How do you respond to this.....

[sluggo]

My brother-in-law (who is an idiot), just tried to start an argument with my wife over Ron Paul's ideas on foreign policy. He said something to the effect of, "as a superpower it's our responsibility to protect other countries from dictators, and to make sure other countries don't possess nuclear weapons."

My wife argued back with him and he said, "Oh yeah, well what would you do about Hitler?" He then went on to say that we need to stop Ahmadinejad before he becomes the next Hitler.

Well, I wasn't there, and he wouldn't pull this stunt if I was. I know how I would have responded, and it wouldn't be pretty. What is a good, concise, and above all polite way of answering back to a person who is just repeating the stuff he heard on Hannity?

I realize that you could never win some people over, but what's a quick way to shut them down?

[noxagol]

Well, the fact that Iran has an airforce made up mostly of F4's that were new in the 60's and no navy and is a third world country, I don't see them obtaining the level of power and technical sophistiaction equivalent to Germany in world war 2. They woudl have to get better soldiers and technology than us because Germany in WW2 was the most technolically advanced country in the world at that point as far as warfare is concerned. They just lacked the production capacity that the US had which is why they lost.

The threat of Iran is WAY overblown. Also, Hitler wasn't as bent on conquest as everyone is made to believe. His goal was to reform Germany to pre-WW1 borders, he invaded France as a preemptive attack to defend Germany because France and Britain declared war on Germany.

[Corydoras]

He said something to the effect of, "as a superpower it's our responsibility to protect other countries from dictators, and to make sure other countries don't possess nuclear weapons."

Oh, THAT's why we've been supporting Musharraf in nuclear Pakistan, yeah, the guy who just declared martial law there.

[Matt]

The guy also doesn't have the power to launch attacks even if he wanted to. The Iranian President is about the equivalent of our Secretary of State.

[dmitchell]

My brother-in-law (who is an idiot), just tried to start an argument with my wife over Ron Paul's ideas on foreign policy. He said something to the effect of, "as a superpower it's our responsibility to protect other countries from dictators, and to make sure other countries don't possess nuclear weapons."
I would respond by saying "No, it is not. Our responsibility is to provide for freedom, prosperity, and peace in America. It is not our responsibility to be crusaders, to go abroad looking for dragons to slay. What you suggest would be fatal to our country. No nation can preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare."

[American]

This sounds like a statement Hitler would had said had he had Nuclear weapons.

"as a superpower it's our responsibility to protect other countries from dictators, and to make sure other countries don't possess nuclear weapons."

If this guy is so committed tell him he should sign up and go fight. I bet this guy is a big American Idol fan isnt he? Dont get my wrong I like Karaoke too but I dont let it guide my life.

If you want to help him, tell him to stop watching FIXED news for a week. NO FAUX NEWS FOR A WEEK. then have him get back to you.

[mtmedlin]

My brother-in-law (who is an idiot), just tried to start an argument with my wife over Ron Paul's ideas on foreign policy. He said something to the effect of, "as a superpower it's our responsibility to protect other countries from dictators, and to make sure other countries don't possess nuclear weapons."

My wife argued back with him and he said, "Oh yeah, well what would you do about Hitler?" He then went on to say that we need to stop Ahmadinejad before he becomes the next Hitler.

Well, I wasn't there, and he wouldn't pull this stunt if I was. I know how I would have responded, and it wouldn't be pretty. What is a good, concise, and above all polite way of answering back to a person who is just repeating the stuff he heard on Hannity?

I realize that you could never win some people over, but what's a quick way to shut them down?

Tell him you will vote for anybody that he wants if he can support his argument. Then find a copy of the Constitution and have him search. After he isnt able to, just walk away. He who speaks first, loses!

[chipvogel]

Ahmadinejad can talk like Hitler....there are lots of people that sound like Hitler; but Iran is decades behind the US in technology. Hitler had an industrial base and for the time advanced technology.

[werdd]

Well, the fact that Iran has an airforce made up mostly of F4's that were new in the 60's and no navy and is a third world country, I don't see them obtaining the level of power and technical sophistiaction equivalent to Germany in world war 2. They woudl have to get better soldiers and technology than us because Germany in WW2 was the most technolically advanced country in the world at that point as far as warfare is concerned. They just lacked the production capacity that the US had which is why they lost.

The threat of Iran is WAY overblown. Also, Hitler wasn't as bent on conquest as everyone is made to believe. His goal was to reform Germany to pre-WW1 borders, he invaded France as a preemptive attack to defend Germany because France and Britain declared war on Germany.

Why come we just worked out a deal with North Korea and they are set to disarm in 09, they were a much greater threat than iran or formerly iraq. We have strategicly opted for iran over N Korea, because its the next country on the middle east skipping stone effect... If we pull out start trading and with a little diplomacy, we would have a much better chance of never having a nuclear iran....

I just cant beleive some people still ahve the mindset that we need to help foreign countries when our own country is hurting so badly, if we dont start serving the US, there wont be a US to nanny all of these countries. Which im totally against, political darwinism FTW.

[Anti Federalist]

Tell him:

"Good idea or bad, it's a moot point. we're broke and cannot afford it, period."

I've found that to work a few times.

[Paul4Prez]

As a last line of defense against neocon "reasoning," try this:

Even if policing the world were a good idea, we simply can't afford to do it anymore. Our national debt is nine trillion dollars, the dollar is collapsing, and every year we borrow a half a trillion more, much of it from foreign countries like China. When our whole economy is held hostage by nations that might not always have our best interests at heart, how is that helping our national security?

[RobertJ]

No one elected the US to the position of world police. Us being world police is the mastermind of the elites who want to be able to use us to do all their dirty work.

If you think the wold is a nice place just try travelling in it a while. We could have a US soldier on every street corner in the world and it wouldnt make one bit of difference in anything. We would just be driven into the ground by way of debt.

Maybe thats the plan, they("elitists") cant fight us on the battlefront so they tear us down from within. Even the forefathers warned us of this happening. We let ourselves and our children be brainwashed by propaganda and until that stops, there will always be one group of people in the world who think its their godgiven right to be the rulers of humanity.

[beobeli]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=452971&postcount=101