Is it even possible for the US to get out of debt? - Page 6

Z28x · 02-07-2012, 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Duce

Plenty of people have addressed your points time and time again. And most of us agree on the basic tenants about spending and how it can't continue. You though simply harp on the defense and international relations aspects and how we should retreat from the world and forfeit our position and the very things that have made this country as powerful as it is. Your arguments are simple in nature and fail to take in the whole perspective. The only thing you're proven lately is your massive ability to troll.

Once again, name calling but not showing me how we could pay for this. Typical. To be fair most of the Medicare/Medicaid supporters are just like you. They want to spend spend spend but have no plan to pay for it. Social Security is about the only one of the big government spending programs that could actually be "fixed". All they have to do is raise the minimum age to match life expectancy.

This ad is not displayed to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on CamaroZ28.com!

super83Z · 02-07-2012, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Duce

It's completely relevant. You don't like it because it questions your knowledge on the subjects you speak so passionately about. It makes you uncomfortable to question what you have believed to be true. So I guess this forum has its answer since you've been dodging to answer, you don't have much exposure the world outside of the United States? I mean that would almost be as bad as someone who's never left Washington DC trying to tell someone in small town Tennessee what to do!!!

He was giving that advice when we were a young and struggling republic. And his advice was sound when were were the little kid on the block just trying to establish our country.

Oh, and if you would like to see a country that does free trade with all and allegiance to none with complete disregard to opinions look no further than China. You would just love the way they conduct themselves in places like Africa.

Really, exactly how did the means of American expansion through those means relate the how the country is being destroyed today? Please explain what exactly you are referencing. Also, you need to get off the whole Middle East thing. Have you been there? Have you sat in the meetings where policy is actually discussed? Do you actually know what the 6 month, 1 year, 5 year and 10 year goals are? . . . what the organizations and units are working towards every day?

And I do love how you skip right over the observation that if we followed a pure non-interventionism policy that most of the states our forum members are from wouldn't be states at all. As a matter of fact, this conversation on the internet likely would not be occurring at all.

Non-interventionism is a naive policy that ignores the reality of the world the way it is TODAY. There can be serious discussion about how and when we should use all the components of our foreign policy tools, but to try to justify the implementation and switch to such a naive policy is the absolute epitome of head in the sand syndrome.

Okay, now you're just going off on some other tangent and dragging in another discussion that is far too complicated for you to understand with your simpleton RS/CH/IR/PK vs NATO argument.

Don't worry, this forum now laughs at your posts so call it even?

I've addressed the fallacy of its history in the US and naivety of a non-interventionism policy in this very thread. Feel free to counter.

I seriously doubt you have any real insight into the decline of the Roman Empire outside of your week of it in high school and the other week of it in college. It was ridiculously more complex than simple "they went bankrupt having wars."

I addressed your $1T number and you decided to avoid the discussion. And now this board is insulting you because you've turned into the ultimate troll. We no longer like to spend any more the minimum addressing your trolling. If you don't want to be insulted, how about you start using that lump of mush 3' above your poop chute?

Since you are such a history professor you must be aware of how we brought about the current Iranian .gov right? That whole mess in the 50's with their democratically elected president that we overthrew with the CIA's help. Then we gave them nuclear power in the 60's.

Russia and China are warning against striking Iran. They already only deal among themselves in their own currencies. India is buying oil from Iran with gold. So you are telling me in your vast foreign experience that they are going to high five us on the way into Iran? It is only arrogance that makes you think these things don't matter.

How are we going to afford this war again? Buy another printer? Have you seen the unfunded Medicare numbers?

I see you left Sweden out of the convo and went off on some tangent about China being non-interventionist. Then you contradicted yourself by bringing up what they do in Africa. I will just let those two statements sit there.

What place does a free country have in dictating the way every other country should be run?

With freedom comes risk. We might be attacked. People might die. The only alternative is a police state. Unfortunately fear has taken over America and everyone has watched too many episodes of 24. So our expectations for a nuclear attack are entrenched in Hollywood hysteria. Iran has no Navy. They would be lucky to get a missle out of their own air space. Or maybe you have seen True Lies and you expect Arnold to find them in some Persian statues?

For someone so grounded in reality and the way the world is TODAY, you must see the fallacy in comparing the US in its infancy to invading Iran now, right? Exploring a new world or invading a country because they said things we don't like, nah you're right those are the same thing.

El Duce · 02-07-2012, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Z28x

Once again, name calling but not showing me how we could pay for this. Typical. To be fair most of the Medicare/Medicaid supporters are just like you. They want to spend spend spend but have no plan to pay for it. Social Security is about the only one of the big government spending programs that could actually be "fixed". All they have to do is raise the minimum age to match life expectancy.

I have brought up points time and time again about fixing social security, addressing the medical insurance issue, infrastructure and spending on diplomacy. YOU are the one who chose to ignore those posts for the last year. So if you want to now have a discussion you can go find them and address them. If you didn't want to be called names, maybe you should have conducted yourself better over the last few years.

Quote: