Ron Paul should adopt a greater understanding of the clash of civilizations (the idealogical war) that is currently occurring in our globalized world. Americans shouldn't be that naive that they think they can win the wars through pure force, but to completely withdraw, become indifferent and passive toward islamist like Ron Paul is proposing is plain dangerous.
The only reason people want to "Kill US", is because the United States sticks it's nose in everyone's business and has Military Bases in every major country!!! If China built Military Bases in the United States, we wouldn't tolerate it, so why are other countries expected to accept this?
I served in the US ARMY and they try to brainwash you into believing you are protecting peoples rights and liberties, but the truth is that we invade other countries for financially motivated reasons.
Col. Hunt says "the military isn't a voting block" like their vote doesn't count. In the Roman Empire the only ones who could vote on a war declared by the Senate was only those in the military. The ones going to fight and die were the only ones to have say whether they would go fight. Not people sitting at home sending others to die. Why don't we have the same rule? War? You want war? Are you going to fight it? Then you can have say. If you aren't going to fight it, then shut up. Why not here?
@tulare1979 Stossel supports Ron Paul. There's many videos of him openly doing so. However, because of his position as a news journalist, he has to, occasionally at least appear non-biased, or even devils advocate for the other side.
just goes to show neocons and zionist work together. your allegiance is to your country not israel! funny they never talk about the 25 thousand jews living in iran now. if they wanted to why not kill them first? the answer is because they live in peace and aren't warmongoers like zionists. just do some research on this guy and you will see whom his masters are.
What is wrong with minding our own business by trying to improve life in the US instead of trying to force ourselves onto every other nation that someone thinks might hurt us if we do not try to control them first? Our nation is suffering enough at home. It is time we stopped trying to be the world police and take care of our own country and our own problems. The economist is right. I have very little money I can spare, but if a few dollars will help get Dr. Paul in office, I will do so gla
These live in a make believe world where they think the USA has an unlimited amount of money to sustain this foreign policy and more wars. We borrow .47 cents of every dollar we spend. What happens when our lender (Chinese) stop lending. U gonna print money which causes inflation. Ron Pauls position is rational & practical. A nation military is only as strong as their economy so if u want to collapse our economy then keep spending & increasing the debt like theres no tomorrow. Israel is a rich.
What's wrong with capturing Bin Laden in stead of killing him? Think of all the potential information we could have gotten from him. And it doesn't mean we couldn't have tried and executed him. We just would have tried to get information from him that could have saved American lives. It's not "outrageous" at all when you think of it in terms of logic rather than emotion.
What a douche Mr. Hunt is. If he mocked me like that while I was talking... my fist would unvolutarily knock him off his stool. This is just more of the same dribble that main stream media tries to force down our throats. I we say Ron Paul is a kook enough.. people will think he's a kook... We are onto this game and reject it with predjudice!
When Dr. Paul says reduce military spending, it means to cut the upcoming military spending budget. If we spent $400B last yr, and this year's is $600B, and if someone wants to cut the spending, it means to cut the $600B down to $400-450B. It doesn't mean to stop the spending, but the republitard hacks make it sound like Dr. Paul doesn't want to spend money. They're liars, and beware of this military jive talker on this show.
Served our country? Defend our freedoms? They don't serve our country or defend our freedoms. That's a mendacious talking point repeated by the dumbed down, fluoride drinking, T.V. watching masses, i.e. useful idiots.
They serve and have been serving the mega-banks, mega oil companies and other corporate interests that pull the government strings.
@EdsEnemy Oh no wonder your so pissed off then why are you looking at american politics, don't you have riots to be attending to? lol moron, oh and those videos are 2 years old so nice try. Still pissed about the revolution?
@xHippieHunter American politics interest me. There are no riots at the moment, as far as I'm aware, those happened quite a while ago. The American Revolution? No, you're the one that brought that up. I'm glad those videos are old, maybe you have got better at the games you play now. I hear the new cooking mama is quite challenging. ;3
Ron Paul isn't blaming us (as in you and me) for 9/11, he is pointing to the US Government's role in creating enemies all over the world. Do not confuse the country with its government. "Us" is a very misleading, blanket kind of word.
@davorb Yes it did. FDR worked VERY hard to get the Japanese to attack the Pacific fleet, and did NOTHING to protect it. He needed a catastrophe to justify the US entry into WWII.
The colonel keeps referring to "this time of war". I'm so sick of this BS line, it's a neverending time of war, a perpetual time of war, right out of Orwell's 1984, The boogie man is under every bed and behind every garbage can, right Colonel? We must give up our rights, shred our constitution and pay trillions out in Homeland security and foreign meddling because it's a perpetual "time of war"? Sounds like lots of jobs for you military men, eh colonel?
The defense policy of the United States is based on a simple premise: The United States does not start fights. We will never be an aggressor. ~Ronald Reagan
6:12 - actually, Netanyahu (or was it the other guy?) said he DIDN'T NEED our foreign aid. He said that in front of the US Congress, and it's in the congressional record.
The chain reaction of evil--wars producing more wars -- must be broken, or we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation. ~Martin Luther King, Jr
Wars are poor chisels for carving out peaceful tomorrows. ~Martin Luther King, Jr
In the eyes of empire builders men are not men but instruments. ~Napoleon Bonaparte
Preventive war is like committing suicide out of fear of death. ~Otto von Bismarck
"War is a racket. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives". ~General Smedley Butler
"Political language. . . is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable"
~George Orwell
"No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare". ~James Madison
"The greatest protection against war is a well educated populace."~L.L. Castetter
Col. David Hunt, you sir are a bought and paid for pawn of the Military Industrial Complex... Is it any wonder you can't understand the rationality of Ron Paul's Foreign Policy...
