Justin Amash votes to condemn Russia for its incursion into Ukraine

Well about 20 RPF members just proved themselves to be interventionists in a recent poll...so far only about 4 of us voted no for non-interventionism

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...you-risk-your-life-to-save-an-Obama-supporter

Please keep that malarkey out of this topic if you would.

And I'm actually with LE on this one, despite the fact that I admittedly am not always in 100% agreement with her. Look, I will criticize anyone, even Ron Paul, if they do something I don't like, but I will still support them unless they completely betray everything they believe in.

Amash is still solid in my book. Rand is similar to him on foreign policy and plenty of you support him, so don't be rash and bash Amash if you think Rand is cash. Nothing wrong with criticizing, as I said, but to say you won't support them at all because of something minor in the grand scheme of things like this seems silly to me.
 
I think I lost brain cells reading this post.

The fact that there is even a debate as to Justin Amashs' purity is ridiculous. That people are questioning his actions and saying they won't donate to him is absurd.

This is the exact mentality of the movement that has lead to minimal gains. If you're looking for people who exactly mimic all of your opinions and thoughts, run for office yourself.

Amash has consistently been the strongest voice on both the Congressional and national stage for our thoughts and ideas. This is a nonbinding resolution. It does nothing.

By voting for it, it doesn't mean he agrees with everything in the bill. Do you guys understand how many bills are passed through Congress with random little things in it? Should a bill be voted against if you disagree with 1% of it?

This bill does nothing. He is expressing that he feels its wrong for Russia to invade Ukraine. He hasn't come out and said the US should go invade Russia.

I honestly find it disheartening that so many of you are so critical of one of the only people in Congress who supports the libertarian ideas.

It's not like Massie is perfect. He's had his flaws. Get over them.

I rarely even come on here anymore, even to read posts, just because of the constant negative attitude of everyone here. The only reason I find myself posting anymore is to defend attacks on people like Amash, or Rand or Lee, who are the biggest supporters of our ideals, but find themselves consistently bombarded here with negativity, not to mention in the media or by establishment and democrats.

If Amash can't receive support here, where can he get it?

Rarely is a vote by someone praised. Rarely does anyone point out the hundreds of good votes that Amash has made. Only the one bad vote.

The fact that someone else, perhaps Bentivolio for instance, may align with us on far more issues than someone like McCain is absolutely useless to the people here, as he doesn't align with us on every single one.

This place has several very delusional posters. Aside from their insanity, it isn't that bad of a place. Best to just ignore or mock them, rather than take them seriously.
 
This place has several very delusional posters. Aside from their insanity, it isn't that bad of a place. Best to just ignore or mock them, rather than take them seriously.

You could mock them, but I find it better to discuss it with them instead and try to get them to come around. After all, the people on this forum are the closest to me politically, it would be better and more beneficial to try and change some of their ways than condemn them fully to the pits of mockery.
 
Sanctions don't afford us that right. They violate the corresponding right that we have to trade with people there.

If you don't believe in doing trade with the people of some other country, then don't. If you think I should join you in your boycott, then persuade me to do so voluntarily.
As long as there are countries that is the way it will be. When everybody entirely quits using country names and country borders are only in history books then and only then will just the individuals get the right to only trade with other individuals world wide.
If in this future world you are knowingly selling ammo to the man shooting at me I will reserve the right to target you as well as the man shooting.
 
Last edited:
What if the in road is a Dead End, in a really bad neighborhood?

Oh it is, he'll have to turn back at some point.. but hopefully he will bring some people back with him who also got tricked into going down that road.

sp_0514_11_v6.jpg
 
Last edited:
He's done this in the past - vote for bills that have no actions associated with them, even though he disagrees with the content. He views them as throw-away bills that help him politically. He has voted correctly enough to gain my trust. I have no doubt about his sincerity and integrity.

Edit:

and from the other thread on this page about providing loan guarantees to Ukraine - http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2014/roll114.xml He voted no.

I sure hope you're right.
 
As long as there are countries that is the way it will be. When everybody entirely quits using country names and country borders are only in history books then and only then will just the individuals get the right to only trade with other individuals world wide.
If in this future world you are knowingly selling ammo to the man shooting at me I will reserve the right to target you as well as the man shooting.

"As long as there are countries" logic can justify anything the state does.
 
Last edited:
As long as there are countries that is the way it will be. When everybody entirely quits using country names and country borders are only in history books then and only then will just the individuals get the right to only trade with other individuals world wide.
If in this future world you are knowingly selling ammo to the man shooting at me I will reserve the right to target you as well as the man shooting.

Afterwards too. World government will offer everything BUT free trading, or free anything for that matter. "Free" tyranny, maybe.
 
