Korean Job Discussion Forums

[fiveeagles]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWfIhFhelm8

The more I learn about this guy the more impressed I become.

Edit
I have learned more about Ron Paul and he shouldn't be elected! I still believe he has a great message, but I don't believe he would be capable for such an office. Especially with such crazy people supporting him, who knows what he might be convinced to do.

[Gopher]

I am a registered Republican and I have no intention of voting for him in the primaries -- assuming he remains in the primaries when my state holds them.

[Tiger Beer]

I'm huge on Ron Paul as well. I could rally behind this guy. There is a portion of Republicans that would be into this as well. He speaks of Republican history as being non-interventionist. I love it. I'm not a Republican, but I would seriously consider changing parties to get a guy like this in office.

[ontheway]

The crazy interventionists (and there is really no other word for people who believe in the failed concept of interventionism) have created ALL the world's international problems: totalitarian governments currently in existence, wars, conflicts, terrorism - can all be traced to the failed interventionist policies of major powers throughout history. Of course, interventionists are long on actions, but fail completely to take into account the reactions. It is beyond their mental capacity.

Ron Paul has recognized this and fought for non-interventionism for all of the 30 years that I've known him.

He is a great guy personally, and he will be a great president.

[Kuros]

[Tiger Beer]

Even rightwing conservative nut TUCKER who blasts anyone and everyone who is against BUSH is giving a huge ear to RON PAUL!

Incredible to see this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybpOXGYGjXU&mode=related&search=

Tucker is adoring this guy! Incredible.

[Harpeau]

Yup. I like Ron Paul. I hope he gets "put" into office.

[cbclark4]

I like Ron but, Paul makes me sick.

cbc

[ontheway]

WWII is the typical interventionist red herring. Of course a country hat the right to self defense when it is attacked. That is self defense, it is not interventionism.

Everything the US did after WWII is interventionism.

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

The Soviet Union was out to destroy the US.

were it not for US interventionism no one here would be working in Korea

[ontheway]

US interventionism made the USSR stronger. It gave them an evil enemy to oppose. Every time the US intervened, then and still today, it left the world with no hero, no one to respect, no one to follow. It gave the world one more country to hate. It left a moral vacuum in the world.

Worse. The world had grown, prior to and shortly after WWII, to respect America and what it stood for. Interventionism not only ended that respect, it not only made enemies for the US (blowback in CIA bureacratise), it created a feeling of disgust and hatred for the US that exceeded that felt about other countries.

This feeling comes from the abandonment and betrayal of the moral principles that America was founded on. When the other weak, evil or useless countries of the world violate the principles of liberty, there is much less anger and blowback. This is because the people of the world expect no better from them. Who expects great things from Albania or Zimbabwe, or any country between. But, people in every country of the world expect America's lamp to shine the light of liberty around the world. They do not want American troops, bombs or intervention. The want America to lead by example. When America fails, the feelings of betrayal, abandonment, and disillusionment lead to anger and blowback of immense proportions.

The interventionists are all too arrogant and stupid to understand the concept that actions lead