Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 50

Thread: So....stopping an "invasion" before it gets to the U.S. is now "nation building?"

  1. #1

    So....stopping an "invasion" before it gets to the U.S. is now "nation building?"

    So let's see. A large part of this forum is absolutely convinced that the mass waves of immigration from central America represent an "invasion." With that said, I'm surprised that some resist the idea that rather than risking an expansion of the police state in the United States or worse, martial law inside the United States, that we should deploy troops south of the U.S. border because "nation building."

    Well...if we go with the invasion analogy, if China established a beach head in Guatemala and started pushing its way north with a clear intention of entering the U.S., would anyone really be against helping Mexico stop the Chinese advance while it was still in Mexico? That, to me anyway, makes no sense. I know Ron Paul said when he was running that he supported troops defending our border over having them defend the Iraqi border. I think getting troops out of places like Iraq, no matter what the excuse, is a good thing. But look at what Ron says here at 16:15

    "I don't like militarization around the world and I especially don't like it on our border."



    You can be against illegal immigration and be against a police state to fight it. See:

    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.



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

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    “America... goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all.”

    -John Quincy Adams
    Quite the dichotomy the OP makes. He agrees with Ron Paul's stance regarding any increase in border security. And chastises members for disagreeing. A wall will keep us in! He disregards Ron Paul's words about foreign intervention and foreign aid.. And does not see the cognitive dissonance.

  5. #4
    Currently we're taxed at a reasonable ~50% of our income, if you add up all taxes

    Given current trends, in 10 years time we'll probably be taxed at ~53% of our income.

    If, however, we allow these goddamned illegal immigrants to come here and influence our politics, in 10 years time we'll be taxed at 54% of our income instead of 53% !!!!

    Clearly stopping these illegal immigrants is a HUGE priority and is where our attention should be at.
    Last edited by TheTexan; 05-02-2019 at 04:05 PM.

  6. #5
    //
    Last edited by TheTexan; 05-02-2019 at 04:28 PM.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by TheTexan View Post
    Currently we're taxed at a reasonable ~50% of our income, if you add up all taxes

    Given current trends, in 10 years time we'll probably be taxed at ~53% of our income.

    If, however, we allow these goddamned illegal immigrants to come here and influence our politics, in 10 years time we'll be taxed at 54% of our income instead of 53% !!!!

    Clearly stopping these illegal immigrants is a HUGE priority and is where our attention should be at.
    You just might be on to something.. if we divide the national debt by the population each person owes too much money to ever pay back. We will probably be paying interest on the interest. If you were to increase the popluation though by like 800% it would be a much lower amount of debt per person. So we should just start protecting everyones borders and taxing them to pay for it.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    “America... goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all.”

    -John Quincy Adams
    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Quite the dichotomy the OP makes. He agrees with Ron Paul's stance regarding any increase in border security. And chastises members for disagreeing. A wall will keep us in! He disregards Ron Paul's words about foreign intervention and foreign aid.. And does not see the cognitive dissonance.
    I see logic an reason has left both of you. If there is a real invasion then repelling the invasion, wherever it is, is not "foreign intervention." It was not "foreign intervention" for the United States to attack Midway Island after Pearl Harbor. If the Chinese were to land an invading army in Mexico with the clear intent of bringing that army into the United States, it would not be "foreign intervention" to attack the Chinese while they were still in Mexico. You both have just confirmed what I thought was true. All this "invasion" talk from you and others like you is just total pretext. Thank you for clearing that up. I don't think the migrants are "invaders" and Ron Paul doesn't either. But if they were invaders, as you claimed (and now that claim is exposed as a pretext) then stopping that invasion before it reached the U.S. border would be the only sensible course of action.
    Last edited by jmdrake; 05-11-2019 at 03:51 AM.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    I see logic an reason has left both of you. If there is a real invasion then repelling the invasion, wherever it is, is not "foreign intervention." It was not "foreign intervention" for the United States to attack Midway Island after Pearl Harbor. If the Chinese were to land an invading army in Mexico with the clear intent of bringing that army into the United States, it would not be "foreign intervention" to attack the Chinese while they were still in Mexico. You both have just confirmed what I thought was true. All this "invasion" talk from you and others like you is just total pretext. Thank you for clearing that up. I don't think the migrants are "invaders" and Ron Paul doesn't either. But if they were invaders, as you claimed (and now that claim is exposed as a pretext) then stopping that invasion before it reached the U.S. border would be the only sensible course of action.
    Building infrastracture in someone else's country that benefits that nation isn't nation building? When Ron Paul opposed nation building did he say we should be building infrastacture for other nations?



