I need a quote...

[LibertiORDeth]

From Revolution: A Manifesto. I am writing an essay for my English class on Interventionist vs. Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy, which has to be 1000 words, and need two sources, one which can be online, the other from a book, newspaper, etc. So I thought this book would be a great place to start, even though I don't have it, and my local library doesn't either. So could someone pull a quote out of it that would be helpful in this paper, and I can write around it? (Preferably somewhat long, 70-100 words to fill up space :D)

[FindLiberty]

Did you check Amazon.com for the book's official review and sample chapter?

[Knightskye]

“The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible.... Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?”

Page 9 of The Revolution, and it's a quote by George Washington. I love that guy. ;)

65 words, by the way.

[amy31416]

Just one quote? Three more and you'll have a gallon. . .

My inner Marxist is coming out.

[RPTXState]

My inner Marxist is coming out.

Kill it with fire :D

[LibertiORDeth]

I think I need two quotes now, just starting the paper and it is due tomorrow :(

[newyearsrevolution08]

I think I need two quotes now, just starting the paper and it is due tomorrow :(

sounds like myself when I was in school, never really ready for the test the next day even though I knew about it for 2 months...

as far as quotes, there is a thread on that very subject somewhere in this forum.... Let me try and find it BUT if you locate it, I tossed the best quote in that thread.

[LibertiORDeth]

I also need some statistics on how many troops we have overseas, how many died in Vietnam, WW I, and the Iraq war, and any other wars in the last century (besides WWII) that I am not aware of :p

[newyearsrevolution08]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=137012


there it is

[LibertiORDeth]

sounds like myself when I was in school, never really ready for the test the next day even though I knew about it for 2 months...

as far as quotes, there is a thread on that very subject somewhere in this forum.... Let me try and find it BUT if you locate it, I tossed the best quote in that thread.

Lol I started it Saturday, was halfway through it before changing the topic :D

[LibertiORDeth]

bumpity bump

[LibertiORDeth]

My paper so far!

"Interventionist vs. Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy
Many Americans believe that it is necessary to, in effect, use our military as an international police force, in order to stop tyranny abroad. Using this logic, we have deployed over 369,000 troops in over 40 foreign countries, the largest deployment numbers being in Iraq (170,000) Germany (63,958) Japan (48,844) and South Korea (26,477). We also have troops in Afghanistan, Kenya, Egypt, Philippines, Italy, United Kingdom, and many others. Many people claim that these soldiers are in place for “national defense” reasons, because “The (said) country wants us to be there,” or in “the case of an international emergency,” which requires the use of force immediately. However, these troops have done nothing to boost our national defense, and have not stopped any crises in recent history.
Many wars have been fought under the logic that we need to protect our nation, even though it has not been directly threatened, or that, as Woodrow Wilson put it, “We need to make the world safe for democracy.” This, however, is one of the most ridiculous and oxy-moronic statements I have ever heard, since it accidentally implies that democracy is somehow dangerous enough that the world needs to be, essentially, set up for democracy to be acceptable.
World War One, the war that President Wilson was directly
"

[LibertiORDeth]

bump

[ARealConservative]

bump

new forum rules prevent you from bumping this thread any further.

you are going to have to finish this report on your own son. :p

[LibertiORDeth]

new forum rules prevent you from bumping this thread any further.

you are going to have to finish this report on your own son. :p

Rules? What rules paw? :p

[malkusm]

I loaned my book to my mom :( Someone who has the book on them want to go through Chapter 1 and help out?

[dude58677]

From Revolution: A Manifesto. I am writing an essay for my English class on Interventionist vs. Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy, which has to be 1000 words, and need two sources, one which can be online, the other from a book, newspaper, etc. So I thought this book would be a great place to start, even though I don't have it, and my local library doesn't either. So could someone pull a quote out of it that would be helpful in this paper, and I can write around it? (Preferably somewhat long, 70-100 words to fill up space :D)

"They don't attack us because we are rich and we're free, they come here and attack us because we 've been over there." Ron Paul

[ARealConservative]

here is my favorite portion of the non-interventionist section of the book:

------------------------------

We have had troops in Korea for over five and a half decades. We have had troops in Europe and Japan for about as long. How many years is enough? An American presence in those places was supposed to be temporary, persisting only during the military emergencies that were cited as justification for bringing them there. Milton Friedman was right: there is nothing so permanent as a "temporary" government program.