1:48 Stop all investments! This is an obvious freudian slip.......the guy has investments in this wars!!! Thats all these war are for the establishment, a very bloody unethical INVESTMENT!
Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear - kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor - with the cry of grave national emergency.
Good video. Ron Paul is secure in America's ability to defend itself and I think he is on the right track, like a lot of military members believe also.
Actually, it has some to do with Bin Laden, but A lot to do with the US imposing our will on the holy lands on Saudi Arabia AND the little incident where we bombed an aspirin factory in Sudan in 1998. What if Soviet Russia built a military base right on the Arlington cemetery grounds and bombed a General Motors plant in Michigan? You could bet a group of "patriots" led by Dick Chaney, would gather together in a plot to seek revenge on some Russian commies, in Russia, no?
I'm Israeli and think that the US should end aid to our country, and I'm not some leftist idiot (we have a large supply over in Tel Aviv). A lot of people don't understand what the aid entails, it's basically a dumping of money that we have to pay back to the USA's military companies so they can be inefficient and charge American taxpayers huge amounts of money. We should be friends, not the USA's military pet project. I like Ron Paul, he has this sincereness I never see from politicans
Detractors of a non-interventionist foreign policy always complain that we over-simplify problems overseas, as if any one philosophy had a monopoly on that. When arguing against Ron Paul's foreign policy here, Hunt claims Paul wants to "dig a hole" and hide from the world.
This Colonel is whacked! Was he in the Israeli Army or the US? His responses are half agreeing with Dr. Paul and then just as easily calling Dr. Paul crazy!
Yeah sure, if America just pull home all of its troops and leave the islamist alone, they'll say "thank you very much America!", "now we'll stop with terrorism and hostilities toward the West.". Yeah right. Ron Paul is a danger to world peace.
@enevighet17 Yes, I see your point. World peace can only by achieved by pursuing a perpetual, unwinnable war against a tactic, not an enemy. How come Paul can't understand this?
Ron Paul should adopt a greater understanding of the clash of civilizations (the idealogical war) that is currently occurring in our globalized world. Americans shouldn't be that naive that they think they can win the wars through pure force, but to completely withdraw, become indifferent and passive toward islamist like Ron Paul is proposing is plain dangerous.
@enevighet17 Read Pat Buchanan's latest column: Ron Paul: Reactionary or Visionary. This column explains why Paul's plan puts America in the best possible defensive position. Google the terms, it is easy to find.
In the same vein, to compare the nuclear stand-off between the US and the Soviets with a theocratic millitary state that acquires WMDs is, again, to miss the distinctions entirely.
I'm a astaunch libertarian in all issues, even in foreign policy.I have been, for a long time, an advocate of a neo-conservative approach to foreign policy and have since revoked that.But one thing I cannot accept is to attribute the actions of islamo-fascism to US foreign policy. Thos people have been stoning women, gays, and bombing each other for centuries.To say that the radical elements of their beliefs are just a reactionary impulse,is to disregard their long history of violence entirely.
If you recognize correctly that they will hate us no matter what, your last point seems to contradict that. If it's their culture, and the radical nature of their religion that drives this fanaticism, then it really doesn't make any sense to attribute that radicalism to anything other than their own system of beliefs. I mean, they bombed 200 innocent civilians in Bali because they disliked the fact that the UN gave East timor independence.
@regelemihai I never said Islam was modern or pacific - I'm saying that it doesn't have to be our problem. Qutbist and Wahhabist Muslim extremists would much rather turn their energies on the "corrupt" (i.e., not fundamentalist enough) governments of Saudi Arabia, Egypt et al. If we left Afghanistan tomorrow, the Taliban wouldn't follow us home; they would fight Pakistan because they're a Pashtun nationalist movement. This is what Ron Paul and his advisors mean when they say intervention
Exactly right. The violence in these regions is so imbibed in the culture that one cannot say that external provocation is what causes these people to retalliate. They use every excuse in the book to justify mass murder--even if the actions taht spurred such attacks are noble, and are not the result of aggressive US foreign policy. If we left Afghianistan the Taliban would regain control and institute Sharia law as they did before we invaded them; that's exactly my point.
@regelemihai Afghanistan under the Taliban is not a place I would want to live, but I don't think making it right is worth $500 billion and 1,500 dead Americans.
"we're taking the enemies of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Israel"
I don't think that had we stayed out, they wouldn't consider us their enemies. They hate Israel so much so that they want all the Jews to be exterminated, or thrown out of their country. The only provocation there is the fact that they exist. In considering this issue you cannot find a rational explanation to their reaction. They hate all that is not Islamic.
I do agree with Paul taht we don't need to intervene and police...
...the world, or any country that finds itself facing terrorism or dictatorships. He's right on that. It's not our business to national build, or rescue others from their woes. But to ignore the reality of islamo-fascism is silly.
@regelemihai And I have agreed that radical Islam as a political movement will continue to exist. Do you dispute, though, that U.S. (and Israeli!) foreign policy has radicalized more Muslims? It's not politically correct to say so, but Israel hasn't exactly been blameless in its treatment of Arabs in Palestine. For every diehard who hates Israel no matter what, there are at least ten everyday Muslims who are driven into their arms by American and Israeli belligerence. That's...
"but Israel hasn't exactly been blameless in its treatment of Arabs in Palestine."
I don't see how. They have every right any other citizen has in Israel, with the added bonus of not being forced to serve in the army. IN the disputed territories the ongoing conflict is the result of Palestinian terrorism. They want Israel in the hands of Arabs, and have proven to be intolerant and unyielding with respect to any peace proposition and concession. And yet, they still act belligerently.