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    Building infrastracture in someone else's country that benefits that nation isn't nation building? When Ron Paul opposed nation building did he say we should be building infrastacture for other nations?
    So when we built an airfield on Midway Island as a part of rolling back the Japanese war machine that had attacked the United States you considered that "nation building?" Interesting. Illogical but interesting. Nation building is not done for the purpose of stopping an invasion. Nation building is done for the purpose of "winning hearts and minds."
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    So when we built an airfield on Midway Island as a part of rolling back the Japanese war machine that had attacked the United States you considered that "nation building?" Interesting. Illogical but interesting. Nation building is not done for the purpose of stopping an invasion. Nation building is done for the purpose of "winning hearts and minds."
    We shouldn't build anything in another country unless they pay us to do it. We aren't the policemen of the world, we don't owe another country free protection and defence. Are you seriously trying to say that we wouldn't get stovepiped into a war if the country we were supplying infrastractue to goes to war? That's exactly what happened in world war 2 when they sunk one of our ships because we were providing a ton of supplies to the allies before we got involved.

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    We shouldn't build anything in another country unless they pay us to do it.
    That's a pretty stupid idea if we are trying to stop an invasion.

    We aren't the policemen of the world, we don't owe another country free protection and defence.
    You aren't "policing the world" if you are trying to stop an invasion of your own country.


    Are you seriously trying to say that we wouldn't get stovepiped into a war if the country we were supplying infrastractue to goes to war?
    If there is an active invasion already headed to the border of the United States then the war has already happened. Maybe you agree with me now that the migrant crisis is not an invasion? If so then great! You are making progress.

    That's exactly what happened in world war 2 when they sunk one of our ships because we were providing a ton of supplies to the allies before we got involved.
    Umm....you are thinking World War 1 and the Luistania. But at this point I'm not expecting you to have a good command of U.S. history.

    Edit: Some more U.S. history you probably didn't know about. Prior to our entering World War I, Germany tried to get Mexico to invade the United States. That attempt failed. But if Germany had decided to land in Mexico anyway and fight their way north with the purpose of invading the United States, helping Mexico repel the Germans, and even building infrastructure aid in that effort, would not have been "nation building" or "policing the world."
    Last edited by jmdrake; 05-11-2019 at 07:44 AM.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    “America... goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all.”

    -John Quincy Adams
    ... rolls over in his grave.

    Don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    That's a pretty stupid idea if we are trying to stop an invasion.



    You aren't "policing the world" if you are trying to stop an invasion of your own country.




    If there is an active invasion already headed to the border of the United States then the war has already happened. Maybe you agree with me now that the migrant crisis is not an invasion? If so then great! You are making progress.



    Umm....you are thinking World War 1 and the Luistania. But at this point I'm not expecting you to have a good command of U.S. history.

    Edit: Some more U.S. history you probably didn't know about. Prior to our entering World War I, Germany tried to get Mexico to invade the United States. That attempt failed. But if Germany had decided to land in Mexico anyway and fight their way north with the purpose of invading the United States, helping Mexico repel the Germans, and even building infrastructure aid in that effort, would not have been "nation building" or "policing the world."

    • After the start of World War II in Europe in September 1939, the US, which hadn't declared war, provided some aid to Allied countries.
    • That included help escorting convoys across the Atlantic, which put US ships in the line of fire.
    • On October 31, 1941, a Nazi U-boat claimed the first US warship sunk by the enemy in World War II.

  16. #14
    Ron Paul stated that once he left congress the gloves would come off.

    Ron has more insight into the inner workings of the White House than most of us here and no politician is more honest than Ron.

    Why people, especially around here, have stopped heeding Ron’s words is beyond me, it is as if folks think they have surpassed Ron’s knowledge, insight and future-sight into government affairs.

    Perhaps now you will see why us principled folks vehemently oppose that wall and police state tactics when the actual solution is simple and right before our very eyes.

    Thanks jmdrake for posting this:

    Last edited by PAF; 05-11-2019 at 07:59 AM.
    “The right to life is the source of all rights—and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.”

    Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3)

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    • After the start of World War II in Europe in September 1939, the US, which hadn't declared war, provided some aid to Allied countries.
    • That included help escorting convoys across the Atlantic, which put US ships in the line of fire.
    • On October 31, 1941, a Nazi U-boat claimed the first US warship sunk by the enemy in World War II.
    That didn't get us into World War II. Pearl Harbor got us into World War II. Nice try but that you have just disproved your own argument since you claimed that our supplying the allies was what "stovepiped us" into World War II. And Pearl Harbor happened because of the U.S. embargo of Japan. What is Trump trying to do now? Embargo Iran and China. Hmmmmm......

