PDA

View Full Version : Should Dr. Paul keep on using the word "Empire"?




StateofTrance
01-31-2008, 12:29 AM
Should Dr. Paul keep on using the word "Empire"?

mexicanpizza
01-31-2008, 12:29 AM
I prefer, for our idiot countrymen, "bases in >130 countries".

gracebkr
01-31-2008, 12:30 AM
if he uses it appropriately and negatively, yes.

yaz
01-31-2008, 12:30 AM
i'd rather him say bases in 130 countries

SigurdVolsung
01-31-2008, 12:31 AM
I think so, because thats what it really is. Niall Ferguson wrote a book (I think titled Empire) and it was mainly about the British one. I haven't read it

but I watched him talk about it on C-SPAN years ago and I think he mentions in the book that America also is an Empire except we just choose not to call it

that. He said the same problems the Brits had to deal with we too would as well. It was pretty interesting.

coffeewithchess
01-31-2008, 12:31 AM
i'd rather him say bases in 130 countries

+100. When he says Empire...most AMERICANs don't think that America has 130 bases...they are probably equating Empire with "Middle East war".

mexicanpizza
01-31-2008, 12:34 AM
hey...chess!!!

e4 e5 nf3 nc6 bb5!!!!!

Austin
01-31-2008, 12:36 AM
+100, when he says Empire...most AMERICANs don't think that America has 130 bases...they are probably equating Empire with "Middle East war".
Much more than 130 bases, it's bases in a 130 countries.

Pauls' Revere
01-31-2008, 12:37 AM
I prefer, for our idiot countrymen, "bases in >130 countries".


Bases around the world...

idiot countrymen get confused with big numbers like 130

Iowa4Paul
01-31-2008, 12:39 AM
Bases around the world...

idiot countrymen get confused with big numbers like 130

Most idiots don't even know over 130 countries exist...Why don't we just say...

"Lots of countries"

It's stupid, and works.

Pauls' Revere
01-31-2008, 12:43 AM
LOL...Same reason you cant use "globe" wtf is that?

all J's in IL for RP
01-31-2008, 12:50 AM
"neo-colonial empire" would work better.

american empire
01-31-2008, 01:43 AM
"secret history of the American Empire" by John Perkins.....please it is a must read for the revolution....and we are not an empire just b/c of the bases but the world bank and Imf.....

please someone tell me who the president of the world bank is and how he is appointed????

Thom1776
01-31-2008, 01:48 AM
"Global Military Empire" is what I say to people and they get the point.

Thomas Paine
01-31-2008, 02:20 AM
We are the mightiest empire to ever exist in world history. Far greater than the Roman Caesars could have ever imagined. We have the power to vaporize an entire country with the flick of single switch. English is the lingua franca of the world; that is why everyone is trying to learn English. We are also the wealthiest nation in terms of GDP. There is nothing that America cannot conquer.

LibertyBrews
01-31-2008, 02:25 AM
Evil empire.

liberty-rp08
01-31-2008, 02:36 AM
"Empire with military bases in more than 130 countries all over the world"

Yom
01-31-2008, 02:39 AM
No, it turns off a lot of people. Despite the truth in the word, our foreign policy can still be accurately described using less inflammatory words. I think it turns a lot of people off. He should also start emphasizing how he would go after Osama with Letters of Marque and Reprisal.

hamdog
01-31-2008, 02:39 AM
i voted yes, but then i watched the youtube of all six (seven) of his answers.

it sounded like he used the admittedly undescriptive term a lot, but i haven't watched the entire debate. and according to many of the comments, he didn't get much talk time, so it probably wasn't that prominent.

after reading these comments, i, too, wish he would describe it, rather than just call it what it is.

thanks for reading.

JohnnyWrath
01-31-2008, 02:40 AM
i'd rather him say bases in 130 countries

+ another 1000

VoluntaryMan
01-31-2008, 02:42 AM
If we continue to defend the world at our own expense, we are an empire (and a foolish one). If we continue to defend the world at their expense, we are a mercenary force (and an overstretched one). If the nations we are currently policing begin to defend themselves at their own expense, then they and we are republics, as it should be.