With a $9 trillion debt, perhaps $50 trillion in entitlement liabilities, and the dollar in free fall, how much longer can we afford this unnecessary and counterproductive extravagance?

Now it would be a great step forward if we could even debate the foreign policy we have now, a policy that (with a few minor differences) is shared by the establishment of both major parties. One writer correctly labels it "the debate we never have".

The so called debates between pundits they see on television or read in the newspaper carefully limit the debate to the point of insignificance. the debate is always framed in terms of which kind of interventionist strategy our government should pursue. The possibility that we should avoid bleeding ourselves dry in endless foreign meddling is not raised. For heavens sake, what kind of debate is it in which all sides agree that America needs troops in 130 countries?

[LibertiORDeth]

here is my favorite portion of the non-interventionist section of the book:

------------------------------

We have had troops in Korea for over five and a half decades. We have had troops in Europe and Japan for about as long. How many years is enough? An American presence in those places was supposed to be temporary, persisting only during the military emergencies that were cited as justification for bringing them there. Milton Friedman was right: there is nothing so permanent as a "temporary" government program.

With a $9 trillion debt, perhaps $50 trillion in entitlement liabilities, and the dollar in free fall, how much longer can we afford this unnecessary and counterproductive extravagance?

Now it would be a great step forward if we could even debate the foreign policy we have now, a policy that (with a few minor differences) is shared by the establishment of both major parties. One writer correctly labels it "the debate we never have".

The so called debates between pundits they see on television or read in the newspaper carefully limit the debate to the point of insignificance. the debate is always framed in terms of which kind of interventionist strategy our government should pursue. The possibility that we should avoid bleeding ourselves dry in endless foreign meddling is not raised. For heavens sake, what kind of debate is it in which all sides agree that America needs troops in 130 countries?

130 countries? I can't find any statistics to back it up, highest I found was 40.

[ARealConservative]

130 countries? I can't find any statistics to back it up, highest I found was 40.

http://hnn.us/articles/3097.html

[ARealConservative]

130 countries? I can't find any statistics to back it up, highest I found was 40.

also, this is an extremely detailed report:

http://stinet.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA435933&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf

it is from 2005, I'm sure a newer version can be found somewhere on that site.

If go go to DOD Inventory --- Overseas - an extremely detailed listing of our bases is available

[LibertiORDeth]

Edited.

[Mr. Coolidge]

/Bump for forum critique/

Just skimming through it, it looks all right. You focused a lot on Vietnam...? An inordinate amount, I mean. Were you stretching for word count?

[LibertiORDeth]

Lol I didn't do an outline, so I didn't measure everything out right... I didn't put much on that, abotu the same as WW1.

[LibertiORDeth]

Anybody else want to critique it? This is our finals for this quarter...

[LibertiORDeth]

So is it passable?

[Truth Warrior]

Just one quote? Three more and you'll have a gallon. . .

My inner Marxist is coming out.

Ah, that certainly explains a whole lot of things.:rolleyes: I thought the style seemed way too familiar. :p

[SLSteven]

This, however, is one of the most ridiculous and oxy-moronic statements I have ever heard, since it accidentally implies that democracy is somehow dangerous enough that the world needs to be, essentially, set up for democracy to be acceptable.


I don't understand the meaning of this sentence.

[LibertiORDeth]

I don't understand the meaning of this sentence.

Because, to "make something safe" for something implies that said idea/object can be harmful in some way.

[constitutional]

I can't stress enough -- people need to stop posting their essays or convention speeches online. The neocons can catch you, your teachers can use one of those online program to submit your essay and it will come up as plagiarized.

I'd care less if people did it but I can't stand a RP supporter getting zapped! It's for your own good. :D

[LibertiORDeth]

I can't stress enough -- people need to stop posting their essays or convention speeches online. The neocons can catch you, your teachers can use one of those online program to submit your essay and it will come up as plagiarized.

I'd care less if people did it but I can't stand a RP supporter getting zapped! It's for your own good. :D

Really? Editing post :p

[constitutional]

Really? Editing post :p

That's correct, I'm sure you've heard of web sites like these: http://turnitin.com/static/home.html

[LibertiORDeth]

That's correct, I'm sure you've heard of web sites like these: http://turnitin.com/static/home.html

Nope