Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Ugh Lindsey Graham announced 

Quote:Ugh Lindsey Graham announced 

 

At least someone will challenge Hillary for the democrat nomination now.  Unfortunately, their wardrobes are quite similar, so it may be difficult to differentiate between the two.

Updated the list to include not only Lindsey Graham, but also other "candidates".

Quote:LOL. You sit there and preach about you being a libertarian, yet you want to practice communist tenants (isolationism).


So we close every military base over-seas and "bring our boys home", then what? Do we shut down all commerce with European/middle eastern/Asian countries? Do we allow say Russia to take over whatever countries that they choose? Do we allow a country like North Korea to bomb say Seoul South Korea or Japan? Do we allow a country like Iran to gain dominance in the Middle East and take control of say the Straits of Hormuz or the Suez Canal?


What is that going to do for our isolationist selves? Just off the top of my head, our current vulnerable economy really tanks due to product shipments not being brought over, and gas prices spiking.


Here is a little test for you. What brand/make is your computer? What about the monitor? What brand/make is your television? How about your smart phone? What about appliances, other electronics in your home and other devices? I guarantee you that much of it was made in foreign countries that rely on us to protect them. What about your vehicle(s)? I would bet that even if you have a "'merican made'" vehicle it has many parts that are developed and made over seas.

Lol I don't think china needs us to protect them.

Quote:Ugh Lindsey Graham announced 

 

I still have a feeling one day we will get a different kind of Lindsey Graham announcement.

Quote:Lol I don't think china needs us to protect them.

Zinnng. Nail...meet hammer ( and sickle? )

The test regarding foreign made products we need to protect? 90% come from China. Protect them? Sure. I suppose we could give the Patriots a couple extra linemen to protect Brady when we play them. Makes as much sense.

Quote:I still have a feeling one day we will get a different kind of Lindsey Graham announcement.

If he wins, he will make history.... Being both President and First Lady.

Quote:For staters I'm a registered libertarian but by no means are all my views exclusive to libertarian. That said you don't know the libertarian platform outside of what Fox News has labeled it if your surprised a registered libertarian is against foreign intervention.


Isolationism as I was referring to it was on regards to military engagement don't pretend the world economy stops if we're not directly involved in every conflict world.


I'm not sure where you pulled the whole isolationist is communists from other then the neoconservative default response, I don't agree you must be a communist!


I think you need to research the libertarian party a little more were a bit different then republicans perhaps look beyond what fox calls libertarian.


Non-intervention is a pretty big deal with us, war is only waged with congressional approvals, and we're against police state and federal spy programs all of that is a direct result of the constant war state.

 

I am very well aware of the libertarian points of view and I don't get my information exclusively from FOX News.  Being against foreign intervention is not the same as being an isolationist.

Quote:Lol I don't think china needs us to protect them.

 

Lol, it's not only China that produces much of what we consume.  How much stuff comes from South Korea or Japan for starters?

Quote:Zinnng. Nail...meet hammer ( and sickle? )

The test regarding foreign made products we need to protect? 90% come from China. Protect them? Sure. I suppose we could give the Patriots a couple extra linemen to protect Brady when we play them. Makes as much sense.

 

Zinng.  Not all that we consume comes from China.  Where are Sony products developed and made?  What about Hyundai, Nissan or Toyota vehicles?  That doesn't even begin to touch the surface of products that we import from countries that we protect.  Those are merely a few examples of things that come from Japan and South Korea.  Want to see how much we do actually import and from where?

[quote name="jagibelieve" post="494309" timestamp="1433188088"]

Lol, it's not only China that produces much of what we consume. How much stuff comes from South Korea or Japan for starters?[/

But..back to your statement of needing to protect those who we do business with. You're saying we need to protect China? With whom the vast majority of our trade comes from?

As far as S?Korea, Vietnam Nam and others, I personally could live without their fine, essential products. Protecting their sweatshops should be paid for by the WalMarts.

Quote:Zinng.  Not all that we consume comes from China.  Where are Sony products developed and made?  What about Hyundai, Nissan or Toyota vehicles?  That doesn't even begin to touch the surface of products that we import from countries that we protect.  Those are merely a few examples of things that come from Japan and South Korea.  Want to see how much we do actually <a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.worldsrichestcountries.com/top_us_imports.html'>import and from where</a>?

Wait till China mass produces cheaper cars after they steal the technology. But I digress...you say we must protect them, I say we don't.

Quote: 


But..back to your statement of needing to protect those who we do business with. You're saying we need to protect China? With whom the vast majority of our trade comes from?

As far as S?Korea, Vietnam Nam and others, I personally could live without their fine, essential products. Protecting their sweatshops should be paid for by the WalMarts.

 

I never said that we need to protect China, so please don't put words into my mouth.  While we do a vast amount of commerce with them, the products that we get and consume from them are essentially "non-essential" or "un-important" (unless you are an iphone fanboy).

 

However, I keep presenting South Korea as an example for a couple of reasons.  To get back to why this debate started, we have a base in and do protect South Korea.  However, that base also includes our protecting Japan (both countries that we import many goods from).  It's a major threat for North Korea to gain nuclear weapons.  If that happened, it would be a threat to the world economy as we know it.  Even if they didn't gain the nukes, what would happen if we "brought our boys home" from there as Eric eluded to earlier.  What would North Korea do in the region and how would it affect us?

When Eric said "Bring our Boys Home" he was referring to those involved in active combat.  Not those stationed over seas where our allies are.  At least I don't think he was.

Quote:At least someone will challenge Hillary for the democrat nomination now.  Unfortunately, their wardrobes are quite similar, so it may be difficult to differentiate between the two.

Quote:I still have a feeling one day we will get a different kind of Lindsey Graham announcement.

 

I didnt even know there was still a prohibition party, went to their page, they played the party platform page smart by saving the kookiness for the bottom. 

Quote:When Eric said "Bring our Boys Home" he was referring to those involved in active combat.  Not those stationed over seas where our allies are.  At least I don't think he was.

 

While I suspect that might be true, there is a reason for "our boys" being involved in active combat.  I took somewhat offense to Eric's position of being "isolationists".  While ideally that might seem to be the best position to back, realistically it's not feasible and therefor I would not vote for a Presidential candidate that supports such a view.

Quote:When Eric said "Bring our Boys Home" he was referring to those involved in active combat.  Not those stationed over seas where our allies are.  At least I don't think he was.

 

He usually means all overseas stations when he says that.

Quote:While I suspect that might be true, there is a reason for "our boys" being involved in active combat. I took somewhat offense to Eric's position of being "isolationists". While ideally that might seem to be the best position to back, realistically it's not feasible and therefor I would not vote for a Presidential candidate that supports such a view.

You shouldn't worry about that it's hard enough to find one just reluctant to insert our military in every regional conflict. I'd settle for a candidate that simply follows the procedures and gets congressional approval for war. That would be a good first step enough with this war power act loophole.

Quote:You shouldn't worry about that it's hard enough to find one just reluctant to insert our military in every regional conflict. I'd settle for a candidate that simply follows the procedures and gets congressional approval for war. That would be a good first step enough with this war power act loophole.

 

You know, I tend to believe in and trust our Constitution.  The "procedures and congressional approval" doesn't apply to going into an armed conflict.  I will tell you right now, that if military commanders had to rely on and go through this process, we would be "fornicated".

 

You seem to not differentiate the meaning of going into a hostile territory or armed conflict from "war".  Here's something to noodle, and I challenge you not to use google for this question.  When is the last time that this country actually declared war?

 

The answer may or may not be surprising to you.

 

Another question.  What good or bad came out of certain conflicts since then?