    Now back to the actual thread. Why, if you believe the "invasion" is already going on (maybe you don't anymore) do you not support stopping the "invasion" while it is still in Mexico? Again, after World War II had actually started and the United States had actual been attacked, it made zero sense to say "We need to fight the Japanese invaders!....But only if they actually make it all the way to U.S. soil." Speak on that issue...if you have the courage. (I realize you may not).
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    That didn't get us into World War II. Pearl Harbor got us into World War II. Nice try but that you have just disproved your own argument since you claimed that our supplying the allies was what "stovepiped us" into World War II. And Pearl Harbor happened because of the U.S. embargo of Japan. What is Trump trying to do now? Embargo Iran and China. Hmmmmm......

    Now back to the actual thread. Why, if you believe the "invasion" is already going on (maybe you don't anymore) do you not support stopping the "invasion" while it is still in Mexico? Again, after World War II had actually started and the United States had actual been attacked, it made zero sense to say "We need to fight the Japanese invaders!....But only if they actually make it all the way to U.S. soil." Speak on that issue...if you have the courage. (I realize you may not).
    I disagree with you entirely,. Pearl harbor sold the war to the Americans, but Germany sinking our ships and being unapologetic about it was what made us be in a defacto cold war. Germany was the first one to sink an American ship not Japan.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    I disagree with you enittrely. Pearl harbor sold the war to the Americans, but Germany sinking our ships and being unapologetic about it was what made us be in a defacto cold war. Germany was the first one to sink an American ship not Japan.
    You are absolutely correct. And Pearl Harbor was conveniently " allowed" to happen later to get us into the war.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    Now back to the actual thread. Why, if you believe the "invasion" is already going on (maybe you don't anymore) do you not support stopping the "invasion" while it is still in Mexico? Again, after World War II had actually started and the United States had actual been attacked, it made zero sense to say "We need to fight the Japanese invaders!....But only if they actually make it all the way to U.S. soil." Speak on that issue...if you have the courage. (I realize you may not).
    Check your history.

    One of the largest mobilizations of "unorganized militias" and citizens occurred state-side during WWII.

    Millions of people were part of the Civil Defense system.

    Million of hours of flight time were logged by Civil Air Patrol pilots, they hampered and disrupted German U-boat operations on the east coast significantly.

    Even though Yamamoto's famous quote: "America cannot be invaded, for there would a rifle pointed at us from behind every blade of grass" may be spurious, the idea is not and it had been mentioned many times among the Japanese military leadership that a ground invasion of the US would be next to impossible.

    Force projection into the Pacific was carried out mostly by the Navy, against relatively small island targets.

    The bulk of national defense, was, in fact, concentrated on the mainland, at the border, at the shoreline, on both coasts.

    Mainland Japan never was invaded.

    It sounds like you're advocating a bombing campaign against Mexico to stop the invading hordes, which is exactly what these people are, to stop them before they get here.

    Really? And I'm the one who has lost my way and become a "syhll" or whatever the pejorative term is for today to apply to somebody who uses logic, reason and common sense to look at a situation, realizes that a change has occurred, and adjusts their thinking accordingly?

    What is happening is an invasion.

    It is "Fifth Generation" warfare, and will require "Fifth Generation" tactics to defeat it.

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    It is "Fifth Generation" warfare, and will require "Fifth Generation" tactics to defeat it.
    Posting really hard on message boards?

  23. #20

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    do you got any sick memes?

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by TheTexan View Post
    Posting really hard on message boards?
    Of course not.

    I plan to vote harder than I ever have in 2020.

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    Of course not.

    I plan to vote harder than I ever have in 2020.
    +rep vote like your life depends on it, because it does. The invaders will stop at nothing to ruin our Great way of life

  27. #24
    I can't believe that @jmdrake wants us to buy the "fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here" nonsense.

    We can handle this at our border just fine, at most we need only go about 100 yards into Mexico to deal with the false narrative that border enforcement by the military would violate Posse Comitatus.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    I can't believe that @jmdrake wants us to buy the "fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here" nonsense.

    We can handle this at our border just fine, at most we need only go about 100 yards into Mexico to deal with the false narrative that border enforcement by the military would violate Posse Comitatus.
    I can't believe you are so full of shyt. Actually I can believe it. You don't actually think this is an "invasion." If it was you would support stopping it where it started. After 9/11, Dr. Paul, Mr. "non interventionist" himself voted to send troops INTO AFGHANISTAN in order to prevent another attack on the United States. If he were in congress and there was a real invasion coming up through Mexico, i.e. Chinese troops and tanks, he wouldn't sit on his ass (like you apparently) and wait for the invasion to reach the border. So either you don't actually believe this is an invasion or you don't know jack shyt about what non interventionism actually means. Which is it?
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    Check your history.

    One of the largest mobilizations of "unorganized militias" and citizens occurred state-side during WWII.

    Millions of people were part of the Civil Defense system.

    Million of hours of flight time were logged by Civil Air Patrol pilots, they hampered and disrupted German U-boat operations on the east coast significantly.

    Even though Yamamoto's famous quote: "America cannot be invaded, for there would a rifle pointed at us from behind every blade of grass" may be spurious, the idea is not and it had been mentioned many times among the Japanese military leadership that a ground invasion of the US would be next to impossible.

    Force projection into the Pacific was carried out mostly by the Navy, against relatively small island targets.

    The bulk of national defense, was, in fact, concentrated on the mainland, at the border, at the shoreline, on both coasts.

    Mainland Japan never was invaded.

    It sounds like you're advocating a bombing campaign against Mexico to stop the invading hordes, which is exactly what these people are, to stop them before they get here.

    Really? And I'm the one who has lost my way and become a "syhll" or whatever the pejorative term is for today to apply to somebody who uses logic, reason and common sense to look at a situation, realizes that a change has occurred, and adjusts their thinking accordingly?

    What is happening is an invasion.

    It is "Fifth Generation" warfare, and will require "Fifth Generation" tactics to defeat it.
    Nothing that you wrote actually changes anything I said. My history is 100% correct. We mobilized state side and outside the United States. Same thing post 9/11. After 9/11, Dr. Paul, Mr. "non interventionist" himself voted to send troops INTO AFGHANISTAN in order to prevent another attack on the United States. If he were in congress and there was a real invasion coming up through Mexico, i.e. Chinese troops and tanks, he wouldn't sit on his butt the invasion to reach the border. I respect you A.F., but you aren't being logical this time.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    I can't believe you are so full of shyt. Actually I can believe it. You don't actually think this is an "invasion." If it was you would support stopping it where it started. After 9/11, Dr. Paul, Mr. "non interventionist" himself voted to send troops INTO AFGHANISTAN in order to prevent another attack on the United States. If he were in congress and there was a real invasion coming up through Mexico, i.e. Chinese troops and tanks, he wouldn't sit on his ass (like you apparently) and wait for the invasion to reach the border. So either you don't actually believe this is an invasion or you don't know jack shyt about what non interventionism actually means. Which is it?
    You know nothing about war, it is foolish and wasteful to expend resources attacking foreign countries when we can handle the problem at our border and getting involved in the foreign countries would in this case only make the problem worse because of the asymmetrical nature of the threat.

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    Nothing that you wrote actually changes anything I said. My history is 100% correct. We mobilized state side and outside the United States. Same thing post 9/11. After 9/11, Dr. Paul, Mr. "non interventionist" himself voted to send troops INTO AFGHANISTAN in order to prevent another attack on the United States. If he were in congress and there was a real invasion coming up through Mexico, i.e. Chinese troops and tanks, he wouldn't sit on his butt the invasion to reach the border. I respect you A.F., but you aren't being logical this time.
    Voting for the Afghan war was a colossal mistake, securing our borders and reforming our immigration system would have been much better.

    Might I suggest a new Avatar?



  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    I disagree with you entirely,. Pearl harbor sold the war to the Americans, but Germany sinking our ships and being unapologetic about it was what made us be in a defacto cold war. Germany was the first one to sink an American ship not Japan.
    You don't actually "disagree with me entirely" because you said "Pearl harbor sold the war to the Americans." You are really disagreeing with yourself. We were not "stovepiped" into World War II by U-boat activity. Those who wanted a "cold war" with Germany were doing that before any U.S. boats were sunk. Your own analysis shows that. And it was the embargoes that caused Pearl Harbor, not the German u-boats.

    That said, let's come back to the thread subject shall we? If Chinese troops landed in Guatamela and invaded Mexico with the clear intention of fighting their way to the United States would you REALLY be against sending troops into Mexico to build tank traps to stop the Chinese advance? Yes or no? I think you are afraid to answer that question. I doubt @Swordsmyth will bother answering it either.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    You don't actually "disagree with me entirely" because you said "Pearl harbor sold the war to the Americans." You are really disagreeing with yourself. We were not "stovepiped" into World War II by U-boat activity. Those who wanted a "cold war" with Germany were doing that before any U.S. boats were sunk. Your own analysis shows that. And it was the embargoes that caused Pearl Harbor, not the German u-boats.

    That said, let's come back to the thread subject shall we? If Chinese troops landed in Guatamela and invaded Mexico with the clear intention of fighting their way to the United States would you REALLY be against sending troops into Mexico to build tank traps to stop the Chinese advance? Yes or no? I think you are afraid to answer that question. I doubt @Swordsmyth will bother answering it either.
    Your attempts to conflate orthodox warfare and asymmetric warfare are ignorant and foolish.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Trump's "No Nation-Building" Folly in Afghanistan: No Nation-Building, No Peace
    By James_Madison_Lives in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 05-16-2018, 12:32 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-04-2014, 08:06 AM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-18-2011, 04:05 AM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-25-2011, 09:40 PM
  5. Allen West: "We have to get away from occupation, nation-building"
    By Knightskye in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 11-20-2010, 07:41 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
  •