Are there really people on this website who hate Ron Paul? What have we come to?

Are there really people on this website who hate Ron Paul? What have we come to?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=E-ClIxlVdlo
youtube.com/watch?v=TGcNVTfJ-XE
independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-state-department-saudi-arabia-arms-sales-yemen-air-strikes-barack-obama-block-weapons-a7620821.html
washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-administration-looks-to-resume-saudi-arms-sale-criticized-as-endangering-civilians-in-yemen/2017/03/08/a259090a-040e-11e7-b1e9-a05d3c21f7cf_story.html?utm_term=.46f4ced2ae60
m.youtube.com/watch?v=ecjUsREKMuI
youtu.be/wlc_uBVlonA
youtu.be/D6qzzYOIU2g
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

I developed from RP t the real RP aka redpill.

he is impotent and his politics too.

expect the same from current berniebros. they will be radicalized when they realize bernie is a cuck. as we did when realizing that rp is a cuck.

Not sure what you you just said there.

I'm a quad time ron paul voter and proud of it

Thank God one of you is around. What's happened? Last time I visited was a year and a half ago.

How is an openly anti-Israel, anti-protectionist, anti-paper currency, anti-excessive military spending candidate a cuck?
Your nationalists will not save you. They will only make things worse. Watch.

youtube.com/watch?v=E-ClIxlVdlo
1:40
Ron Paul had the ideas but he couldn't sell it. Still based as fuck.

yeah me neither but ron paul is an impotent cuck and the evolution from libertarian to far right is in hindsight very rational.

how will a dude who got cheated out of office save you when he sold out to make his little rand a senator?

rp is a sellout, you, me, him and rand knows it.

You mean endorsing your own party, the lesser of two evils, is being a cuck?
Wanting your son to continue your legacy is being a cuck?
You sound like an immature child. Please feel free to study his actual policies. You seem deeply misinformed.

First thirty seconds basically summarizes everything.

youtube.com/watch?v=TGcNVTfJ-XE

He was unwilling to change. I feel like he was cheated to this day.

No I mean not contesting obvious cheating, just like bernie, is being a cuck.

he sold out to romney for little rand. and both romney and in bernies case clinton lost.

so being a sellout cuck doesn't seem work.

You do realize that standing up to "cheating" can cause the entire democracy to fall? Some people eventually realize that there are more important things than self interest. He was a true patriot. To this day he sits on LibertyReport and reviews everyday news hoping the people will see the truth. You expected him to cause an uprising and created chaos? Be realistic. A true patriot would never do something so irrational. He keeps the people informed and waits for them to make their own decisions.

yeah standing up for the rules can cause the rules to be broken. they already were.

he cucked, bernie cucked. deal with it and move on.

You do realize that there is a deep state that is very much functional? You realize that the people actually have very little power? Bernie sold out and went away. Ron Paul is preaching to this day, and God bless his soul. He was cheated and realized that the elites did not want him in power. Going against this decision would harm the republic more than it would help it.

I do not mean to offend you, but it is rather funny watching a Swedish person using the word "cuck" so frequently.

yeah and ron paul and bernie sold out to them.

so what's your point?

you don't follow sellouts you follow people who fight back.

Hes a liberal faggot.
>inb4 we call dem libertardians

Name one elected politician who is fighting deep state government today.
You see to fail to recognize that actions have consequences. Saying that you were cheated has enormous consequences in the political field. You have effectively undermined your own democracy. There was never any democracy, but what choice do you have but keep the sheep asleep so they do not awake as wolves?

You Scandinavians have some really weird misconceptions about politics. He promoted policies that were anti-war, anti-Isreal, anti-protectionist, anti-paper money. He was against homosexuals and abortion.

What has gotten into you people?

>Name one elected politician who is fighting deep state government today.

Trump

And that is how I know that you are as far from the Truth as possible.

Just met with the Saudis and is continuing to sell them weapons.
Promotes isolationism but wants to increase military spending.
He has still to make an effort to make a connection with Putin to figure out the true situation in Iran, and consequently Yemen.

He is a war mongerer just like Bush and Obama.

Oh, and he is pro-Israel.

Feel free to respond at any time.

Come on Swede.

