Senate to vote on Iran resolution on Wednesday

[Christian Liberty]

I know FF asked awhile ago, but no, I wouldn't have voted for Santorum. I would have written in Ron Paul.

OK, cool, thanks

Out of respect for Ron Paul's desire to support his son, I would make sure NOT to write him in if Rand is on the ballot. I respect him that much.

A vote for this resolution is a vote for preemptive war. The other resolution was far less explicit in its support for preemptive war.

This one's pretty darn explicit. Its "Non binding" but if there was a bill that said it was morally acceptable to kill children but was "non-binding" would you let that slide? Because that's literally what this bill is.

Has OBAMA even supported this yet?

 

[cero]

Setting aside the trolling and counter trolling and setting aside my own views on Rand, can someone give me a good reason for Rand voting for this resolution when A. He had just spoken out against foreign policy consensus in a meaningful way the day before B. He had been the lone vote against a previous resolution with similarly dangerous language and C. He could have easily not voted up or down? What is the argument for voting for the resolution?

so 3 years for now people won't paint him as antisemitic as they did with Ron

 

[Christian Liberty]

Well, I would say that a "troll" is someone who has already been banned from this forum and came back to post under a different user name.

Well, yes, so would I. But he's not going to admit to his own identity.

Would any Pakistani really know this much about US politics?

Then again, Warlord's style does seem a LITTLE different.

broh please answer how is this resolution worse than the one rand voted against 99 to 1

Well, TradCon made that statement. While he's a reasonable person that doesn't blindly worship Rand, which means I'd tend to trust what he says on this issue, he made the statement. So I'll let him explain it to you.

 

[Warlord]

Setting aside the trolling and counter trolling and setting aside my own views on Rand, can someone give me a good reason for Rand voting for this resolution when A. He had just spoken out against foreign policy consensus in a meaningful way the day before B. He had been the lone vote against a previous resolution with similarly dangerous language and C. He could have easily not voted up or down? What is the argument for voting for the resolution?

The resolution is meaningless. It contains language that requires further congressional action before anything else happens if it was to logically follow. Warlord has seen a lot of these resolutions and this is by far the least objectionable.

 

[cero]

A vote for this resolution is a vote for preemptive war. The other resolution was far less explicit in its support for preemptive war.

how the hell is this resolution a vote for preemptive war, where the hell are you getting this?
point it out to me please

 

[Brett85]

so 3 years for now people won't paint him as antisemitic as they did with Ron

They'll do that anyway. This vote won't change a thing. The warmongers in the GOP will still vote for Rubio and Santorum. This vote did nothing to help Rand get their votes.

 

[Christian Liberty]

so 3 years for now people won't paint him as antisemitic as they did with Ron

They still will. That Jewish Republican group has already done that to Rand. You know what? Just ask them to google Walter Block, that SHOULD shut them up...

But why should we care about these idiots? They won' let us win no matter how we appease them.

 

[Warlord]

TC/FF are you both just going to whine and whine and whine until you fall asleep?

What's the point?

 

[supermario21]

Don't drag Ron into this. He may be being generous to his son but he's a true supporter of liberty. Walter Block has talked to Ron Paul before about Rand not being a libertarian and Ron Paul was apparently embarassed that Block brought it up in the context it was brought up in, but he could not disagree. Ron Paul knows better, but he doesn't want to hurt his son. What am I going to complain about? That Ron Paul is too nice to his own family? Oh please. Leave the real champion of liberty out of this and let's talk about the traitor...

Yeah, and there's a reason why Rand and Ron get cheered wherever they go yet Walter Block was getting booed off the stage at a libertarian rally!!

 

[cero]

Well, TradCon made that statement. While he's a reasonable person that doesn't blindly worship Rand, which means I'd tend to trust what he says on this issue, he made the statement. So I'll let him explain it to you.

please take a shot at it.
I wana hear your point of view

 

[Christian Liberty]

They'll do that anyway. This vote won't change a thing. The warmongers in the GOP will still vote for Rubio and Santorum. This vote did nothing to help Rand get their votes.

Exactly. But they're going to lose people like me. Congratulations Rand! /sarc.