...not to say that terrorism is ever justified, nor is it "blaming America;" but I would put it to you that Islamism would not be such a strong worldwide movement if the United States and her allies didn't fan the flames and alienate Muslims of every stripe with unnecessary foreign wars and by supporting oppressive regimes like the Saudi monarchy. New terrorists are made every day by our foreign policy, and in that respect it has been a total failure.
Terrorists have existed long before the US has began its intervention policies, and long before the US was even an Idea--you correclty admitted it yourself. That religion was spread by the sword from its conception, and conquered half of the free world at one point. I see the rationale behind your type of thinking, but again, given the nature of the conflict I simply can't attribute it to anything else besides their religion. In a normal type of conflict, I'd have to agree with..
...you. Any nation that is being bombed would normally react accordingly. But when we talk about a group of people who believe they are doing the will of a higher power, and when that divine decree happens to also support killings, and violence, searching for rational explanations doesn't work. I think this is where we disagree. Had we not talked about islamic terrorism, then yes, I'd be inclined to agree with you.
@regelemihai I'm not getting through to you, am I? We don't disagree at all that Islamic terrorists are motivated to kill by religion. The only difference, as far as I can see, is that you would rather attribute ALL the anti-Americanism in the Muslim world to religion whereas I can only attribute it to the more radical ones. Islam is a recipe for violence, yes; but what makes Islamists single us out for that violence? Is it our culture and values, or is it our militarism?
@CountArtha Dude, you NAILED it. It's not just Islam, it's Islam AND our militarism put together. Islam is just the tool for them. The cause is our invasions and murders of civilians, our pushing around their people and governments, our interference and propping up of states and dictators we approve of.
"but what makes Islamists single us out for that violence?"
Well, first of all, I think we are making progress. You are getting through to me in a sense that I agree that our intervention is often times unecessary and distructive, but my disagreement with you is on the point of how we interpret their reaction and how do we act in response. If all we're here to argue is that simply because they perceive our actions to be insulting, or see it as a carte blanche to do all kinds of attrocities...
...against us, then every single actions of ours--whether justified, or dumb (like the invasion of Iraq)--will be perceived in the exact same way by them. If all we want to do is avoid hurting their feelings, then like I said. we'd have to let Indonesia continue to oppress East Timor; because once we helped that minority escape persecution and gain independence, they saw it as their right to bomb 200 people to death. So yeah, in that sense if we don't want to be singled out, we have to allow....
...all kinds of crimes to take place. But complacency will only get you so far. It is why Europe and other countries aren't targeted like us--because they allow the slow radicalization of their culture to Islamic fanaticism without saying a peep. The English and the Spaniards aren't in any way like us, and yet they experienced firsthand what these people are capable of, in 2004 and 2005 respectively. It's sad, but that's the reality.
@regelemihai Those are two different issues, bud. Just because we "go not abroad in search of monsters to destroy" doesn't mean we have to endorse or even tolerate radicalism. You make it sound as though our only two options are all-out holy war with an entire religion, or total appeasement. Why not do what we did for 109 years of our history - set an example for the world to follow, and butt out of other people's irrational squabbles? I say living well is the best revenge.
On that you do have a point. I think it only becomes a problem when taht radicalism spreads out to such proportions as to resemble a second caliphate. When we reach that stage, I don't think we'd be able to afford sitting calmly at home. But until then, I agree to an extent--we should stay home and let those people take care of themselves.
@regelemihai Well, creating a caliphate is the ultimate goal of many Islamist groups including al-Qaeda. I doubt they'll make it happen because, frankly, most Muslims like living in the modern age and would never support it.
The Christians who fought in the First Crusade, the Siege of Malta, or the Battle of Lepanto faced a much greater danger to their civilization than we face today, so if this ever does come to a clash of civilizations, it's not likely to be in my lifetime.
I wouldn't be that sure. The cultural influence has been trickling down for decades on in Europe, and hasn't been geting much better. People in response just seem to embrace PC and capitulation. The trends of islamization in the past few years shows that it's not really in decline. While in the Middle Ages the imposition of islam was much more "in yer face", today it's just as strong, only a lot more subtle.Rich and "enlightened" muslims carried out most of the decade's famous...
...terrorist attacks; from the London bombings, to the Madrid bombings, to 9/11, to the Texas fort hood massacre, and so on. Their religious fervor trumps their sense of self preservation and comfort. Not everyone, granted, but it is a strong element in their culture.
@regelemihai Why only the U.S., though? Why not Canada, or Australia, or Sweden? Heck, most of Europe is more culturally degenerate than America. Fundamentalists will hate America no matter what our foreign policy looks like, but the reason terrorism has MAINSTREAM appeal in the Muslim world is because Osama bin Laden was able to convince them that the U.S. was an existential threat to Islam. We made the case for him by attacking Muslim countries that didn't threaten us.
The gentleman representing the "prowar" party, was really struggling. And I seem to remember him in the past being quite articulate. Looks like Ron Paul's position is pretty compelling.
"Hunt, whom O'Reilly has described as 'the feistiest guy we have' repeatedly attempted to link Saddam to terrorism, predicted that the U.N.'s refusal to support U.S. military action in Iraq signaled 'the end of the United Nations' , and suggested that Saddam would 'torch' his country in facing the United Nations inspectors' Hunt added that the Pentagon's mere assertion of that possibility 'is all we need' to invade Iraq.
Iran wants its people to survive and become energy independent - they have no refinery capacity and need nuclear power for domestic power (requires 3% uranium enrichment) and medical treatment (requires 20% uranium enrichment).They don't have the resources and have no interest in bombing anyone with a nuclear weapon - even if they had one (requires uranium enrichment to 90%)
You wonder if this guy might have an interest in war and stoking the fear and paranoia to keep federal money flowing into the national security state??? Just a little digging and you find:
"Hunt is founder and president of D.A.R. Inc., Global Security Consultants, "an international security consulting firm based in Scarborough, Maine." Hunt is also a member of the Advisory Board of StorCard, Inc., which provides storage and "security solutions" for digital information."
How would any body feel if their son or daughter was under the command of a Col. Hunt when he seems like a nut job, on cocaine, all juiced up? And when will military members have the courage to defend the Constitution by not obey unlawful orders...esp when the orders come from someone like Hunt?
Listen to this globalist establishment prick, he just as well said, "what the hell do these soldiers know" Exuse me Adolph but they are the ones who are fighting and dying for these evil wars that you and your rich white buddies start, what a piece of garbage trash this guy is, makes me sick!
Col. Hunt is a typical non-listener. He makes a statement like "Ron Paul's foreign policy is dangerous," and when he's countered with logical, factual arguments his retort is just to restate his opinion. We get what your opinion is, Col., our question is why is that your opinion, and what your answer to the counterarguments are.
War is peace? Ignorance is strength? We really are living in an Orwellian nightmare! I was raised on military bases, & I can tell you all about people like Mr. Hunt. They have an entirely different way of thinking. More or less, "what can we destroy next"?! Imagine if all the manpower and resources that have been used on war, making our children (& theirs) into hamburger and rivers of blood, had instead been used to; invent, create, & build a better humanity for all of us. We can only dream...
The reason why neocon's have to resort to name calling with RP is that their arguments (as you can see here) are just plain ridiculous. And the hypocrisy of 'conservatives' arguing for absurdly wasteful 'defense' spending in this day and age is ripe indeed.
Colonel David Hunt at 3:26 : "The issue of why 3,000 Americans got killed has little to do with Saudi Arabia and everything to do with Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda."
.
The fact that Hunt is completely unaware of the fact that 15 of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 as well as Osama Bin Laden himself were all Saudis is proof of how ignorant he really is when it comes to foreign policy.
@atchisrj1 How can a half million persons not be a voting block? Eh, maybe because the millions of persons who depend on the jobs created by that industry and the billions of dollars in political donations.
One of the few growing industries in US is the arms industry. Sadly that industry is based on destroying wealth. It may create jobs but it is a sinkhole for life, resources and wealth.
@atchisrj1 I agre with you. The military is just a smaller voting block than those who are dependant on the miltary for jobs/money.
What happened when Clinton closed bases? How many cities died? Though government jobs are not productive jobs they are stll part of the food chain.
What happens when you misallocate wealth? Eventualy there is an equalibrium that must be met. If the US cuts military spending... allot more than military jobs will be lost. Vote war or unemployment
I cant stand Ron Paul. Anyone whos disagrees with him is labeled a neocon or a warmonger.
See what I did there? You ron paul people are so stupid and hypocritical, you cant even see it. Sorry, just because you arent afraid to go to war, doesnt mean you are a warmonger. ron paul is a pussy.
Hitler couldn't even cross the English Channel. There was zero chance of an American Invasion by Hitler; it's ridiculous. They propagandized the hell out of the whole thing, just as they did in The Great War, just as they did in the Spanish-American war, just like they're doing today.
Countries in Europe and Asia fight with each other. It's what they do. We should capitalize on our good fortune of living an ocean away and stay out of their retarded squabbles. War IS avoidable for us.
I just wonder how much money the war supporters think we can continue to print and wage against the future of many generations. Are you willing to completely bankrupt what is left of this country? I guess you will be safe from terrorism while you starve to death
@daizee106 There is much more spent on welfare as a category of government spending than defence. Add into that, unfunded liabilities. Long term defence spending on US bases and fleets was cut by Bush Snr and Clinton. Since 2001 the wars are short term or temporary spending. When the Afghan war ends, this temporary spending will be obvious. But the welfare budget will only grow. Defence spendng isnt the only elephant in the room.
@wwclay86 Ron Paul is all for national security.. just not occupation, nation building and pre-emptive attacks. Halfing $700 billion budget to $350 B, still means the USA is much bigger than China at $150 B... and that's just the income statement, the USA's military balance sheet is vast!
@dmg46664 But that's accounting. China doesn't have to pay the same wages etc. for what it gets. The US has very few naval units left. That's a fact. Just because the war spending is stupid doesn't mean the US is ready. Others develop weapons to precisely counter US carriers and other assets. That's what I don't get with Ron Paul. Why no details on what cut specifically? I guess he doesn't know as a flight surgeon.
@dmg46664 go sell that to someone else. im in the military, and i do beleive that preemptive action is the way to go. any political candidate that even looks soft on national security wont get my vote. the term prepostioining should ring a bell when it comes to the basing of us forces. by having troops, ships, planes ect in a area saves time and money instead of hurrying to get forces into a troubled sector or area....
@wwclay86 Saves time and money? It wastes countless Billions to keep them there. You must be glad the American tax payer is paying for such waste as it keeps your paycheck rolling, but that is not a rational cost/benefit analysis basis for keeping the bases there. America should be protecting it's assets... not other nation's assets, that's just international welfare, which is never a good idea. Let Korea protect Korea, and Germany protect Germany.
@dmg46664 if we had of acted instead of sitting around on our asses , ww2 coulda had a different out come.. it costs more to suddenly surge troops and send them from the mainland then to to use predeployed troops.... and guess what... i dont do my job for the money. its never been about the money. there are real patriots left ya know....
@wwclay86 Wars are almost always won by the country who is more powerful economically. At the start of WW2 the USA had the 17th most powerful military in the world. By the end, it had the most powerful! That's despite it's loss at Pearl harbour! The private sector can switch to building warfare on a dime when the risk is great! America needs to get it's budget in order, or it will fall like Rome fell. Economic reality trumps military reality.
