PDA

View Full Version : Rafael "Ted" Cruz's Foreign Policy is a Deal-Breaker




nbruno322
03-09-2014, 10:43 AM
“I’m a big fan of Rand Paul. He and I are good friends. But I don’t agree with him on foreign policy,” Cruz said.


It's long been glaringly clear that Rafael "Ted" Cruz is a neocon.

And foreign policy is a big deal, because it develops the statist germ in all other areas...like higher taxes, higher debt, decline of civil liberties, police state, surveillance, etc.

That's what made Ron Paul well Ron Paul. He refused to play ball on this most crucial of issues. Rand says what he has to sometimes, but it is also clear that at heart he has the same views as Ron.

Foreign policy, and all the evils that stem from it, are why I could never vote or promote Rafael "Ted" Cruz.


“Of all the enemies of public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies. From these proceed debts and taxes. And armies, debts and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the dominion of the few. . . . No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”

~ James Madison

kcchiefs6465
03-09-2014, 10:58 AM
To add on, Ted Cruz, as well as Mike Lee, are cosponsors of S.462


There is one summary for this bill. Bill summaries are authored by CRS.
Shown Here:
Introduced in Senate (03/05/2013)

United States-Israel Strategic Partnership Act of 2013 - Declares that Israel is a Major Strategic Partner of the United States.

Amends the Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012 to extend authority to: (1) make additions to foreign-based defense stockpiles, and (2) transfer certain obsolete or surplus Department of Defense (DOD) items to Israel.

Directs the Secretary of Commerce to take steps to make Israel eligible for the strategic trade authorization exception to the requirement for a license for the export, reexport, or in-country transfer of an item subject to certain export controls.

Authorizes the President to carry out U.S.-Israel cooperative activities and to provide assistance for cooperation in the fields of energy, water, homeland security, agriculture, and alternative fuel technologies.

Directs the President to report to Congress on the feasibility and advisability of establishing a joint United States-Israel Cyber Security Center.

Includes Israel in the visa waiver program when Israel satisfies such program's inclusion requirements and provides, subject to security concerns, reciprocal travel privileges for U.S. citizens.

jkr
03-09-2014, 11:04 AM
http://ninja-turtles.clipartonline.net/_/rsrc/1386281653703/raphael-ninja-turtle/Raphael_3.png?height=400&width=400

compromise
03-09-2014, 11:07 AM
To add on, Ted Cruz, as well as Mike Lee, are cosponsors of S.462

I would be surprised if Rand does not vote for that bill.

kcchiefs6465
03-09-2014, 11:14 AM
I would be surprised if Rand does not vote for that bill.
Would you be surprised if him doing so annoyed me?

Snew
03-09-2014, 01:47 PM
http://ninja-turtles.clipartonline.net/_/rsrc/1386281653703/raphael-ninja-turtle/Raphael_3.png?height=400&width=400

much cooler :cool:

CPUd
03-09-2014, 02:25 PM
http://i.imgur.com/QZflx1W.jpg

pcosmar
03-09-2014, 03:18 PM
I would be surprised if Rand does not vote for that bill.

I would hope not.

erowe1
03-09-2014, 03:24 PM
Why does the thread title call him Rafael and then put Ted in quotation marks?

alucard13mm
03-09-2014, 03:25 PM
Best response is to oppose foreign intervention... BUT will honor standing agreements and treaties. Only use force with congressional approval unless there is an IMMEDIATE militarty threat that is backed by several reliable source/reporting.

pcosmar
03-09-2014, 03:54 PM
Why does the thread title call him Rafael and then put Ted in quotation marks?

I would suspect because "Ted" is not his name. It is a nickname he chooses to use. (like an alias)

erowe1
03-09-2014, 03:58 PM
I would suspect because "Ted" is not his name. It is a nickname he chooses to use. (like an alias)

That doesn't seem like a very sensible reason to me. Why not call him by the name everyone knows him by?

pcosmar
03-09-2014, 04:11 PM
That doesn't seem like a very sensible reason to me. Why not call him by the name everyone knows him by?

Ask the OP,, or the several others that do the same.

or ask "ted" why he does not use his given name.

Not a big deal to me,, I know lots of folks that don't use their legal name.

erowe1
03-09-2014, 04:12 PM
Ask the OP,, or the several others that do the same.

That's what I was doing. See post #9.

