Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Conversation about CFR / NAU

  1. #1

    Question Conversation about CFR / NAU

    This is my conversation with someone on the CFR/NAU. What do you guys have to say about this?

    s: http://www.cfr.org/
    s: yeah
    Doronster195: thats their site
    Doronster195: so i doubt you'd find it on their website
    s: Looks to me like an information site.
    s: Information and Analysis.
    s: Doesn't look to me that it advocates anything itself.
    Doronster195: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kjsy...eature=related.
    Doronster195: have a look at that
    Doronster195: short 4 min video
    Doronster195: i also heard the Mexican president talk about something like this in an interview
    Doronster195: i forget by who
    Doronster195: did you watc hit?
    s: Yes
    s: Idiots
    s: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...American_Union
    s: Just talking about something and exploring ideas does not translate into a giant conspiracy
    Doronster195: well, i doubt they would make it obvious to the public that they're trying to do this sort of thing
    s: Who is "they"
    Doronster195: the people who want to make an NAU
    s: That's the problem with most conspiracy theories.
    s: "They" is us.
    s: What you have here is pretty typical....
    s: With all the media today, and all the political commentators...
    s: It's easy to find X number of publications or speakers on any topic.
    s: Mix in some idealists.
    s: Along with some legitimate security debate.
    s: And next thing you know you can present a conspiracy that idiots will talk about as if it's some dark secret.
    s: There is WAY too much transparancy in our media for this to be a conspiracy.
    s: Too many pundits, too many bloggers.
    s: It only takes a few minutes to see that the CFR is a legitimate forum for analyzing world issues.
    s: Not an advocacy group perp-se
    s: per-se
    s: The very fact that most other politicians belong to it is evidence of that.
    s: The idea that all of them except for Ron Paul are somehow advocating NAU is ludicrous.
    s: As if Clinton, McCain, Obama and Guliani would agree on such a thing.
    s: or anything
    s: As for the NAU...
    s: allow me to point out something obvious...
    s: Right now if you wanted to ship a nuke into the U.S., the easiest way would probably be to get it into Canada and just drive south.
    Doronster195: yeah
    s: Or north from Mexico.
    s: My point being - advocating such a union isn't a brain-dead stupid idea.
    Doronster195: how so
    s: We'd be able to secure the Canadian border (Canada to the rest of the world) in a way we can't now.
    s: Much easier to secure Canada's ports and air space than the long land border.
    s: That said, it's a silly debate
    s: Because no way would Canada or Mexico want such a union.
    s: Not to mention most Americans.
    Doronster195: lets hope not
    s: Plenty of realistic things to worry about.
    Doronster195: but
    Doronster195: ifit did happen
    Doronster195: it would be really bad
    s: Why?
    Doronster195: we would lose our sovreignity
    s: Give me a break
    Doronster195: the NAU would bea ble to legislate laws
    Doronster195: to the whole continent
    s: In any such union, we'd totally dominate it.
    Doronster195: and override our own
    s: By population and economy.
    Doronster195: like the EU is doign currently
    s: We'd have tons of cheap Mexican labor.
    s: And be able to exploit Canada's resources.
    s: That's why it won't happen - no way would Canada or Mexico accept such a thing.
    s: EU is different
    s: And it's an experiment that is likely to fail.
    s: EU is an attempt to merge multiple homogeounous cultures each with its own distinct traditions and currency.
    s: A North American culture would merge 3 cultures, two of which are nearly identical already, one of which is already multiethnic.
    s: And all of which pretty much use the dollar anyway.
    s: But even though it would probably work better than the EU - it won't happen.
    s: Unless we invade Canada and Mexico and take them over.
    s: That could happen.
    s: Dobbs is an idiot
    s: A country that imports as much stuff as we do MUST work out agreements with other countries.
    s: Otherwise they can ship us crap
    s: Like toys covered with lead paint in China
    s: Helping protect Mexico's southern border is necessary
    s: These guys are idiots
    s: We need to cooperate and engage with our neighbors.
    s: And to say that any time we make a deal with them somehow compromises our sovereignty is talking heads trying to get attention.
    s: Utter bull$#@!
    s: Worse, it's crying wolf.
    s: Because we'll ignore them when they catch our leaders doing something really serious or criminal.

    Also check out the links he and I posted.
    Last edited by doronster195; 12-02-2007 at 11:32 PM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doronster195 View Post
    This is my conversation with someone on the CFR/NAU. What do you guys have to say about this?
    Great thread idea for the Hot Topics or Ron Paul on the Issues forum.
    Hi!

  4. #3

    Default

    That is pretty sad and typical of neocons.

    This also doesn't belong in Grassroots forum.

  5. #4

    Default

    Oh my bad, maybe it should be moved then. But still this is the most viewed forum and its an important discussion topic.

    oh an for the record, he isn't a neo-con. I think he's pro-obama but I'm not sure.

