies or economic interests? If we go isolationist then it will all just work out.

...

One, his isolationist polices do not mean pulling completely out of all foreign relations and affairs. His policies want to get US bases out of some countries. The United States Military has at least one base in over 150 different countries, at one time was fighting three seperate wars, and made hundreds of foreign relation screw-ups. It does not mean complete isolation. It means a gradual decrease in the United State's presense on the World Stage. We hold to big of a power in the world.

Why give that power up?

Anyways where should we pull out of?
No one normal accomplished anything meaningful in this world.
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 8:03:50 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 7:55:58 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:53:46 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:50:32 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:46:48 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:45:22 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
Do you agree with Ron Paul's insane isolationist policies then?

Yes. And they are not insane, they are genius.

Genuis?

Ron Paul - We'll just leave! Let's pull every American back to America then everyone will love us again :D who cares if we have enemies or economic interests? If we go isolationist then it will all just work out.

...

One, his isolationist polices do not mean pulling completely out of all foreign relations and affairs. His policies want to get US bases out of some countries. The United States Military has at least one base in over 150 different countries, at one time was fighting three seperate wars, and made hundreds of foreign relation screw-ups. It does not mean complete isolation. It means a gradual decrease in the United State's presense on the World Stage. We hold to big of a power in the world.

Why give that power up?

Anyways where should we pull out of?

Question 1: Because it is not our responsibility to have that power.

Question 2: Africa, South America, some of Asia, some of Europe, and Central America. Basically, we should pull out of any countries where we are not needed anymore.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 8:06:39 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 8:03:50 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:55:58 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:53:46 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:50:32 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:46:48 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:45:22 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
Do you agree with Ron Paul's insane isolationist policies then?

Yes. And they are not insane, they are genius.

Genuis?

Ron Paul - We'll just leave! Let's pull every American back to America then everyone will love us again :D who cares if we have enemies or economic interests? If we go isolationist then it will all just work out.

...

One, his isolationist polices do not mean pulling completely out of all foreign relations and affairs. His policies want to get US bases out of some countries. The United States Military has at least one base in over 150 different countries, at one time was fighting three seperate wars, and made hundreds of foreign relation screw-ups. It does not mean complete isolation. It means a gradual decrease in the United State's presense on the World Stage. We hold to big of a power in the world.

Why give that power up?

Anyways where should we pull out of?

Question 1: Because it is not our responsibility to have that power.
Lolz. This is pathetic. The strongest member of society (in nature, the Alpha male) always commands the highest responsibility. The US is the Alpha male. It is naturally programmed to control others.
Question 2: Africa, South America, some of Asia, some of Europe, and Central America. Basically, we should pull out of any countries where we are not needed anymore.

Just because we aren't needed there now=/= that we won't need to be needed there in the future. Always good to prepare.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,041
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 8:11:30 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 8:03:50 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:55:58 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:53:46 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:50:32 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:46:48 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:45:22 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
Do you agree with Ron Paul's insane isolationist policies then?

Yes. And they are not insane, they are genius.

Genuis?

Ron Paul - We'll just leave! Let's pull every American back to America then everyone will love us again :D who cares if we have enemies or economic interests? If we go isolationist then it will all just work out.

...

One, his isolationist polices do not mean pulling completely out of all foreign relations and affairs. His policies want to get US bases out of some countries. The United States Military has at least one base in over 150 different countries, at one time was fighting three seperate wars, and made hundreds of foreign relation screw-ups. It does not mean complete isolation. It means a gradual decrease in the United State's presense on the World Stage. We hold to big of a power in the world.

Why give that power up?

Anyways where should we pull out of?

Question 1: Because it is not our responsibility to have that power.

Question 2: Africa, South America, some of Asia, some of Europe, and Central America. Basically, we should pull out of any countries where we are not needed anymore.

Who determines where we are needed anymore? You? Ron Paul? Very rarely does the US stay for prolonged periods of time where we are not wanted.

Save for the Middle East and Cuba right now everyone else is in some sort of acceptance of our presence there.
No one normal accomplished anything meaningful in this world.
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 8:18:25 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 8:06:39 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/31/2011 8:03:50 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:55:58 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:53:46 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:50:32 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:46:48 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:45:22 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
Do you agree with Ron Paul's insane isolationist policies then?

Yes. And they are not insane, they are genius.

Genuis?

Ron Paul - We'll just leave! Let's pull every American back to America then everyone will love us again :D who cares if we have enemies or economic interests? If we go isolationist then it will all just work out.

...

One, his isolationist polices do not mean pulling completely out of all foreign relations and affairs. His policies want to get US bases out of some countries. The United States Military has at least one base in over 150 different countries, at one time was fighting three seperate wars, and made hundreds of foreign relation screw-ups. It does not mean complete isolation. It means a gradual decrease in the United State's presense on the World Stage. We hold to big of a power in the world.

Why give that power up?

Anyways where should we pull out of?

Question 1: Because it is not our responsibility to have that power.
Lolz. This is pathetic. The strongest member of society (in nature, the Alpha male) always commands the highest responsibility. The US is the Alpha male. It is naturally programmed to control others.
Question 2: Africa, South America, some of Asia, some of Europe, and Central America. Basically, we should pull out of any countries where we are not needed anymore.

Just because we aren't needed there now=/= that we won't need to be needed there in the future. Always good to prepare.

Question 1 Response: We are not the strongest member of society, and even if we were, it is not our place to mettle in other countries's affairs. That is the individual countries's business. The world does not have 191 states headed by the United States. And plus, over three-forths of the countries in the world, if we told them to do something, they wouldn't do it, and we couldn't make them,

Question 2 Response: If we are needed there in the future, we can go there at the supposed date. Just have the military at home, and when that supposed date comes, we can deploy them. Plus, we do not need to intervene in every war. The countries fighting the war are more the capable enough to settle the differences for themselves. They do not need us.
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2011 8:21:44 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/31/2011 8:11:30 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 12/31/2011 8:03:50 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:55:58 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:53:46 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:50:32 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:46:48 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 12/31/2011 7:45:22 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
Do you agree with Ron Paul's insane isolationist policies then?

Yes. And they are not insane, they are genius.

Genuis?

Ron Paul - We'll just leave! Let's pull every American back to America then everyone will love us again :D who cares if we have enemies or economic interests? If we go isolationist then it will all just work out.

...

One, his isolationist polices do not mean pulling completely out of all foreign relations and affairs. His policies want to get US bases out of some countries. The United States Military has at least one base in over 150 different countries, at one time was fighting three seperate wars, and made hundreds of foreign relation screw-ups. It does not mean complete isolation. It means a gradual decrease in the United State's presense on the World Stage. We hold to big of a power in the world.

Why give that power up?

Anyways where should we pull out of?

Question 1: Because it is not our responsibility to have that power.

Question 2: Africa, South America, some of Asia, some of Europe, and Central America. Basically, we should pull out of any countries where we are not needed anymore.

Who determines where we are needed anymore? You? Ron Paul? Very rarely does the US stay for prolonged periods of time where we are not wanted.

Save for the Middle East and Cuba right now everyone else is in some sort of acceptance of our presence there.

Question 1 Response: Us and the particular country. One, if the country does not want us, then we should pull out. Two, if having a base in that country does nothing but keep people from their families and take up ground, we should pull out.

Question 2 Response: The countries that are in acceptance may feel ok with us there, but that does not mean that saying there is justified.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.