[Rushtalk] George Will on Why Ron Paul is Right About Foreign Policy and RINO Mitt Romney is Wrong

Stephen A. Frye s.frye at verizon.net
Sat Aug 22 19:04:37 MDT 2015


I don’t disagree – usually.  No, likely we shouldn’t just back.  Nor should we just wage war against anyone and everyone who might disagree with us.  There is some balance.  I think we should strive to strike that balance.  The operative word is “strive”.  I also hope for wisdom.  Probably way too much to ask.  Maybe even idealistic,  but I do hope.

 

From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On Behalf Of Tom Matiska
Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2015 5:28 PM
To: Rushtalk Discussion List
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] George Will on Why Ron Paul is Right About Foreign Policy and RINO Mitt Romney is Wrong

 

Or should we sit back and let Iran, ISIS, North Korea, etc....  be the "wise judges"??   We internalize too much about what "we" should do.  Anything we do is wrong to some degree, including doing nothing.   Tom 

 

 

On Saturday, August 22, 2015 6:18 PM, Stephen A. Frye <s.frye at verizon.net> wrote:

 

Silly was quite sarcastic.  My point is that what I think is silly is when people say one can’t put a value on human life.  We do it all the time.  We assign relative value to different lives all of the time.

 

And I like (no sarcasm) your statement of “sometimes” necessary.  My question from that would be “are we wise judges of what is necessary?”  I don’t know.

 

But again, this is WAY off point.  But then it helps me make my original point:  look at all of the words here written to justify killing, yet not a word written about maybe bettering life.  My whole original point.

 

From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Putnam
Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2015 12:06 PM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] George Will on Why Ron Paul is Right About Foreign Policy and RINO Mitt Romney is Wrong

 

I can answer that with an example. My life and those of other Americans are worth more than the entire population of Imperial Japan. I would likely not be here today if it were not for Hiroshima and Nagasaki. My father was in the Philippines training for the Japanese invasion. That may sound arrogant but tough, they should not have attacked Perl Harbor. Life is hard, war is hell and SOMETIMES (note the emphasis, so I am not accused of "always") necessary. Nothing "silly" about that at all.

On 8/22/2015 1:24 PM, Stephen A. Frye wrote:

At what cost?  And people say a human life has no dollar value.  How silly.

 

From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On Behalf Of Steven Laib
Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2015 10:02 AM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] George Will on Why Ron Paul is Right About Foreign Policy and RINO Mitt Romney is Wrong

 

There is also the question of whose lives we are interested in preserving and bettering, and at what cost. 
Sometimes there is no choice in the matter.  

SDL

On 8/22/15 11:29 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:

This is completely different than how I interpreted your earlier replies. Being sometimes dense, please provide a recent example where the US, as a people, put more emphasis on killing than preserving or bettering life. I'm also not sure what you mean my "more emphasis."

On 8/22/2015 12:20 PM, Stephen A. Frye wrote:

I tend to agree.  But it also begs the question “Is anticipation enough?”  I sometimes think we seek way more than just anticipation.

 

But this is not a discussion I “anticipated”.  I will not argue pre-emption or anything that resembles it.  My original point, and I believe it strongly, is that we, as a people (maybe even as a species), put far more emphasis on killing each other – and “we” includes us Americans,  than on preserving – and even bettering – the life we claim to value.

 

From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On Behalf Of Steven Laib
Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2015 7:54 AM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] George Will on Why Ron Paul is Right About Foreign Policy and RINO Mitt Romney is Wrong

 

That smacks of the old Chinese observation that Revenge Never Ends. 
But that may well be human nature.  Douglas Adams said that human relations can be summed up in Retribution, Anticipation and Diplomacy. 
Still, on has to consider that survival has a price. If your society wishes to survive, Anticipation may be the only reasonable course of action. 

SDL




On 8/22/15 9:35 AM, Stephen A. Frye wrote:

Sorry, won’t bite.  One example (or even several) does not extrapolate to “it’s always right”, any more than abuse or misuse of a benefit or gift by some extrapolates to “it’s all wrong”.  And I will step out on a limb here – vowing to kill us does not justify killing them in advance.  That would never end.  I simply don’t agree with the all or nothing philosophies.