 

[klamath]

I don't remember saying that, but frankly, I'd rather see someone actually fight for our freedoms and against the thugs in Washington than see all of this crap. I don't think you can win this game peacefully. I support the right of any state to secede and I support the right of the states to execute any Federal agents who try to take away our rights. That's self-defense. Every libertarian should know the difference between self-defense and murder. I don't subscribe to pacifism.

Right You haven't got a clue what a war is kid. "Actually fight for our FREEDOMS!!!!!" God have I heard that one before. Maybe you oaught to join the military and you can hear that stupid line every day to your hearts content. I am sure you will love the lines at the airports with the people shaking your hand and women hugging you thanking you for "fighting for our freedoms!" I don't like this vote of Rands but you lost all credibility with your principals. If you believe in a civil war you are about 5000 points below Rand as far as prolife.

About me: 18 years old, Christian, Baptist, Libertarian, minarchist, strict constructionist, anti-federalist, anti-warNOT!, anti-prohibition, pro-nullification, pro-gun, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-peaceNOT!, pro-freedom.

 

[DylanWaco]

so 3 years for now people won't paint him as antisemitic as they did with Ron

Two problems with this....

1. It almost certainly won't work because the people who do that painting use a brush big enough that anything less than slavish devotion to Israel means you are a devotee of Hitler.

2. He already casts a lone vote against a resolution you are claiming was even more dangerous and written by AIPAC and has come out hard against the Israeli hardline Likud position on Syria.

 

[Warlord]

Exactly. But they're going to lose people like me. Congratulations Rand! /sarc.

I'm pretty sure losing a "supporter" like you would be a massive boost to his campaign.

 

[Brett85]

how the hell is this resolution a vote for preemptive war, where the hell are you getting this?
point it out to me please

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c113:6:./temp/~c113DRdvt6::

urges that, if the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in legitimate self-defense against Iran's nuclear weapons program.

 

[TaftFan]

I have said before I support preventing Iran from getting nuclear weapons, however I disagree with sanctions as a strategy as it hurts the people and doesn't remove the regime. My preferred strategy is sabotage(if not viable, bomb the hell out of that mountain). I don't want Iran's economy to collapse, or another Middle Eastern ground war to deal with. I also don't want any more nuclear weapons in such a crazy region. Yes my position violates libertarian principles however utilitarianism is higher on my human morality scale in this case. (If I was true to pure libertarian principles, I would also be an anarchist, but I am not).

In any case, I think it is more appropriate for Israel to take my suggested action.

 

[DylanWaco]

The resolution is meaningless. It contains language that requires further congressional action before anything else happens if it was to logically follow. Warlord has seen a lot of these resolutions and this is by far the least objectionable.

Even if we assume that the resolution is meaningless because it's non-binding (which is highly questionable given the propaganda value and consensus building tools bills like this are often used for) that's hardly a reason to vote for it.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Yeah, and there's a reason why Rand and Ron get cheered wherever they go yet Walter Block was getting booed off the stage at a libertarian rally!!

If I recall correctly, Block got booed because he had promised to talk about one of his books but went off on evictionism instead. If that's the case you're talking about, he also recognized his mistake and apologized.

I'm not really from the same wing of Libertarianism as Block is, for the record. I admire his consistency, but I can't stomach the Rothbardian views on family and children's rights. I haven't been convinced of anarcho-capitalism eventually, but I could be. I could never be convinced that spanking a child should be a crime but that depriving a child of food is not, yet that's the logical conclusion of the Rothbard/Block position. I also would never "Allow" a ten year old to run away from home. So to be clear, simply by mentioning him does not mean I agree with everything he says.

Nobody's perfect, but if I had to pick one person that's the CLOSEST to my belief system, it would in fact be Ron Paul.

please take a shot at it.
I wana hear your point of view

I'd have to actually read the thing. I honestly don't know if TradCon is correct here, since I haven't read the other one. I know that this one sucked but for all I know the other one did too. I only read the one in this thread.

 

[Brett85]

I'm pretty sure losing a "supporter" like you would be a massive boost to his campaign.

Why? He just supports the platform Ron ran on in 2008 and 2012. There's nothing unreasonable about wanting to support candidates who hold to the principles of non intervention.

 

[Warlord]

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c113:6:./temp/~c113DRdvt6::

urges that, if the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in legitimate self-defense against Iran's nuclear weapons program.

The passage makes it clear that whatever happens it comes back to Congress and does not authorize war, military action or anything else.