RonPaulNLiveFree
01-31-2008, 04:26 AM
i say yes because its true, we're no longer a sovereign nation, we're a dictatorship, we march into other countries, with no real threat against us, wage war, expand the 'empire'. so yea, it's an empire the american empire, and we're running out of money

raiha
01-31-2008, 04:39 AM
When the heroes of the American Revolution did what they did, I believe they felt they were in rebellion against the British Empire. It has an historical resonance i would be sorry to see disappear, especially when the present Revolution (peaceful of course) gains traction.

maeqFREEDOMfree
01-31-2008, 07:47 AM
i think he's speaking the truth, no doubt; however, pointing out the however many bases in 130+ countries is also speaking the truth.

To take it a step further, i wonder if it would be more easily received if RP continued the path of his reasoning all the way down into the working American's pocket (quoting the budget to keep all the bases going and then pointing out that since the government is not 'employed', its only source of income is from those of us who are). Drawing the parallel and displaying the rational clearly could help the people that "just don't get it" get it.

DrCap
01-31-2008, 07:51 AM
Read about the Roman empire's history and you will find we are very much doing what they did, only on a much faster pace. They also devalued their money by secretly mixing silver and other metal in their coins, gradually decreasing the silver content, mostly so they could fight their wars. The Romans, over centuries, decreased the value of their coins around 50%... of course we have decreased ours about 98% in just 30 years.
We are an empire, like it or not.

evadmurd
01-31-2008, 08:01 AM
It's a good word, but alas, probably is lost to the average Joe who begins thinking of the last Star Wars movie they saw.

CelestialRender
01-31-2008, 08:07 AM
Absolutely. Every time he says it, people become a slight bit more likely to believe the truth.

wfd40
01-31-2008, 08:17 AM
Much more than 130 bases, it's bases in a 130 countries.

+1000

Anyone who voted "yes" simply does not get it

R_Harris
01-31-2008, 08:29 AM
It's a good word, but alas, probably is lost to the average Joe who begins thinking of the last Star Wars movie they saw.


LOL, exactly.

I think he should carefully explain

(1) what the political definition of "empire" is
(2) give historical examples of empire that MOST people, with any reasonable level of post high school education, should pick up on
(3) then demonstrate how we fit that definition

Folks, we have 737 bases in 131 countries (Source: Chalmers Johnnson, from his last book Nemesis: the last days of the American Republic. He got the figure from a Pentagon white paper). That is an average of 5.5 bases per country!!!! There are exactly 163 sovereign nations on the planet. When you have military installations in 80% of all the nations on the planet, and you have them there because you are wanting to protect your "interests," then yes, you are an empire.

As usual, the challenge is being able to do all of the above in 60 seconds or less. THAT is what makes this so challenging, frustrating, and disturbing.

There is a lot of work to do, folks. Ron Paul is only able to touch just the tip of the iceberg in terms of what has to be done.

I am glad he is making this effort, but alas, it is probably too little too late to save the country from its incremental decay to destruction.

FreeTraveler
01-31-2008, 08:42 AM
Okay, who's going to go tell Dr. Paul that he needs to change his language? OP, since you proposed it, I guess it's your job.

Is it possible there might be a more productive way to use this time, since nobody's going to do the above anyway? Canvas, make calls, even sign-wave?

This thread is a textbook example of why Dr. Paul is going to lose. Everybody wants to be a chief, and nobody wants to be an indian.

mudhoney
01-31-2008, 08:50 AM
At first I was shaky on his use of the word empire so much. Now, however, I'm all for Ron Paul's in-your-face-establishment style of talk. He has an opinion that opposes the establishment, and their supporters, and he's not going to tip-toe around it, it's an empire. He's not going to persuade anyone with a more politically correct approach to explaining our foreign policy, so he might as well say what it is with brutal honesty and keep saying it until it's planted in the people's minds.

mnewcomb
01-31-2008, 09:09 AM
No.

A *VAST* majority of Americans see us as the moral leader of the world and therefore we would *NEVER* have an 'empire'.

I think he just needs to keep hammering home the fact that we are have soldiers in 60+% of the countries in the world and did we really need all of them overseas instead of home protecting the border, defending this country, etc...

kigol
01-31-2008, 09:15 AM
"neo-colonial empire" would work better.

haha

mysticgeek
01-31-2008, 09:16 AM
Absolutely he should use Empire! It is what America has become ... as with Rome we shall fall too! Unless the Revolution can save The Republic.

Besides, it sure beats the crap out of mAcaynes "straight talk" lame-o line

Gimme Some Truth
01-31-2008, 09:16 AM
No. Simple reason is that it turns away moderate neocons - who are the people we need to "convert".