@dmg46664 lets get one thing straight. i dont do my job for money. i dont do it to opress other people. i do it keep AMERICANS and our allies safe. i dont get paid much to do it. yes we could save alot of money if we all sat stateside and did nothing. but we cant do that. it wouldnt be right. it may take another big attack to get everyones mind in the right frame....
@wwclay86 I'm sure your motives are noble. I don't question them. I question that in your noble motives you fail to make rational assessments of risks and rewards... Is the tax payer getting the bang for his buck. There the answer is no. tinyurl(.)com/d5ubj3n
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul should adopt a greater understanding of the clash of civilizations (the idealogical war) that is currently occurring in our globalized world. Americans shouldn't be that naive that they think they can win the wars through pure force, but to completely withdraw, become indifferent and passive toward islamist like Ron Paul is proposing is plain dangerous.
enevighet17 2 weeks ago
The only reason people want to "Kill US", is because the United States sticks it's nose in everyone's business and has Military Bases in every major country!!! If China built Military Bases in the United States, we wouldn't tolerate it, so why are other countries expected to accept this?
I served in the US ARMY and they try to brainwash you into believing you are protecting peoples rights and liberties, but the truth is that we invade other countries for financially motivated reasons.
HHO4ALL 3 weeks ago
Col. Hunt says "the military isn't a voting block" like their vote doesn't count. In the Roman Empire the only ones who could vote on a war declared by the Senate was only those in the military. The ones going to fight and die were the only ones to have say whether they would go fight. Not people sitting at home sending others to die. Why don't we have the same rule? War? You want war? Are you going to fight it? Then you can have say. If you aren't going to fight it, then shut up. Why not here?
TongueMaster9 3 weeks ago
Then guy who's pro Ron lives in my town hahaha
DFWDUB 3 weeks ago
Ron Paul should run as independant or libertarian.
tulare1979 3 weeks ago
Fox news is the worst = number 1 - it is the favorite of the far right & government.
tulare1979 3 weeks ago
John Stossel is biased.
tulare1979 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
RonPaulRonPaul___RonPaulRonPau¬¬l___RonPaul___RonPaulRonPaul RonPaulRonPaul___RonPaulRonPau¬¬l___RonPaul___RonPaulRonPaul _______RonPaul___Ron_______Pau¬¬l___RonPaul__________RonPaul _______RonPaul___Ron_______Pau¬¬l___RonPaul__________RonPaul RonPaulRonPaul___Ron_______Pau¬¬l___RonPaul___RonPaulRonPaul RonPaul__________Ron_______Pau¬¬l___RonPaul___RonPaul_______ RonPaulRonPaul___RonPaulRonPau¬¬l___RonPaul___RonPaulRonPaul RonPaulRonPaul___RonPaulRonPau¬¬l___RonPaul___RonPaulRonPaul¬
SeattleSSA 3 weeks ago
RON RAIL is right. John Stossel is not neutral , he is siding on war - on empire - on selling fear - selling war. John is wrong !
tulare1979 3 weeks ago
@tulare1979 Stossel supports Ron Paul. There's many videos of him openly doing so. However, because of his position as a news journalist, he has to, occasionally at least appear non-biased, or even devils advocate for the other side.
SeattleSSA 3 weeks ago
"First of all" this Colonel is stumbling over every one of his answers.
liOVERLOADil 3 weeks ago
just goes to show neocons and zionist work together. your allegiance is to your country not israel! funny they never talk about the 25 thousand jews living in iran now. if they wanted to why not kill them first? the answer is because they live in peace and aren't warmongoers like zionists. just do some research on this guy and you will see whom his masters are.
akanes7 3 weeks ago
What is wrong with minding our own business by trying to improve life in the US instead of trying to force ourselves onto every other nation that someone thinks might hurt us if we do not try to control them first? Our nation is suffering enough at home. It is time we stopped trying to be the world police and take care of our own country and our own problems. The economist is right. I have very little money I can spare, but if a few dollars will help get Dr. Paul in office, I will do so gla
loosebwep 3 weeks ago
war cleanses the world of human debris.
UltraProle21 3 weeks ago
These live in a make believe world where they think the USA has an unlimited amount of money to sustain this foreign policy and more wars. We borrow .47 cents of every dollar we spend. What happens when our lender (Chinese) stop lending. U gonna print money which causes inflation. Ron Pauls position is rational & practical. A nation military is only as strong as their economy so if u want to collapse our economy then keep spending & increasing the debt like theres no tomorrow. Israel is a rich.
Mythicist 4 weeks ago
What's wrong with capturing Bin Laden in stead of killing him? Think of all the potential information we could have gotten from him. And it doesn't mean we couldn't have tried and executed him. We just would have tried to get information from him that could have saved American lives. It's not "outrageous" at all when you think of it in terms of logic rather than emotion.
RyanJ504 4 weeks ago 4
I have to listen to Hunt every time he subs for Howie Carr here in Boston. The man is brain dead. As is Howie.
AngstBoy42 4 weeks ago
What a douche Mr. Hunt is. If he mocked me like that while I was talking... my fist would unvolutarily knock him off his stool. This is just more of the same dribble that main stream media tries to force down our throats. I we say Ron Paul is a kook enough.. people will think he's a kook... We are onto this game and reject it with predjudice!
kingrusky 4 weeks ago 2
When Dr. Paul says reduce military spending, it means to cut the upcoming military spending budget. If we spent $400B last yr, and this year's is $600B, and if someone wants to cut the spending, it means to cut the $600B down to $400-450B. It doesn't mean to stop the spending, but the republitard hacks make it sound like Dr. Paul doesn't want to spend money. They're liars, and beware of this military jive talker on this show.
filoIII 4 weeks ago
Kudos to Stossel for broaching a subject that deserves a lot more discussion. Especially in an election year.
karaool 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
xHippieHunter 4 weeks ago
Served our country? Defend our freedoms? They don't serve our country or defend our freedoms. That's a mendacious talking point repeated by the dumbed down, fluoride drinking, T.V. watching masses, i.e. useful idiots.
They serve and have been serving the mega-banks, mega oil companies and other corporate interests that pull the government strings.
jscott2700 4 weeks ago
What happened to National DEFENSE?
espada9 4 weeks ago
Looks like Bruce Willis' father smoked too many cocks.
fsujag54 4 weeks ago
what people need to understand there is a huge difference between defense and offense our government's job is defense!!
sryan286 4 weeks ago
Ron Paul is right, and Stossel is a retarded jackass.
RON PAUL 2012
1GodOnlyOne 4 weeks ago
This guy is giving me a sore throat just listening to him. What has he been smoking, gravel?
EdsEnemy 4 weeks ago 20
@EdsEnemy yeah insult a guy who served your country you fool. Learn some history idiot.
xHippieHunter 4 weeks ago
@xHippieHunter This guy is American. I'm English.
Learn some geography that isn't from a modern warfare game, kid.
EdsEnemy 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
xHippieHunter 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EdsEnemy Oh no wonder your so pissed off then why are you looking at american politics, don't you have riots to be attending to? lol moron, oh and those videos are 2 years old so nice try. Still pissed about the revolution?
xHippieHunter 4 weeks ago
@xHippieHunter American politics interest me. There are no riots at the moment, as far as I'm aware, those happened quite a while ago. The American Revolution? No, you're the one that brought that up. I'm glad those videos are old, maybe you have got better at the games you play now. I hear the new cooking mama is quite challenging. ;3
EdsEnemy 4 weeks ago
@EdsEnemy probably drill instructor, yelling all day long, tore his vocal cords?
NIGHTMAREuki 3 weeks ago
What if Saudi Arabia had military bases on US soil? And in Canada and in Mexico? How would Americans feel about that?
TheLegalImmigrant05 4 weeks ago
Ron Paul isn't blaming us (as in you and me) for 9/11, he is pointing to the US Government's role in creating enemies all over the world. Do not confuse the country with its government. "Us" is a very misleading, blanket kind of word.
TheLegalImmigrant05 4 weeks ago 34
South Korea can defend themselves. North Koreans are starving.
In any case, we have no duty to South Korea, just as we have no duty to Israel, Europe, Japan, or Taiwan.
Sorry, a gravelly voice doesn't intimidate me.
Skeptic121 4 weeks ago 3
The War machine is sh## scared Ron Paul is getting his message across and it rings true to any one that has half a brain.
kjp68 4 weeks ago 2
America didn't go to war against the Nazis in WWII. They went to war against America.
davorb 4 weeks ago
@davorb Yes it did. FDR worked VERY hard to get the Japanese to attack the Pacific fleet, and did NOTHING to protect it. He needed a catastrophe to justify the US entry into WWII.
TheLegalImmigrant05 4 weeks ago 2
Everything this man says is spot on. Why can't we have more news men like John Stossel?
Dartht33bagger 4 weeks ago 3
I thought this Col. died on Pandora?
MrJoeystockdale 4 weeks ago 4
Dont they give some kind of basic intelligence test before they promote people to colonel in the US army?
LUOHANMAN 4 weeks ago
@LUOHANMAN No. Its all PT tests, passing a Officer course, and getting good reviews from people's ass you kissed.
RobTzu 4 weeks ago
When did we become a nation of violent killers?
Franchise70 4 weeks ago
@Franchise70 pff 1913ish? Maybe WW1 with Wilson to be more accurate.
pbfrank13 4 weeks ago
i'm ashamed to have david hunt as one of the leaders in our military..seems like this dude overdose on morphine...
jasonkimist 4 weeks ago
Dude looks like a very old Bruce Willis.
bonesaw8 4 weeks ago
The Col. sounds like he does not believe what he is saying.
wordception 4 weeks ago 2
The colonel keeps referring to "this time of war". I'm so sick of this BS line, it's a neverending time of war, a perpetual time of war, right out of Orwell's 1984, The boogie man is under every bed and behind every garbage can, right Colonel? We must give up our rights, shred our constitution and pay trillions out in Homeland security and foreign meddling because it's a perpetual "time of war"? Sounds like lots of jobs for you military men, eh colonel?
MrJaundiced 4 weeks ago
The defense policy of the United States is based on a simple premise: The United States does not start fights. We will never be an aggressor. ~Ronald Reagan
peaceliberty4all 1 month ago
7:40 - Dude, Israel has over 300 nukes. Having more facts would have made the arguments more powerful.
stevemcgee99 1 month ago
6:12 - actually, Netanyahu (or was it the other guy?) said he DIDN'T NEED our foreign aid. He said that in front of the US Congress, and it's in the congressional record.
stevemcgee99 1 month ago
I think the retired col. doesn't read anything.
stevemcgee99 1 month ago
The chain reaction of evil--wars producing more wars -- must be broken, or we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation. ~Martin Luther King, Jr
Wars are poor chisels for carving out peaceful tomorrows. ~Martin Luther King, Jr
In the eyes of empire builders men are not men but instruments. ~Napoleon Bonaparte
Preventive war is like committing suicide out of fear of death. ~Otto von Bismarck
peaceliberty4all 1 month ago
"War is a racket. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives". ~General Smedley Butler
"Political language. . . is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable"
~George Orwell
"No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare". ~James Madison
"The greatest protection against war is a well educated populace."~L.L. Castetter
peaceliberty4all 1 month ago
Col. David Hunt, you sir are a bought and paid for pawn of the Military Industrial Complex... Is it any wonder you can't understand the rationality of Ron Paul's Foreign Policy...
Seabhacre 1 month ago
Interesting version of the Army - Navy game, eh
gman68137 1 month ago
1:48 Stop all investments! This is an obvious freudian slip.......the guy has investments in this wars!!! Thats all these war are for the establishment, a very bloody unethical INVESTMENT!
This is criminal!!
seamaverick1 1 month ago
Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear - kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor - with the cry of grave national emergency.
~General Douglas MacArthur
Sound familiar?
peaceliberty4all 1 month ago
col. hunt...blah, blah, blah
alad77 1 month ago 2
the col. got flustered quick... what a douchebag..
daPlumber702 1 month ago 2
I think they are both good guys who both makes good points but Im taking my chances w. Ron Paul...
DumbVoters 1 month ago
Colonel David Allen Hunt is an Idiot...Did a Vid Response to this...If you cannot find it here...Go to my channel and watch it...
OlGreyWolf58 1 month ago 3
Good video. Ron Paul is secure in America's ability to defend itself and I think he is on the right track, like a lot of military members believe also.
ThePelicans44 1 month ago
Actually, it has some to do with Bin Laden, but A lot to do with the US imposing our will on the holy lands on Saudi Arabia AND the little incident where we bombed an aspirin factory in Sudan in 1998. What if Soviet Russia built a military base right on the Arlington cemetery grounds and bombed a General Motors plant in Michigan? You could bet a group of "patriots" led by Dick Chaney, would gather together in a plot to seek revenge on some Russian commies, in Russia, no?
scalp340 1 month ago
FUCKING LIARS we don't need to give Israel any money. they are doing good for themselves.
xLowLightx 1 month ago
@xLowLightx oh and I'm not against Israel i have family there
xLowLightx 1 month ago
stop helping Israel wait stop helping everyone else.
xLowLightx 1 month ago
3:11 watch he does the head bobble guy on left fucking funny KINDERGARDEN.LOLOLOLOL
xLowLightx 1 month ago
WOW first 1:30 and i can find so many bullshit points.
xLowLightx 1 month ago
A clear win for the peace makers (ie the sane).
Great job Stossel.
healthhavencom 1 month ago
I'm Israeli and think that the US should end aid to our country, and I'm not some leftist idiot (we have a large supply over in Tel Aviv). A lot of people don't understand what the aid entails, it's basically a dumping of money that we have to pay back to the USA's military companies so they can be inefficient and charge American taxpayers huge amounts of money. We should be friends, not the USA's military pet project. I like Ron Paul, he has this sincereness I never see from politicans
mites7 1 month ago
Detractors of a non-interventionist foreign policy always complain that we over-simplify problems overseas, as if any one philosophy had a monopoly on that. When arguing against Ron Paul's foreign policy here, Hunt claims Paul wants to "dig a hole" and hide from the world.
MooseOfReason 1 month ago
Please check out reddit (dot) com (slash) r (slash) ronpaul
Join a community of supporters, discuss debates live, and spread the word!
seebradrun 1 month ago
It's a good thing he is retired.
seebradrun 1 month ago
RON PAUL 2012!
SuperSneakySteve 1 month ago
This Colonel is whacked! Was he in the Israeli Army or the US? His responses are half agreeing with Dr. Paul and then just as easily calling Dr. Paul crazy!
His position are indefensible.
Vote RON PAUL 2012
glocestersteve 1 month ago
Would have been great if he let the colonel attempt a hornet metaphor rebuttal
michaeledwardburns 1 month ago
Yeah sure, if America just pull home all of its troops and leave the islamist alone, they'll say "thank you very much America!", "now we'll stop with terrorism and hostilities toward the West.". Yeah right. Ron Paul is a danger to world peace.
enevighet17 1 month ago
@enevighet17 Yes, I see your point. World peace can only by achieved by pursuing a perpetual, unwinnable war against a tactic, not an enemy. How come Paul can't understand this?
fzqlcs 1 month ago
@fzqlcs
Ron Paul should adopt a greater understanding of the clash of civilizations (the idealogical war) that is currently occurring in our globalized world. Americans shouldn't be that naive that they think they can win the wars through pure force, but to completely withdraw, become indifferent and passive toward islamist like Ron Paul is proposing is plain dangerous.
enevighet17 2 weeks ago
@enevighet17 Read Pat Buchanan's latest column: Ron Paul: Reactionary or Visionary. This column explains why Paul's plan puts America in the best possible defensive position. Google the terms, it is easy to find.
fzqlcs 2 weeks ago
I SAW THIS ON FOX NEWS. RON PAUL IS WINNING! HE'S CHANGING THE CONVERTATION
greatgatsb9o921o 1 month ago
Guy in the middle reminds me of the Ringbanger episode on MASH with Leslie Nielsen.
Haviq 1 month ago
Problems in Korea? Why should the American taxpayers be forced to pay for that too? Leave the American tax payers alone.
elbuggo 1 month ago
I love it when war mongers have to defend themselves. They self destruct within just a few exchanges.
razerfish 1 month ago
The Col. is the comedy find of the season. The Cold War zeitgeist is still acute & emergent for the neo-cons. Great interview!
