Watch Live: Donald Trump's Teleprompted Foreign Policy Speech

[nikcers]

Looks like it's working on lots of you Never Trump guys...



Honestly, saying something as absurd as "I would vote for Hillary before I vote for Trump because…." is all you have to say and then please stop talking… we get it… you're certifiably insane.

Seriously you gotta edit my comments and argue with yourself. You are one lonely cat.

 

[Ender]

There's nothing unconstitutional about fighting an enemy. Jefferson fought the same sort of enemy with the Barbary pirates, and it didn't stop until he did.

It is unconstitutional if not ratified by Congress.

AND- the problem with chasing "terrorists" is that one never knows who the real perps are.

The Truth:

The U.S. fought in two separate wars over state-sponsored Muslim pirates along Africa’s Barbary Coast in the early 1800s.

The eRumor’s claims about the lead up to the Barbary Wars are also accurate. After the U.S won its independence, France stopped protecting U.S. ships in the Mediterranean, according to papers collected by the Library of Congress. Thomas Jefferson, then United States Minister to France, grew increasingly frustrated with paying ransom to the Barbary pirates after French protection ended. Jefferson tried to negotiate an accord with France and Great Britain, but that fell through.Jefferson later wrote in a letter, “From what I learn from the temper of my countrymen and their tenaciousness of their money, it will be more easy to raise ships and men to fight these pirates into reason, than money to bribe them.”

The eRumor’s recounting of an interaction between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams and an ambassador to Tripoli about the motives for the pirate attacks is also accurate, according to a book of diplomatic correspondences.

Jefferson and Adams wrote: “The Ambassador answered us, that (the aggression) was founded on the laws of their Prophet; that it was written in their Koran, that all nationals who should not have acknowledged their authority, were sinners; that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners; and that every Mussulman who was slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

George Washington attempted to forge treaties with Barbary Coast states, as the eRumor claimed, and he expressed frustration about France’s role in a letter he penned in 1796. Just after Algiers pirates had released American hostages in accordance with a treaty, Washington received news that pirates from Tunis had taken more American hostages. “’Tis difficult to understand precisely what the French government design relative to this country,” Washington replied.

As it turned out, France and Great Britain benefited from the Barbary pirates, and they may have even supported them. The State Department’s Office of the Historian said, “The practice of state-sponsored piracy and ransoming of captives was not wholly unusual for its time. Many European states commissioned privateers to attack each others’ shipping and also participated in the transatlantic slave trade. The two major European powers, Great Britain and France, found it expedient to encourage the Barbary States’ policy and pay tribute to them, as it allowed their merchant shipping an increased share of the Mediterranean trade, and Barbary leaders chose not to challenge the superior British or French navies.”

After Jefferson was elected president, Tripoli declared war on America in 1801.

War followed with Algiers in 1815, but the U.S. had bulked up its naval fleet for the War of 1812, and the war ended quickly, according to Library of Congress documents

https://www.truthorfiction.com/jefferson-vs-muslims//

 

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

It is unconstitutional if not ratified by Congress.

AND- the problem with chasing "terrorists" is that one never knows who the real perps are.

It is not unconstitutional to fight back when you are already attacked, and you don't need a declaration of war for that.

It is not unconstitutional to fight terrorists just because they don't have a country, and you don't get a declaration of war for that. Various things, such as orders to military, bounties, and letters of marque and reprisal are used.

I think you are confusing the constitutional authority of Congress with most of the executive function.

 

[nikcers]

It is not unconstitutional to fight back when you are already attacked, and you don't need a declaration of war for that.

It is not unconstitutional to fight terrorists just because they don't have a country, and you don't get a declaration of war for that. Various things, such as orders to military, bounties, and letters of marque and reprisal are used.

I think you are confusing the constitutional authority of Congress with most of the executive function.

WE are still using the 2002 Iraq AUMF, so you are right it is not unconstiutional. We are in luck though, they are replacing it and its breaking news! they are still funding the same war and even are debating repealing and repassing the AUMF because (infer what you want)

HASC Passes Major DoD Policy Bill for 2017

a bipartisan 60-2 vote, the committee approved its version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which uses the war account to skirt statutory budget caps — and salvage items cut from the Obama administration’s budget and placed on the services’ “unfunded priorities” lists. That includes 27,000 more active-duty troops and 25,000 reservists; $3 billion for 14 more F/A-18E/F aircraft for the Navy and 11 more F-35 joint strike fighters across the services; and a $2 billion plus-up to the Navy’s shipbuilding budget. WASHINGTON — The House Armed Services Committee early Thursday voted to add billions to a list of Defense Department weapons programs and signed off on a $583 billion Pentagon budget that blurs the lines between wartime funding and base-budget requirements.

 

[nikcers]

Yes, I know that speech inside out. I've shared it many times over the years.

You fail to recognize what Trump's speech represents and how it advances the most of the ideals and goals in Ron's speech. Hence, my comment.

"1000% opposite"?

Point by point, I can find only one "opposite of Trump":

What part of Ron Paul doesn't want to be associated with Trump don't you understand??

Tommy Behnke is a Mises Institute alumnus and the former Press Assistant for the Rand Paul for President campaign.

This election cycle, the establishment will again emerge victorious, but not without feeling the Liberty Movement’s burning and growing flame.

Did Senator Paul’s campaign come up on top? No, but it did manage to win the hearts and minds of many — especially millennials — and it won that support with the power of ideas, not the power of personality or rhetoric.

You can’t kill ideas - Donald Trump will be forgotten by the end of this election cycle.. the flame of the Liberty Movement will only rise and grow stronger in the years to come.
-Tommy Behnke

 

[phill4paul]

What part of Ron Paul doesn't want to be associated with Trump don't you understand??

Tommy Behnke is a Mises Institute alumnus and the former Press Assistant for the Rand Paul for President campaign.

I think it is the part where Ron Paul doesn't want to be associated with Trump. It's a tough one for some people to wrap their heads around.

 

[FindLiberty]

This speech represents one of the greatest opportunities for the Liberty Movement in many of our lifetimes. Peace with Russia, Europe taking care of Europe, No More "Spreading Democracy" around the globe, even questioning the very existence of NATO and the UN are now fully within the pale of mainstream discussion. This is a battle that goes back all the way to 1952 when the Neocons hijacked Republican Foreign Policy and continued through the Cold War with William F. Buckley "denouncing" Rothbard, Buchanan, and anybody who dared to question the prevailing interventionist paradigm. If Trump is able to win the GOP nomination on this platform, it will be HUGE.

The nitpicking and whining from some of you in this thread is ridiculous. Trump advances the ball 99 yards and you are bitching about him not punching it through for a touchdown. That is our job! And because our ideas can no longer be dismissed as "fringe" we are going to be in a hell of a lot stronger position to do exactly that. This is why Lindsay Graham and Charles Krauthammer are losing it. Trump has unleashed ideas that have been subject to a highly effective blackout for over a century. The suppression of these ideas has been the basis of the Neocon's power. And now that they've been released in to the wild they will spread out to their logical conclusion whether Trump himself wants to fully take them their or not.

Sounds GREAT! It's about time to try something different, try anything to turn around the steady decline I've been seeing for about five decades.

 

[Ender]

It is not unconstitutional to fight back when you are already attacked, and you don't need a declaration of war for that.

It is not unconstitutional to fight terrorists just because they don't have a country, and you don't get a declaration of war for that. Various things, such as orders to military, bounties, and letters of marque and reprisal are used.

I think you are confusing the constitutional authority of Congress with most of the executive function.

A Declaration of War MUST be done for the US to be involved in a war and there has to be a known enemy. Running around the world attacking random people is unconstitutional and unethical. AND it has created the mess we now have before us.

 

[openfire]

This is something that Obama said was a mistake, it was blamed on false intelligence. Basically they bombed them off their metadata, and their data was being spoofed by real targets.

One could argue that wasn't a mistake, but I think one could also argue that without the meta data and intelligence either argument is unsubstantial. I tend to argue on the side of error, then intent.

 

[nikcers]

obamacoolaidtroll.gif

I respectfully gave you a explanation and now you just want to be childish! We have gotten some of IsIs top leaders that way.