0 votes

Should Ron Paul Emphasize America's National DEFENSE over our National OFFENSIVE Foreign Policy?

Ronald Reagan is alot like Ron Paul in many ways...

The republican party did NOT like Reagan at all in 1976...

Reagan lost in 1976, but he defeated Jimmy Carter in 1980.

In fact, Reagan's "revolution," started in 1976....Ron Paul's rEVOLution started in 2007.

http://www.reagansrevolution.com/contents/words/

Ronald Reagan inherited a terrible economy, and a military force that had been through hell and back for 20 years in North Korea and Vietnam.

If Ron Paul wins, he will inherit a terrible economy, and a military force that has been through hell and back again for the past 20 years in Kuwait, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

In many ways, Carter is ALOT like Obama. High gas prices, high unemployment, a government gone wild on spending... still stuck on LBJ's "Great Society."

Carter's administration was just as insane and inept as Obama's...carbon taxes, classifying carbon DIoxide as a "harmful pollutant," John Holdren...I think you get the point.

It shouldn't be hard for ANY political opponent to beat Obama - BUT, Obama now holds the War Card, just as Bush did in 2004.

How does Ron Paul take away the War Card from Obama?

Dr. Paul can call for the immediate withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan until he is blue in the face....if he does not QUALIFY his grand statements by giving a political incentive to the war hawks within his own party, Ron Paul will not win the nomination.

Ron Paul needs to emphasize National DEFENSE over our current foreign policy of National OFFENSE.

If that results in a "Cold War," with the Middle East, so be it!

I agree...let's end our foregin empire. Let's close the 700+ military bases overseas.

But where are these troops going to go? America needs to build 700+ new military bases in our own backyard so our Armed Forces can actually DEFEND and protect the United States.




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Yes.

And talking about Reagan would get a good automatic response from a lot of people too.

But I think the 700 bases idea is no good. Just approaching questions about Offense with answers about the need for Defense would be sufficient, in my opinion.

I don't personally want 700 more military bases in the US.

Ronald Reagan wasn't only a

Ronald Reagan wasn't only a great politician, he was a great ACTOR.

He was able to win over alot of Americans with his IMAGE alone....

And of course IMAGE is EVERYTHING in America today.......

When I was 5 years old, I remember Ronald Reagan winning in a landslide over Mondale....and that made me very happy as a child. I always remembered Ronny as being the grandfather I never had...he was my grandaddy president and I absolutely LOVED him as a kid.

Ronald Reagan spoke softly, but he carried a very big political shtick. In retrospect, he was a GREAT actor...and he pulled it off as far as he could get away with even after the bastards shot him. George Bush I was FORCED upon Reagan to become the VP....the bastard probably poisoned Reagan himself to make sure his voice was not heard......

Dr. Paul is too humble of a servant to the public...he does not let his ego get in the way of rational, constitutional thought. In a way, Dr. Paul acts too YOUNG! He's too spunky! At times he sounds like a 33 year old idealist!

It's true too! Ron Paul most certainly does not act his age...

BUT, maybe he should start ACTING more like the grandfather candidate? America needs old wisdom, not youthful idealism.

Perhaps Ron Paul should step right into his own doctoral skin and start ACTING a little bit more like the old wise man he really is?

At times, Ron speaks faster than my 13 year old niece!

Slow it down a little there, Ronny!

Fine tune the Big Message....end the wars, BUT bring our troops home to new bases.

DEFENSE....DEFENCE...D#

Ron should get a chant going.....

Never be afraid to ask simple questions.