can you explain what that sound bite means? freedom of choice generally refers to the abortion argument, and i really dont think you mean that choice in whether or not to get an abortion will stabilize the dollar.
Just because you don't win doesn't mean your cause isn't moving forward. A battle may have won but the war isn't over and I like to be on the side of integrity.
They don't need to be reduced, they need to be redeployed. The Euros can defend themselves just fine. Together they have a bigger economy and a bigger military than us. What? Be specific. No we need to be smart interventionists. Sometimes intervention is necessary, sometimes it ain't. We need to be much smarter in how we use our military, but use it we must. It's our supreme advantage on the world stage. We have a worldwide, extremely capable military force that can go anywhere it wants to. But it is squandered in a knife fight in a guerilla war and this sitzkrieg of an occupation. We need to fight our kind of war--the kind in which we have overwhelming supremacy. And we need to fight it only when it is in our vital national interests to do so. American isolationism has been tried and it did not work, it resulted in World War II. We can't be a world power without worldwide reach. We don't need a base in every port, but we need a base where we need them. Bases are not problems. Inability to deploy a force due to lack of bases or troop depletion in a stupid war is a real problem.
I believe it has to do with using competing currencies that are grounded in reality (tied to actual commodity reserves such as gold and silver) as opposed to a fiat system, which isn't tied to anything and can be adjusted (inflated) as those in power see fit. The power of the US dollar has fallen because of this; in the past the world accepted our dollar because we were the most stable nation in the world, but now because our strength in relation to the rest of the world is declining and because of poor governing decisions by those in power, our fiat dollar is losing respect around the world and is losing value in relation to commodities. I think the difference between the value of oil and gold is relatively unchanged while the difference between the value of oil and the dollar has seriously increased. I'm not really an expert, but this is how I understand it. How should we be using our military right now? I like the idea of bringing them home and strengthening our borders; the economic impact bringing the military home would have is enormous. Military dollars would go into the US economy rather than the German, Japanese, and Iraqi economy. Also, our military force should not be for sell, it should be for national security and defense. Foreign countries in need of military force should look to the private sector. Where do we need to be exerting military force at this time? Venezuela, because they are stealing from a US company? Iran, because their president has a loud mouth? Are we paying, directly or indirectly, North Korea to drop their nuclear program? If so, is that really money well spent?
You mean higher standards like claiming to be against pork legislation then ear marking hundreds of millions of dollars and then voting against it and then claiming to never have been party to a spending increase...ya know like Ron Paul does.
I still don't see that as a contradiction, and you still do. Anyway, Ron Paul doesn't really seem to argue against pork legislation, which is returning money to his district that they were taxed for in the first place. If Ron Paul didn't allocate how that money was spent, other districts would get that money and the federal government would keep the extra to spend as it sees fit. Ron Paul wants to reduce the size of the federal government, why wouldn't he ask for his constituents' money back in lieu of allowing the federal government to spend it? And as I said, Ron Paul doesn't really argue against pork spending like McCain does because he believes that is treating the symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. Paul believes the federal government is too powerful, spends too much money too inefficiently, and takes too much money from its people in the first place. If Paul was arguing simply against pork spending like McCain, he would be glossing over the fact that pork spending dollars would simply be used at the discretion of the executive branch and by other representatives. I think McCain is on the losing side of this argument as he is in many cases.
back on topic here's a comparison shot of their high school years highlighted guy on the left bottom row. It's a wrestling team.
I don't think so. We have all the cards, but we need to play them smartly. Sometimes the magic works and sometimes it doesn't. The trick to to know when it works. We commit the military force when we have all the cards in our favor. When we don't, we use our other bag of tricks . . . like economic warfare (it beat the USSR), intelligence assets, covert assets, diplomatic pressure and outright bribery. Jimmy Carter brought about a lasting peace between Egypt and Israel by giving each a carrot. Egypt got Sinai back. Israel got a guarantee of Billions in American miitary equipment of the latest technology and American observers on the ground in Sinai between the armies. In effect, America bought the Sinai for Egypt. Cheaper than a war and much more effective. The Sunni Sheiks in Iraq are coming over to us because we paid them to. It's cheaper than killing them and more effective. We will never be able to kill the last insurgent and go home. But we may be able to redirect their fervor into the old American tradition of life, liberty and getting rich. You're still young, stick around if you want to. Is there a surplus of E-8's or something?
