Ron Paul's Restore America Plan

You have to have reasonable cause to stop or detain an American. Stopping everyone is the exact opposite of that.

BTW- I got some time to debate it if you want to start another thread. I am passionate about it.

Semi-hijack: What would be the fallout from a massive cut in millitary spending (over a number of years?) It's not like the US is going to be invaded and attacked anytime soon, and they have more enough nukes to deter just about anyone. America probably couldn't become involved in so many foreign conflicts, but is this necessarily so bad?

I don't know enough about what they spend the military budget on to give a definitive answer. I am guessing that they would shut down bases. There are communities who rely heavily on the military personel for their basic survival. Shutting down bases shuts down bars, restaurants, gas stations......Kind of like what happens when industries are shut down in a community that depends on those workers spending their money locally.

As far as spending on bombs and stuff, I have no clue. Like I said, I don't know for sure, but I would guess that a huge chunk of the military spending is for payroll and insurance. But I have been wrong before.

Many argue that we ar so far ahead of the rest of the world that we could afford to lay off for awhile, but what happens if we become complaicent and the rest of the world catches up.

Really where we could save money but lose some influence globaly is to close bases in other countries, bring those soldiers home and repost them on the boarder, thats two birds one stone. One of the issues is always how much more we spend on defense than say japan, well the reason japan or germany dont have to spend a bunch on defense is because we basically provide defense for them. Now logistically it is good for us to have the baes over seas. Either way the cuts will come at the expense of the soldiers as usuall, if they happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quinn14

I'm not giving up, just realistic. Paul does very well whenever he gets the chance to speak at the debates, so they simply don't let him speak. His supporters are great and he probably appeals to more of the population than people even know. So what does the media do? They call him a loon. What I find interesting is that people on the right and people on the left both call him crazy. That should be an endorsement in itself.

---

Realistic? Sounds pessimistic. "Realistic" actually is just a way of looking at the current scene & seeing what you do to move it from that to the IDEAL scene. If you aren't doing that, you are pessimistic b/c you are not doing anything about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UGLY

I didnt think Paul was being attacked the reporter was doing a good job of asking tough questions and I appreciate that. I like Ron Paul a lot and I will also give him my primary vote, my hope is that he can stay in the race until everyone in the nation starts paying attention and then he will get a bump in the polls. HE would be great for this nation as president. Although I think that we would see both parties block or shelve a lot of his policies as president because they enjoy having the money to spend.

---

Tough questions? He was trying to spread disinfo on him, to paint his Plan in particular light so as to get the Left wing up in arms about it.

But Dr. Paul handled him very well b/c he doesn't operate from talking points he operates off of experience & certainty. He has a viewpoint & that viewpoint is the basis of from where he speaks on all the issues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quinn14

You have to have reasonable cause to stop or detain an American. Stopping everyone is the exact opposite of that.

BTW- I got some time to debate it if you want to start another thread. I am passionate about it.

---

Well he just wanted to argue so just tell him that your avatar has a better beard then his avatar....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kr1963

Realistic? Sounds pessimistic. "Realistic" actually is just a way of looking at the current scene & seeing what you do to move it from that to the IDEAL scene. If you aren't doing that, you are pessimistic b/c you are not doing anything about it.

---

I agree with pessimistic, just not giving up. I tell anyone I know about him and post on here about him. I would love for everyone to vote for him. But I am pessimistic about his chances. Most of America will vote for whoever the union bosses and media tells them to vote for. That is realistic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arm-spin

Semi-hijack: What would be the fallout from a massive cut in millitary spending (over a number of years?) It's not like the US is going to be invaded and attacked anytime soon, and they have more enough nukes to deter just about anyone. America probably couldn't become involved in so many foreign conflicts, but is this necessarily so bad?

---

He is cutting Military spending but not Defense. He is talking about shutting down the vast empire we have created around the world. NOt the bases at home so the local economies would not impacted.

Also if you look at the 9/11 report & CIA reports, BLOWBACK is a major cause of terrorist attacks. Take away the oversea bases & cut down on Blowback.

Also we can't afford it anymore. Remember in Sept 2001 when right before 9/11 Rumsfeld came out & said that they couldn't find 2 TRILLION dollars? Didn't that the "plane" crashed in the audit office...?