 

From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Putnam
Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2015 5:38 AM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] George Will on Why Ron Paul is Right About Foreign Policy and RINO Mitt Romney is Wrong

 

Hmm. A country that has vowed to kill us all is called a "stretch" when I use the term self-defense. You reinforce my assertion of convoluted logic.

On 8/20/2015 6:04 PM, Stephen A. Frye wrote:

We rationalize a lot with the stretch of “self defense”.  And yes, I choose the word ”stretch” both carefully and deliberately.  I won’t go there.  It’s an argument neither of us can win.  And again, the question manifests the philosophy of all or nothing.  I believe that such a view is an error.

 

From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Putnam
Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2015 2:48 PM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] George Will on Why Ron Paul is Right About Foreign Policy and RINO Mitt Romney is Wrong

 

Convoluted logic at best. You seem to be making a moral equivalency between self defense and acts of murder. Where are we showing willingness to kill other than in self defense?

On 8/20/2015 5:20 PM, Stephen A. Frye wrote:

I agree with the underlying principle of your post.  At the same time, I question our willingness – and even lust – to spend money to take life, but balk at spending to save it or better it.  We’re an odd species.  We fight very hard for our right to kill each other.

 

From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On Behalf Of Steven Laib
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 5:54 AM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] George Will on Why Ron Paul is Right About Foreign Policy and RINO Mitt Romney is Wrong

 

The problem is that if we weren't spending horrendous amounts of money on social welfare then the budget would not be anywhere near as troubled by the military spending. 
IMO, Military spending is constitutionally mandated.  Social welfare is not and may not even be permitted.  

Just my two cents. 

SDL

On 8/17/15 11:00 PM, Carl Spitzer wrote:


  
George Will on Why Ron Paul is Right About Foreign Policy and Mitt Romney is Wrong
Writes George Will:

Few things so embitter a nation as squandered valor, hence Americans, with much valor spent there, want Iraq to master its fissures. But with America in the second decade of its longest war, the probable Republican nominee is promising to extend it indefinitely.

Mitt Romney opposes negotiations with the Taliban while they “are killing our soldiers.” Which means: No negotiations until the war ends, when there will be nothing about which to negotiate…

The U.S. defense budget is about 43% of the world’s total military spending ­ more than the combined defense spending of the next 17 nations, many of which are U.S. allies. Are Republicans really going to warn voters that America will be imperiled if the defense budget is cut 8% from projections over the next decade? In 2017, defense spending would still be more than that of the next 10 countries.

Do Republicans think it is premature to withdraw up to 7,000 troops from Europe two decades after the Soviet Union’s death? About 73,000 will remain, most of them in prosperous, pacific, largely unarmed and utterly unthreatened Germany. Why do so many remain?

Since 2001, the United States has waged war in three nations, and some Republicans appear ready to bring the total to five, adding Iran and Syria. (The Weekly Standard, of neoconservative bent, regrets that Obama “is reluctant to intervene to oust Iran’s closest ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.”) GOP critics say Obama’s proposed defense cuts will limit America’s ability to engage in troop-intensive nation-building. Most Americans probably say: Good…

Romney says: “It is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon…” (Leon) Panetta says Iran acquiring nuclear weapons is “unacceptable” and “a red line for us” and if “we get intelligence that they are proceeding with developing a nuclear weapon, then we will take whatever steps necessary to stop it.”

What, then, is the difference between Romney and Obama regarding Iran?

Osama bin Laden and many other “high-value targets” are dead, the drone war is being waged more vigorously than ever, and Guantanamo is still open, so Republicans can hardly say Obama has implemented dramatic and dangerous discontinuities regarding counterterrorism. Obama says that even with his proposed cuts, the defense budget would increase at about the rate of inflation through the next decade.

Republicans who think America is being endangered by “appeasement” and military parsimony have worked that pedal on their organ quite enough.













_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

 









_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

 








_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

 







_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

 






_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk







_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

 





_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

 

 

_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20150822/6fc44660/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the Rushtalk mailing list