>deep state own msm
>msm hate trump

easy. trump is not a sell out to deep state.

so now what?

You did not answer a single one of the four points I made.
A pro Israel candidate who sells weapons to the Saudis, and fails to resolve conflict in Yemen, while pointing a finger at Iran and not talking to the Russians in not anti deep state.

Do you even know what I am saying? Its okay if you don't.

no I told you an anti deep state politician. you shifted the goal post.

stop acting retarded please.

He is making Al-Qaeda and the owners of the Gaza Strip richer. How uneducated can you be, Swede?

The deep state sells weapons to Isreal which are bought by the US aid we give them to continue the perpetual conflict killing Syrians.
American people are being robbed.
Syrian women and children are being killed.
Israel continues to make money by closing all other possible oil sources.

How is this not deep state, anti American action wasting the taxpayer's money?
How old are you?

Scandinavia truly is facing troubling times if you represent the electorate.

>18 posts
Man no amount of shilling will get you anywhere
Trump is ourgoy
Deal with this fact you fuck

Liberal faggot? You're an idiot. Ron Paul is the anti-liberal. He wants to give you freedom and lower your taxes. What kind of retarded monkey nigger are you?

>4 answers from the same poster when saying trump isn't deep state

kek stop shilling please. he is obviously not deep state and your candidate mr paul and mr sanders were sell outs. that is all for me.

have a nice night.

Answer any one of the dozen arguments I already made instead of calling me a shill.
I had high hopes for Trump.
No talks with Putin.
More selling of weapons to Saudis.
Pro-Israel.
Will spend more on military while proclaiming he is "isolationist."

These people are horrendous. They call him a liberal not knowing that he was anti homosexual, anti abortion, anti war, and anti Israel. What have we come to?

You still did not answer a single one of my arguments. I want you to come away from this conversation realizing how mislead you are on foreign policy.
I am pro wall by the way.

Weak. Truly weak and sad.

didnt sell weapons
there will be a talk
playing chess
any reasonable man would spend on military right now

>all the worst things about Ron Paul were the good things

He's simply speaking the truth, nothing wrong with that.
The Mossad has no shortage of capable men.

Oh really?

independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-state-department-saudi-arabia-arms-sales-yemen-air-strikes-barack-obama-block-weapons-a7620821.html

Tell me more.

You must a liberal globalist. Makes sense. Say hello to your NeoCon buddies who are helping you for me.

washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-administration-looks-to-resume-saudi-arms-sale-criticized-as-endangering-civilians-in-yemen/2017/03/08/a259090a-040e-11e7-b1e9-a05d3c21f7cf_story.html?utm_term=.46f4ced2ae60

who cares about muslim rebels
really
who
And if obama was the one who blocked it then it was probably for some globalist agenda fuck knows about

>You must a liberal globalist
Nope. Just not a white nationalist bottom feeder who bought into some Paul staffer's newsletter.

I've voted for ron paul twice.

I voted for trump this time around. bc he's like 80% of the way there, and that's a step in the right direction.

White nationalist? What? You and your buddies did not answer a single one of my arguments.

Those weapons will be used to kill innocent women and children in Yemen.

I pray with you for American success.

I hate Obama too, but selling weapons to Saudis and screaming that Iran and Russia are the enemy is wrong. Plain wrong.

I dont know that selling weapons to the sauds is morally wrong. I dont think its economically wrong. but its not right either.

I would rather be selling bombs to the sauds than running drugs, guns and oil through ISIS and afganistan with the CIA.

To be fair, I didn't read most of your arguments. They seamed stupid. Your glorification of isolationism, for one, which Paul wrongly elevated as an ideal. It's a mindset completely divorced from America's role in the modern world and would immediately through it into chaos, for instance. Any who bought into that Paul argument has no conception to the extent how we've become integral to sustaining world peace, having stepped into the role a hundred years ago. If such a policy were even in part pursued with any seriousness this country would find itself in the largest land war since WWII within five years.

>Are there really people on this website who hate Ron Paul? What have we come to?
Sup Forums is just a portal for nomalfag phone posters now and underaged autistic kids that praise kek.

