A few good talking points to get thru to Repub. Neocons:
1. The republicans hate welfare/socialism and so do libertarians like me. Why is there a disconnect when it comes to "Military Welfare a socialist policy" my new term when describing our overseas military industrial complex.
Why are we spending trillions to defend Europe, Asia, and the Middle East? Don't they have their own money? The only reason they don't build their own defense is because they know that we will do it for them using our hard earned capital and blood. Its like people not getting a job or working because someone else will pay.
This is great logic to get thru to your local neocon friends and works for me every time. You need to phrase this a "Welfare". It really is very similar in that the Government takes money from the public for some designated reason to help “others”. To make it worse it’s the “others” are not even in our country.
2. If this still does not get them, then the next best option would be that if we defend other countries because they need us, we should at least get paid for it! I propose they pay say $200,000 per infantry a year + expenses + equipment and transportation costs. Let us see how quick they want us to defend them then? And if that happens we will be exporting military goods helping our trade deficit. Instead of spending capital, we will bring wealth in. And we will not be blamed as much for issues because we just supply the goods and are not the perpetrators.
3. If they still think we need it because the other countries can’t afford their own Military. The next talking point is “How safe will the world be if we need to precipitously leave the military posts because we are BROKE! It would be a disaster. Its better to wind down slowly, this is Ron Paul’s policy.”
Just trying to get some of my talking points that actually converted many neocon friends of mine to understand and sooner the people realize this, the more Ron will get support.
1. The republicans hate welfare/socialism and so do libertarians like me. Why is there a disconnect when it comes to "Military Welfare a socialist policy" my new term when describing our overseas military industrial complex.
Why are we spending trillions to defend Europe, Asia, and the Middle East? Don't they have their own money? The only reason they don't build their own defense is because they know that we will do it for them using our hard earned capital and blood. Its like people not getting a job or working because someone else will pay.
This is great logic to get thru to your local neocon friends and works for me every time. You need to phrase this a "Welfare". It really is very similar in that the Government takes money from the public for some designated reason to help “others”. To make it worse it’s the “others” are not even in our country.
2. If this still does not get them, then the next best option would be that if we defend other countries because they need us, we should at least get paid for it! I propose they pay say $200,000 per infantry a year + expenses + equipment and transportation costs. Let us see how quick they want us to defend them then? And if that happens we will be exporting military goods helping our trade deficit. Instead of spending capital, we will bring wealth in. And we will not be blamed as much for issues because we just supply the goods and are not the perpetrators.
3. If they still think we need it because the other countries can’t afford their own Military. The next talking point is “How safe will the world be if we need to precipitously leave the military posts because we are BROKE! It would be a disaster. Its better to wind down slowly, this is Ron Paul’s policy.”
Just trying to get some of my talking points that actually converted many neocon friends of mine to understand and sooner the people realize this, the more Ron will get support.
Last edited:
