Ron Paul Wins Straw Poll; Cain 2nd

[Odysseus]

The word nation means something different than country or state. It implies homogeneity, which means the external threats are not to our well being but to an ethnic American identity. Not so much defend America, but defend Americanism--something nobody has been able to compellingly prove exists.

This has a number of faults in logic.

The word nation means something different than country or state.

Actually, country, state and nation are three separate things. A country is a geographic area, a state is the governing institutions and the nation is the combination of country, state, culture and a host of other unifying elements. Thus, France is a country, a state and a culture. Jordan, however, is a country and state, but not a nation. Saudi Arabia is a family masquerading as a state.

It implies homogeneity, which means the external threats are not to our well being but to an ethnic American identity.

No, a nation implies unity, not homogeneity. This is why the de facto national motto until 1956 was "e pluribus unum", from many, one. The original idea was that out of many colonies or states, we produced a single nation, but it also applied to the many peoples, races, religions and ancestries that have come into America to form a single people and nation. I realize that this is anathema to the left, but that doesn't make it any less true.

Not so much defend America, but defend Americanism--something nobody has been able to compellingly prove exists.

False, again. We had this discussion a while ago, when you claimed that there was no such thing as a distinct American culture. You were proven wrong in great detail. There is an American nation, one which has been formed out of many other peoples, races, cultures and whatever other divisions you care to name, but we are one nation, despite the efforts to Balkanize America through identity politics and the ethnic grievance mongering that the left uses to divide us in the hopes of conquering us.

[Powerlifter181]

WARNING Will Robinson WARNING....Ronulan spotted....WARNING Will Robinson WARNING

Come on that's immature. I prefer Ron Paul but I don't blindly hate the other candidates or believe his form of conservatism is the only valid form. I'm open to the idea of a Perry or a Cain presidency. I just believe I'm entitled to the product of my own labor and have the right to live my life any way I choose so long as I don't directly harm or violate the liberty of another human being and unfortunately Paul is the only candidate on stage right now standing for that. Personally, I wish Milton Friedman was still alive to run for president.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrgckWNgNgE

[malloc]

Powerlifter,

Some of the guys here are anti-Ron just because they really don't like the guy or his supporters, you aren't going to change their minds. Their ideas about his positions and the potential benefit a Ron Paul platform could bring to this nation never even enters into the equation for these guys.

For those those who disagree about the "10%" of Ron's platform, which basically equates to foreign policy you are only about half right. If we were to implement Ron's foreign and military policies tomorrow, do you honestly believe the United States would cease to exist as a nation? Will the jihadi's show up on our shores in transports, with paratroopers and landing craft? Will Muslim tanks pull down our statue of Abraham Lincoln? Do you really believe the United States, the nation who soundly defeated Hitler and Hirohito simultaneously, needs to outspend radical Islamic elements by 10,000,000:1, and everyone else in the world by at least 10:1 in order to stay on top? Do you think that this ratio of spending makes us safer, like maybe if we spend $1,000,000 per jihadi the problem will go away? I'd like to think our military and ingenuity is well above and beyond throwing money and bodies at the problem, and that we can come up with a better solution with a smaller footprint and more decisive action. However, apparently I'm wrong in thinking that because not a single one of my children have seen a peacetime U.S. military, victorious against Radical Islam, in their lifetime. These are the points you need to think about, and fully explore the consequences before you just decide to go with the rhetoric. These insurgents and jihadis have less 5 percent the combat effectiveness of an 0121 (Admin Clerk) Marine, yet 10 years later we are still hunting them?

Ron's idea to implement a more elite and capable military with a smaller global footprint capable of striking our enemy quickly and decisively without all the political nation building/occupational bullshit is exactly the change in direction we need to get this job done. It's not good enough to spend trillions occupying Afghanistan while our enemies hide in Pakistan and Yemen and nobody does a damn thing about it. We wouldn't need to occupy Afghanistan to keep the Taliban from coming back if the Taliban was feeding vultures in Pakistan. If we had the military and political capability to hit them where they are, and hit them ruthlessly, like we were actually fighting a war, without leaving a resource draining, permanent colony for generations for come, I'm pretty damn sure we'd be a much safer America today.

You guys who believe the U.S. should be the world's policeman, which is basically what you argue for, go on and on about the intentions of radicalized Islam without ever comparing their intentions to their capabilities. Then, there's the industrial logistics angle, with Ron Paul's sharp free-market economics, we would have a strong economy, with an actual industrial and energy base within the U.S., not outsourced overseas. This industrial base would allow our military to go from the proposed, small-footprint elite force it would be, to a war machine behemoth overnight if it were ever needed. Right now, the U.S. would have the capability to ramp up and engage in a WWII-esque land war in Europe. We don't have the money in the bank. A peacetime, garrisoned military should be strong enough to defend the nation from invasion for long enough for the industrial war machine to come to the relief. They should also be advancing the profession of warfare when not in use for defense.

Honestly, I just don't see how you guys who are in, or have been in the military, don't see the benefits of this kind of thinking, it harkens to maneuver over attrition.

[NJCardFan]

Every day on this forum

I listen to Rush Limbaugh and watch Fox News, so I see the repetition.

I don't so how am I "marching lockstep" and parroting anything? You're correlation fails.

[NJCardFan]

Not so much defend America, but defend Americanism--something nobody has been able to compellingly prove exists.

See, this points out the stupidity of KS, wee wee, and their ilk. What makes America so great is that we've taken the best the world can give and made it our own. You want Americana? It's a summer barbecue with friends and family. It's the Super Bowl, March Madness, and the Daytona 500. It's Christmas, Hanukkah, and Ramadan(try celebrating the former 2 in an Arab country). It's summer nights at the Jersey shore. It's an autumn morning in New Hampshire. It's a snowy day in Iowa or a rainy night in Georgia. It's Little League and Pop Warner and Mini Wrestling. Hell, it's baseball, hotdogs, apple pie, and Chevrolet. In short, if you don't think there is an American culture then the truth is, you don't want there to be one so you make yourself blind to it.