>would immediately throw
>If such a policy were ever

Selling weapons that are used to fight a war against Iran and Russia while killing civilians stranded in a defenseless country is definitely morally wrong.
The CIA involvement in Afghanistan is meant to prevent an Iranian pipeline into Asia.
All of this is to make sure that no other pipelines compete with the monopoly fueled by Turkey, Israel, and Saudi Arabia.
This is why government were over thrown in Libya and Egypt, as they were able to open independent lines to Europe and Asia creating competition.
The war on Syria is also connected to this. Initially a pipeline was meant to run from Iran to Syria, and Turkish and Israeli mercenaries prevented this from happening. America will do everything to prevent Israeli interest in the region.
This gets even sadder if I keep talking.
(9/11)

>role in modern world
>chaos
>world peace

I see you have bought into pro-war propaganda. America has created a lot of that chaos and actually does a great deal to prevent world peace.

Wow. Just wow. I came back after year and a half to quite a sight. You people have gone straight off the rails.

I meant "enforce" Israeli interest. Look out for future bombing of Pakistan so that Iran does not make a Southern pipeline into Asia.

And no one responds...because most of you don't actually read about any of this.

The war between the sauds and the iranians is going to happen regardless, these two are the only two power houses left in the middle east, one sunni one shia.

whether its right to profit off of this I would say is morally dubious, no more no less. I think its not good to make profit off of the deaths of civilians, ill grant you. But to allow Iran to overrun the sauds also puts the region out of balance and would put the remaining sunni civilians in the region in danger as well so long as the buffer state of iraq totally neutered.

I think the best possible option would be to make a treaty with russia to cease arms sales to both nations if it were enforceable, but I'm not sure that it is.

I completely agree with you. A treaty with Russia is the most sensible option. I have to remind you, however, that the Saudis are no more innocent than the Iranians. We have picked the Saudis because they do not threaten our pipeline monopoly. Supporting Iran would mean having a separate pipeline through Afghanistan into Asia, and a second one through Syria and into Europe. this would compete with the existing pipeline tracking through the Cspian and through to the Gaza. Israel makes a lot of money as the middleman and they buy our toys.

Money rules the world.

The Sunni Shia war will always exist. it is not an opportunity for a proxy war, however. It is none of our business. But at the end of the day America is another empire that cares little about innocent lives as long as it makes money for itself and for its allies.
Who knows, maybe AIPAC controls Congress.

>dismiss everything I had to say on an issue without thought, but with buzzwords

>America is the real problem
This too was a shitty part of standing side-by-side with other Paul supporters, this regurgitation of a leftist instilled knee-jerk reaction to shit on your own country as first resort. It's done by having a stark lack of awareness to how the world works in terms of geopolitics (all encompassing of economics, military strategy, the aspirations of everyone from petty thugs to world powers among a myriad of other things), with a singularly myopic perceptive on either recent history or a longer span of time, no less than our part in it, and is backed by ill-thought our idealisms that can have no real-world tests; because no serious person would ever go there. Just candidates who are after all--unbeknownst even to many who do support them--are fringe candidates only running to promote a few core ideas.

>I have to remind you, however, that the Saudis are no more innocent than the Iranians.
no argument from me

>We have picked the Saudis because they do not threaten our pipeline monopoly
that and they play ball. ever since the overthrow of the shah (((((ourguy))))) iran has been in the doghouse.

>Who knows, maybe AIPAC controls Congress.
noooo waaaaay they would give money to congress :^)

The hit piece Bill O'Reilly of FOX did on Ron Paul during the 2008 Republican primaries is what opened my eyes that all the MSM are trash.

Not a single argument.

Learn from this guy: All that talk and nothing substantial. Truly a shame. You have learned how to spout nonsense in order to compensate for your lack of knowledge. How sad.

I am glad that guys like you are still around man. It has become a rarity to find people who actually know anything about the Middle East.

I hope Trump establishes a connection and turns a cold shoulder to Israel. As unlikely as this is, I pray. I pray for American success.

God bless.

Like I gathered, and said. Your arguments seemed stupid, just as is your reaction to one.

You never made an argument.
All you have been doing is calling me names.
Feel free to read one of the many paragraphs I already wrote and respond.
You have not done this and I do not understand what you want me to respond to.

Riley really was a prick in that interview.

"We don't need a history lesson."

But Bill, you have no clue what's actually going on in that region. All that anti-Israel rhetoric got Ron back in the end. Sucks.

You put in a whole 1min and 30sec to both read my and write up a response to it. Given this, I don't see any value to continuing with one who seems to think himself in charge of other people's arguments.

>On Jews
>Proceeds to talk about people working with the Israeli government
Nice try ADL in trying to paint people against the bullshit Israel does as anti-Semitic
> Your glorification of isolationism,
Then you clearly don't understand Paul's position which is quite the opposite of isolationism and protip regardless of the neocon propaganda you're spewing with
> 's a mindset completely divorced from America's role in the modern world and would immediately through it into chaos, for instance
Being pro intervention is diametrically opposed to everything America stands for and these actions are why the places in the world with the most chaos are almost exclusively where we unconstitutionally intervened.

He's right you know.

>is backed by ill-thought our idealisms that can have no real-world tests; because no serious person would ever go there.

I wont argue that libertarianism is an unattainable idealism. But it has been attempted, liberal democracy, the whole west is based on liberal / libertarian principals. The goal of any liberal / libertarian philosophy in practice is to come as close to individual freedom and self determination as possible without sacrificing the structure and integrity of the nation state or the individual liberty / self determination of other people.

This is the city on a hill. The ideal. The problem with the west is that we gave up any attempts at trying to be the city on the hill. We dont even try any more. We just accept the shit and consider it could be worse in defeat.

I miss ron paul.

>> Your glorification of isolationism,
>Then you clearly don't understand Paul's position which is quite the opposite of isolationism and protip regardless of the neocon propaganda you're spewing with
>> 's a mindset completely divorced from America's role in the modern world and would immediately through it into chaos, for instance
>Being pro intervention is diametrically opposed to everything America stands for and these actions are why the places in the world with the most chaos are almost exclusively where we unconstitutionally intervened.
For

Not sure who you are talking to.
Did you mean this?

He hasn't gone anywhere he's still very active
m.youtube.com/watch?v=ecjUsREKMuI

I feel like there is a clear difference between liberalism and conservative libertarianism.

Very sad how right he is at times.

Same.

I listen to the LibertyReport every day. God bless this man.

I would say modern libertarian scholars/authors/philosophers are an augmentation to liberalism, but libertarianism is definitely rooted in liberalism (john locke)

Me too. I'm the autist spamming frog emojis in his live chat.

To be fair, your only argument against Ron Paul's isolationism was that the US would "find itself in the largest land war since WWII within five years," which is doom saying nonsense that you didn't even bother to back up. The fact is that the US taxes wealth from its own citizens to play global police and interferes in foreign politics where it has no business being in, and more often than not makes things worse.

Another thing I don't get is how you said Ron Paul's anti-protectionism was one of the worst things about him but then praise the US' interventionist foreign policy.

Ayy. I'm glad.

I feel like the definition of liberalism has changed. Its disturbing how the socialist and globalist undertones are slowly rising among liberal youth. Ron was anti homosexual and anti abortion. He was not liberal in the modern sense.
He was a conservative libertarian, and what I consider to be the last fiscal conservative in public politics.

This guy has been fighting hell in Australia to try and get across the extent of Israeli spying against both governments and even more so corporate espionage. The later being the main reason Israeli companies stay competitive on the world stage instead of innovating they use state backed corporate espionage to steal ideas
youtu.be/wlc_uBVlonA

Answer:
Go ahead.

Right libertarian and Hoppe generals are fairly regular recently. But yeah it seems lots of newfags came for this alt-right shtick. More people to redpill, I guess.

I don't see anyone preaching Ron Paul's ideology besides "happening" threads using his picture once in a while. We forgot 2008 big time. The summer is only coming around now.

The goal of most who advocate for libertarian philosophy in practice has been either to hold to an ideal which no longer resonates with the average American voter for as long as the left's culture has propagandized against classical liberal thought, or if ever they're awarded with some political office to compromise away those ideals at the slightest push back to them. I won't argue against your definition of the west's problem (more to the point, our American problem, for it's more our tradition than it is Europe's in the main; they only inherited our concepts of liberal democracy by virtue of being on the losing end of several wars and its people had never internalized it to begin with such to be knowledgeable enough to defend it), the people were not vigilant enough to resist the call to power.