  6. #5

    Default

    People are naive. They assume that politicians will make the right decision, it's just another way of abdicating their responsibility as citizens to give a damn and get involved.

    And he's wrong about the border. The land border is a lot shorter than the Canadian national border.

    What he is failing to realize is that Canada already imports from China, with an at par dollar (or near that), the days of Canadians manufacturing for American consumption are gone.

    I think it was Peter Schiff guesting on Fox that said that Canadians used to make 70% of what an American made. And now it is par.
    Hi!

  7. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by me3 View Post
    People are naive. They assume that politicians will make the right decision, it's just another way of abdicating their responsibility as citizens to give a damn and get involved.

    And he's wrong about the border. The land border is a lot shorter than the Canadian national border.

    What he is failing to realize is that Canada already imports from China, with an at par dollar (or near that), the days of Canadians manufacturing for American consumption are gone.

    I think it was Peter Schiff guesting on Fox that said that Canadians used to make 70% of what an American made. And now it is par.
    His response to you:
    s: The part about imports and manufacturing has nothing to do with anything I said.
    s: The border comment makes no sense either.
    s: Entry points to the U.S. and Canada are primarily sea and air
    s: Al Quaida is not going to march a nuke across the north pole.
    s: If Canada's sea and air ports are less secure than ours (they are), then those are our points of vulnerability.
    s: Because our land border with Canada is so insecure.
    s: Oh, I do agree with citizens getting involved.
    s: But it's advisable that they THINK about what's going on, and not believe anyone.
    s: Including both the administration and people like Lou Dobbs

  8. #7

    Default

    Bump, this is a very important discussion people need to respond to, because a lot of people may be turned off by Ron Paul if they realize he's the only one not part of an important organization (if that is indeed what the CFR is)

  9. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doronster195 View Post
    His response to you:
    s: The part about imports and manufacturing has nothing to do with anything I said.
    s: The border comment makes no sense either.
    s: Entry points to the U.S. and Canada are primarily sea and air
    s: Al Quaida is not going to march a nuke across the north pole.
    s: If Canada's sea and air ports are less secure than ours (they are), then those are our points of vulnerability.
    s: Because our land border with Canada is so insecure.
    s: Oh, I do agree with citizens getting involved.
    s: But it's advisable that they THINK about what's going on, and not believe anyone.
    s: Including both the administration and people like Lou Dobbs
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=hc110-40

    I really don't feel like participating in an IM debate right now but I will add this.

    The point about imports and exports was related to the Chinese lead toys comment. It's disingenuous to think that the changes for the sake of commerce or trade will remove these issues. The plan calls for Chinese products to land in Mexico and be transported through the US and Canada.

    The 9/11 Terrorists entered the US directly, not through Canada AFAIK. US ports have issues, and the recent test scores of the TSA highlight this.

    Al Queda flew airplanes into buildings. Where did we get this idea that they would not be willing to smuggle a nuke across the North Pole?

    Have a good night.
    Hi!

  10. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doronster195 View Post
    Bump, this is a very important discussion people need to respond to, because a lot of people may be turned off by Ron Paul if they realize he's the only one not part of an important organization (if that is indeed what the CFR is)
    If the people want to elect a President based on his membership in the CFR, then it is time to emigrate en mass to a country, and do a Free State style project for smart people in a small country.
    Hi!

  11. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doronster195 View Post
    Bump, this is a very important discussion people need to respond to, because a lot of people may be turned off by Ron Paul if they realize he's the only one not part of an important organization (if that is indeed what the CFR is)
    Tell the guy he's too smart by half and move on to someone else. He's not engaging you in conversation he's rattling off a barely disguised yet barely coherent monologue. Time is short - stick with the ones who are open to new information and ideas.

  12. #11

    Default

    This is a Ron Paul issue right now, because of the last debate. I think his first naive mistake, is to think there is transparency in the media. I think you need to knock down that wall, to be effective in other areas. Show him digg, and all the stories not being coverd by his beloved media. And the NAU, is covered by the media, Lou Dobbs, Glenn Beck, etc. There is also legislation to block it. And Duncan Hunter's website also discusses it. Show him that, if he doesn't like RP.
    "It is our true policy to steer clear of entangling alliances with any portion of the foreign world. "
    George Washington

    "Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations"
    James Madison






Similar Threads

  1. Facebook conversation. How'd I do?
    By 89five.o in forum Ron Paul Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-06-2012, 09:22 AM
  2. Conversation With My Dad
    By Sola_Fide in forum Ron Paul Forum
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 08-14-2011, 04:27 AM
  3. What do you think of this conversation?
    By Tyler19 in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-27-2007, 09:30 PM
  4. Had My First Ron Paul Conversation
    By Kregener in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-16-2007, 11:58 PM
  5. Yo, conversation
    By DjLoTi in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 09-13-2007, 11:39 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •