[flamesfilmguy]

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articl ... 6742/?ck=1

I'm not gonna lie i share some of the same frustrations. Discuss.

[Covert Hawk]

I share many of the same frustrations. I would like to add two, though:

1. Informal global empire- I see no reason as to why we need to have troops stationed in 130 different countries.
2. Federal Reserve Bank- their monopoly over the money supply and issuance of credit has gone on long enough. Their responsible for creating the credit for that fueled the housing boom/bust.

[Covert Hawk]

<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object>

[LUconn]

You're a RonPaulite aren't you, CH. How do you not see any reason to have our troops stationed across the world? Or is it just that you don't agree with those reasons.

[RubberMallet]

You're a RonPaulite aren't you, CH. How do you not see any reason to have our troops stationed across the world? Or is it just that you don't agree with those reasons.

i'm a rp supporter on most things....on this situation i don't but i have no problem with trying it out and see how it goes...

[ALUmnus]

Let's take the brakes off your geo, just to see how it goes...

[RubberMallet]

lets go for it...you can have the first ride

[Covert Hawk]

Here is an Op-ed in the Washington Times about our current foreign policy by Ron Paul

PAUL: 'Fight them over there vs. over here' a false choice

There is no area in which Republicans have further strayed from our traditions than in foreign affairs.

Conservatives know government is a poor tool to solve problems. It then makes no sense that we would think that our government could build civil societies and solve the tremendously complex problems of a developing country. Nation-building does not work. It places a tremendous burden on our military and takes directly from the pockets of the American taxpayer. The best thing we as Americans can do is offer friendship while setting a good example of what a free and prosperous society looks like. Ronald Reagan wanted America to be a "shining city on the hill." We should make that our goal.

We have more than 700 military installations in 135 countries around the globe. We have 50,000 troops in Germany, 30,000 in Japan, and 25,000 in South Korea. Worse, we have our brave men and women bogged down occupying Iraq and Afghanistan in the midst of ethnic strife and civil war.

We spend more than $1 trillion per year on our foreign policy, and our military is stretched thin. We can no longer afford to be the world's policeman. We must bring our troops home from around the world, cut overseas spending and strengthen our national defense.

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/ju ... me_columns

[flamesfilmguy]

I love how this turned into the ron paul thread... not my intentions at all.

[Covert Hawk]

I love how this turned into the ron paul thread... not my intentions at all.

Sorry. Glenn Beck does sympathize with Ron Paul and frequently has other libertarians featured on his show like Penn Jillette and Andrew Napolitano.

[Hold My Own]

I fully support having thousands of troops in places like Germany, however someone asked me why we did that and I couldnt give them a good answer other than saying it's our representation....why do we station people in places like that?

[flamesfilmguy]

I love how this turned into the ron paul thread... not my intentions at all.

Sorry. Glenn Beck does sympathize with Ron Paul and frequently has other libertarians featured on his show like Penn Jillette and Andrew Napolitano.

True but i was more focused on the letter and its contents.

[flamesfilmguy]

I fully support having thousands of troops in places like Germany, however someone asked me why we did that and I couldnt give them a good answer other than saying it's our representation....why do we station people in places like that?

Why do other countries feel the need to have embassies in other countries? I think the main purpose is station troops in our allied nations to be ready to help said allied country in time of need and have a launching point from which troops can be deployed at a moments notice faster and more efficient than the could from the U.S. sort of a symbiotic relationship.

I'd give an example of say Kazakhstan got invaded by russia. Its a heck of a lot faster to fly troops in from Germany than from the US.

[thepostman]

we have bases overseas for several reasons...but Germany was set up as a way to safeguard us and our allies against a possible attack from Russia...and so it would be easier to keep and eye on them...and that is pretty much the reason for most of our bases around the world...to help us keep a better eye on different countries as well as making it much easier and cost effective to deploy quickly if needed. As well as assisting our allies where needed...which is something some don't agree with...

There is a little more to it than that...but that is the rational in a nutshell..and honestly something I did not completely understand or agree with until joining the military myself

[Liberty4Life]

Not just all the things listed above, but you have to realize that we need strategic locales in the event that we need to launch an attack. For example, when we invaded Iraq, we wanted to be able to launch some of our forces from bases in Turkey. However, Turkey wouldn't let us do that. Having installations in foreign countries is a bit necessary (although yes, having 30,000 troops in some countries does, in fact, seem excessive).

[Covert Hawk]

My personal opinion is that our European allies are wealthy and have the means to take care of themselves. The threat of the Soviet Union is long gone. The more we subsidize for their defense, the more it strains our own military. Also, it prevents the European countries from making necessary reforms because they don't have to spend their own money on their defense and can pursue "socialists" programs.

The argument that is helps us deploy to other areas of the world like Iraq is true, but I don't think we should have gone to Iraq in the first place. I also do not like the idea of entangling alliances, in which we commit future generations to wars. What if an ally of ours that we promised to defend acts belligerently and provokes and attack? If we had not promised defense, maybe they wouldn't act belligerently. For instance, in 1915 during WWI Colonel Edward House assured France and Britain that the United States would not allow them to lose the war. In 1916, when the Germans desired peace talks, Britain and France refused because they expected the U.S. to enter the war on their behalf. If the U.S. had not made these promises to Britain and France they would have been forced to end the war in 1916, and the world would have been better off.

[JDUB]

I love watching glenn beck. He is hilarious. The day after michael jackson died he had bryson g and I rofl