Good for Amash. As far as Japan, damn right we had the right to NOT supply the Japanese war machine raping Nanking.

By "we" you mean the US government had the right to prevent private citizens from trading with foreigners?
 
And why should "Government A" punish the people living under "Government B" when it's "Government B" who is responsible for committing atrocities?

The U.S. did not stop food, medicine or anything else that would mostly effect "the people" from going into Japan. The U.S. government cut off steel, iron and oil exports to Japan in 1940, things that Japan needed to continue committing aggressive atrocities. If you think doing that was unacceptable, then I ask: would you have any qualms about private arms shipments to Germany in 1940 as well?
 
Last edited:
The U.S. did not stop food, medicine or anything else that would mostly effect "the people" from going into Japan. The U.S. government cut off steel, iron and oil exports to Japan in 1940, things that Japan needed to continue committing aggressive atrocities. If you think doing that was unacceptable, then I ask: would you have any qualms about private arms shipments to Germany in 1940 as well?

Yes, that was unacceptable for both Japan and Germany.
 
The U.S. did not stop food, medicine or anything else that would mostly effect "the people" from going into Japan. The U.S. government cut off steel, iron and oil exports to Japan in 1940, things that Japan needed to continue committing aggressive atrocities. If you think doing that was unacceptable, then I ask: would you have any qualms about private arms shipments to Germany in 1940 as well?

If you don't want to trade with them, don't trade. Don't threaten to imprison others who do.

And I'm curious, do you think the US should have taken war refuges and persecuted minorities like the Jews in as immigrants, or do you think keeping them out or sending them back to Germany was the right thing to do?
 
No you didn't. Show me where Amash voted to send money to Ukraine. This vote was a non-binding resolution. I already linked a vote where Amash voted against giving money to Ukraine. http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2014/roll114.xml

Go back and read the quote of exactly what I said to which you replied asking me to show you.

I agreed that he didn't vote to send money to Ukraine, only that he voted for a resolution calling for doing so.
 
Russia invaded another country without reason. If I were you, I would be criticizing the seven nay votes. This is not an interventionist vs non-interventionist issue. It's not like Amash voted to send money or weapons to Ukraine. Good job, Justin.

Russia invaded another country without reason.
Like the same way America took Kosovo without reason, and bombed it afterwards and placed radicals and mafia to run it like a client state or more rather look at the fine job your American Gov did in Iraq and Libya both are left in Ruins.
 
NO. They did not.
That is the propaganda angle from the folks that engineered the violent overthrow of the Government of Ukraine.

Russia had bases and assets in Crimea. They have good cause to secure those assets. And they were also invited by the locals WHO WERE RIGHTFULLY CONCERNED WITH THE ANTI-RUSSIAN HOSTILES THAT THAT TAKEN OVER UKRAINE.
The people of Crimea will vote on the matter,, but no shots have been fired.. No Hostilities. Russia is providing security for their own assets and against the threat of the Fascists that have taken over.

Sorry,, but my observation is that Russia is doing the right thing here.

I believe that this was targeted at Russia in retaliation for it's diplomacy in preventing escalation in Syria. And for negotiating a deal with Iran.

I agree with you 100% ... When Putin upstaged that fool in the White House in the matter of Syria, it was game on. Somehow that idiot in the White House has to save face with the help of the robot, once known as John Kerry.
 
Go back and read the quote of exactly what I said to which you replied asking me to show you.

I agreed that he didn't vote to send money to Ukraine, only that he voted for a resolution calling for doing so.

Sometimes these guys have to do, what they have to do ... Until we see the bigger picture of what they may be working on ... He's worth 5000 of 1 John Boehner, and worth 5000 of Mitch McConnell, and 5000 of John McCain, 1000000 of Obama ...

So, don't sink his ship. We have no idea of what his strategy may be behind this vote. I'm certain it is not sinister, as the majority of the Congress.
 
Not my company, none of my business.

I'm with this to an extent, but there are places for protesting and boycotting when it comes to this.

If a company is doing something you don't like, convince others to boycott or hold protests to spread the word and put pressure on the company to stop its behavior.

That's how it's done in a free market, not by Government force.
 
I'm with this to an extent, but there are places for protesting and boycotting when it comes to this.

If a company is doing something you don't like, convince others to boycott or hold protests to spread the word and put pressure on the company to stop its behavior.

That's how it's done in a free market, not by Government force.

Oh I agree. I should have been more clear when I said that it was none of my business. I don't have to like their business practices and I can try to steer others away from doing business with them (without using force) but at the end of the day, the government does not possess the right to restrict trade because they don't like one group of people but yet will turn the other cheek when another group they're allied with pulls the same shit they're complaining about in the first place.
 
Back
Top