TaftFan
03-09-2014, 04:15 PM
Every time I see someone call Ted Cruz by his given name I know they are pissed inside so I laugh.

cajuncocoa
03-09-2014, 04:35 PM
Every time I see someone call Ted Cruz by his given name I know they are pissed inside so I laugh.
There are many reasons to be pissed off at Rafael.

cajuncocoa
03-09-2014, 04:35 PM
I would be surprised if Rand does not vote for that bill.
I sincerely hope he does not.

BucksforPaul
03-09-2014, 04:37 PM
Every time I see our resident neo-cons trying to push this bullshit artist as a "Libertarian," I laugh out loud.

jkr
03-09-2014, 04:47 PM
TURTLE POWER!

Warlord
03-09-2014, 05:42 PM
Every time I see our resident neo-cons trying to push this bullshit artist as a "Libertarian," I laugh out loud.

So true

oyarde
03-09-2014, 05:57 PM
Ask the OP,, or the several others that do the same.

or ask "ted" why he does not use his given name.

Not a big deal to me,, I know lots of folks that don't use their legal name.
I never use mine , hardly remember it .

TaftFan
03-09-2014, 06:33 PM
Every time I see our resident neo-cons trying to push this bullshit artist as a "Libertarian," I laugh out loud.

I don't see people doing so. It's a collective figment of many people's imaginations.

Brett85
03-09-2014, 06:45 PM
To add on, Ted Cruz, as well as Mike Lee, are cosponsors of S.462

That bill will be passed unanimously in the Senate.

Brett85
03-09-2014, 06:47 PM
Best response is to oppose foreign intervention... BUT will honor standing agreements and treaties. Only use force with congressional approval unless there is an IMMEDIATE militarty threat that is backed by several reliable source/reporting.

The problem with that is that we currently have agreements that force us to militarily defend 50+ countries around the world if they get attacked, which means that we could get forced into a war halfway around the world at any given time.

pcosmar
03-09-2014, 06:56 PM
That bill will be passed unanimously in the Senate.

I expect such.

But I can hope there is a voice raised in protest to it.

Miss Annie
03-09-2014, 07:09 PM
I can't believe that Cruz is so popular, even after endorsing Cornyn! Disgusting!

kcchiefs6465
03-09-2014, 07:14 PM
That bill will be passed unanimously in the Senate.
I know it will. A similar one did before.

It is about to the point where I simply say good riddance.

I am not a politician though so perhaps pandering to a particularly stupid yet large portion of the population who believes in actively promoting a Rapture by way of some great Holy War in "Israel" (not the Israel from the Bible, mind you) is politically expedient. I think "absurd" would be putting it lightly.

The people deserve what they get. And quite frankly Rand Paul never was quite there. Watered down what was and what ought to have been a crystal clear message. And for what? Most certainly an insider manipulated and rigged loss. Mark my words. And I'll be of the few to simply have long said, "meh."

TaftFan
03-09-2014, 07:17 PM
I can't believe that Cruz is so popular, even after endorsing Cornyn! Disgusting!

Unlike Rand, he stayed out of the primary and endorsed for the general election.

NIU Students for Liberty
03-09-2014, 07:21 PM
Best response is to oppose foreign intervention... BUT will honor standing agreements and treaties. Only use force with congressional approval unless there is an IMMEDIATE militarty threat that is backed by several reliable source/reporting.

That rationale sounds eerily familiar to Mike Huckabee's "you break it, you buy it" foreign policy:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-xN4BSDNNM

enhanced_deficit
03-09-2014, 07:47 PM
Who is Rafael Edward Cruz? (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?444158-Who-is-Ted-Cruz&)

unknown
03-10-2014, 12:15 AM
That bill will be passed unanimously in the Senate.

Yah it will.

And the dissenting voices (if any) can forget about running for POTUS.

jkr
03-10-2014, 12:25 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfUKgqEJMq0

kcchiefs6465
03-10-2014, 12:26 AM
Yah it will.

And the dissenting voices (if any) can forget about running for POTUS.
Well, as for me, and many others, those voting for this can forget it as well.

I suppose a cost/benefit analysis of policy which has real impact on real lives (or rather, the death of them) is simply a debate of what is to be gained versus what is lost. Aside from a particularly radical portion of the vote (i.e., those not going to die for it), most people would not or do not want this. They are tired of the interventionism.

Fuck being the POTUS if involved is sacrificing principle. As if the president has that much power anyways. Rand would be a pariah in the eyes of the entirety of Congress and would be lucky not to be impeached. Aside from even that, he wouldn't object to the half of it or would pragmatically assign value. This shit is such a circus it is ridiculous. And the article annoyingly so.