>I feel like the definition of liberalism has changed

youre not wrong. the connotation of liberalism has changed.

but if you want to talk about the fundamentals of liberal democracy or western democracy, you have to talk about adam smith and locke et al, in context this is liberalism.

I intentionally try to never identify collectivists as liberal. They are leftists socialists marxists or simply collectivists. People who believe in the supremacy of the state or the collective over the individual. Liberalism and the left are diametrically opposed in this way.

He also asserted that Paul's ideas would lead to (undefined)chaos but Paul has been warning of the exact situation we're in due to the insane neocon foreign policy for around 30 years minimum and predicting events that would result from this insane foreign policy with great accuracy.
If anything Ron's understanding of foreign policy is his strongest trait in regards to raw political understanding in practical terms. The reason he's so hated by neocons is because they know he'd right but they have completely different goals than what they advertise as the reason for their policies
youtu.be/D6qzzYOIU2g

Libertarianism, much like socialism is only capable of existing properly in an isolated, homogenous state.

Libertarians are retarded if they think at some point their guns will magicly solve political oppression. You have to VOTE the direction you want things when THERE ALREADY IS TOO MUCH GOVERNMENT.

The Democrats were wrenching all of your rights away (apart from drug related) and yet there were libertarians annoyed people went to the "right" (an alternative one at that)

You are a bunch of stoners not proactive enough.

>hey only inherited our concepts of liberal democracy by virtue of being on the losing end of several wars
I'll agree with the exceptions of france and england.

Its arguable that england was the first liberal democracy, although they lagged behind the US after the revolution. France paid for their democracy with their own revolution, although somewhat different from the anglo definition, its similar and they own it completely.

I completely agree. It saddens me that the word has been corrupted, Lock and Smith will turn in their graves the day American elects a politician who ran as a socialist, globalist, collectivist. It is scary how close Bernie and Clinton were to these titles, however.

Having him as president would mean turning the cold shoulder to Israel and allowing the Middle East to figure out their own problems, while spending all that money at home. This would be simply unacceptable for AIPAC lobbyists and the same shadow government mentioned by our NeoCon friends earlier in this thread. Ron spoke too much which was truth. This was his flaw.

The fuck you talking about lad? Ron never sold out to help Rand, they even had a little political falling out when Rand started courting the Tea Party back in 2010. The one thing Dr No has is principles and I don't think their is a person alive he'd break them for.

Aren't isolated, homogeneous states good?

Wow. Just wow.
Pretty sure nothing was said about guns solving problems. Ron Paul only raised 41 million compared to Romney's 700. He was never supported by those who truly decide who steps in power.

Any respect I had for European democracy was thrown away with the formation of the European Union, a formal coup meant to make countries hand their rights to supranational forces (taking them away from their people).

>The swede is calling Ron Paul a cuck

you're not wrong.

see

You cucks are just jealous of our post scarcity libertarian society.

>Then you clearly don't understand Paul's position
My argument with with user rather than Paul, but putting that aside Paul does trend too far into the old mindset of the isolationist Republican legacy; that which held sway when Republicanism was decidedly on the outs politically for as much as it failed to represent the larger whole of the people.
>oh yeah, well you're just a neocon
Not helpful. And not particularly mindful that safety of the world's trade--that which in the main sustains the larger peace--has been the driving principle to America's interventionalism these past one-hundred years, and that to retract from this role without first seeing to that trade's safety would be to invite instability. But who are you willing to hand that role off to?
>Being pro intervention is diametrically opposed to everything America stands for
You wish. I may wish too, but you don't know your own people.
>and these actions are why the places in the world with the most chaos are almost exclusively where we unconstitutionally intervened.
Constitutional intervention is one issue, and from where the world's instability might arise in the absence of America "keeping the peace" is a completely different one.

Look, I may not want it as a matter of principle either, but the world is the world. Pull the seventh fleet out of the Pacific and then you'll see just how quickly that China gets to decide how the world's destiny goes.

>filename
>venus project
>check map
>kek