BrotherWoody1 1 month ago
this whole discussion seemed to be based on the misconception that those who are running Iran are as rational as the soviets were.
oofinity 1 month ago
In the same vein, to compare the nuclear stand-off between the US and the Soviets with a theocratic millitary state that acquires WMDs is, again, to miss the distinctions entirely.
regelemihai 1 month ago
I'm a astaunch libertarian in all issues, even in foreign policy.I have been, for a long time, an advocate of a neo-conservative approach to foreign policy and have since revoked that.But one thing I cannot accept is to attribute the actions of islamo-fascism to US foreign policy. Thos people have been stoning women, gays, and bombing each other for centuries.To say that the radical elements of their beliefs are just a reactionary impulse,is to disregard their long history of violence entirely.
regelemihai 1 month ago
Comment removed
CountArtha 1 month ago
@CountArtha
If you recognize correctly that they will hate us no matter what, your last point seems to contradict that. If it's their culture, and the radical nature of their religion that drives this fanaticism, then it really doesn't make any sense to attribute that radicalism to anything other than their own system of beliefs. I mean, they bombed 200 innocent civilians in Bali because they disliked the fact that the UN gave East timor independence.
regelemihai 1 month ago
@regelemihai I never said Islam was modern or pacific - I'm saying that it doesn't have to be our problem. Qutbist and Wahhabist Muslim extremists would much rather turn their energies on the "corrupt" (i.e., not fundamentalist enough) governments of Saudi Arabia, Egypt et al. If we left Afghanistan tomorrow, the Taliban wouldn't follow us home; they would fight Pakistan because they're a Pashtun nationalist movement. This is what Ron Paul and his advisors mean when they say intervention
CountArtha 1 month ago
Exactly right. The violence in these regions is so imbibed in the culture that one cannot say that external provocation is what causes these people to retalliate. They use every excuse in the book to justify mass murder--even if the actions taht spurred such attacks are noble, and are not the result of aggressive US foreign policy. If we left Afghianistan the Taliban would regain control and institute Sharia law as they did before we invaded them; that's exactly my point.
regelemihai 1 month ago
@regelemihai Afghanistan under the Taliban is not a place I would want to live, but I don't think making it right is worth $500 billion and 1,500 dead Americans.
CountArtha 1 month ago
@regelemihai (continued)
undermines our national security - we're taking the enemies of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Israel and making them into OUR enemies.
CountArtha 1 month ago
"we're taking the enemies of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Israel"
I don't think that had we stayed out, they wouldn't consider us their enemies. They hate Israel so much so that they want all the Jews to be exterminated, or thrown out of their country. The only provocation there is the fact that they exist. In considering this issue you cannot find a rational explanation to their reaction. They hate all that is not Islamic.
I do agree with Paul taht we don't need to intervene and police...
regelemihai 1 month ago
...the world, or any country that finds itself facing terrorism or dictatorships. He's right on that. It's not our business to national build, or rescue others from their woes. But to ignore the reality of islamo-fascism is silly.
regelemihai 1 month ago
@regelemihai And I have agreed that radical Islam as a political movement will continue to exist. Do you dispute, though, that U.S. (and Israeli!) foreign policy has radicalized more Muslims? It's not politically correct to say so, but Israel hasn't exactly been blameless in its treatment of Arabs in Palestine. For every diehard who hates Israel no matter what, there are at least ten everyday Muslims who are driven into their arms by American and Israeli belligerence. That's...
CountArtha 1 month ago
"but Israel hasn't exactly been blameless in its treatment of Arabs in Palestine."
I don't see how. They have every right any other citizen has in Israel, with the added bonus of not being forced to serve in the army. IN the disputed territories the ongoing conflict is the result of Palestinian terrorism. They want Israel in the hands of Arabs, and have proven to be intolerant and unyielding with respect to any peace proposition and concession. And yet, they still act belligerently.
regelemihai 1 month ago
@regelemihai (continued)
...not to say that terrorism is ever justified, nor is it "blaming America;" but I would put it to you that Islamism would not be such a strong worldwide movement if the United States and her allies didn't fan the flames and alienate Muslims of every stripe with unnecessary foreign wars and by supporting oppressive regimes like the Saudi monarchy. New terrorists are made every day by our foreign policy, and in that respect it has been a total failure.
CountArtha 1 month ago
@CountArtha
Terrorists have existed long before the US has began its intervention policies, and long before the US was even an Idea--you correclty admitted it yourself. That religion was spread by the sword from its conception, and conquered half of the free world at one point. I see the rationale behind your type of thinking, but again, given the nature of the conflict I simply can't attribute it to anything else besides their religion. In a normal type of conflict, I'd have to agree with..
regelemihai 1 month ago
...you. Any nation that is being bombed would normally react accordingly. But when we talk about a group of people who believe they are doing the will of a higher power, and when that divine decree happens to also support killings, and violence, searching for rational explanations doesn't work. I think this is where we disagree. Had we not talked about islamic terrorism, then yes, I'd be inclined to agree with you.
regelemihai 1 month ago
@regelemihai I'm not getting through to you, am I? We don't disagree at all that Islamic terrorists are motivated to kill by religion. The only difference, as far as I can see, is that you would rather attribute ALL the anti-Americanism in the Muslim world to religion whereas I can only attribute it to the more radical ones. Islam is a recipe for violence, yes; but what makes Islamists single us out for that violence? Is it our culture and values, or is it our militarism?
CountArtha 1 month ago 2
@CountArtha Dude, you NAILED it. It's not just Islam, it's Islam AND our militarism put together. Islam is just the tool for them. The cause is our invasions and murders of civilians, our pushing around their people and governments, our interference and propping up of states and dictators we approve of.
Itugen88 1 month ago
"but what makes Islamists single us out for that violence?"
Well, first of all, I think we are making progress. You are getting through to me in a sense that I agree that our intervention is often times unecessary and distructive, but my disagreement with you is on the point of how we interpret their reaction and how do we act in response. If all we're here to argue is that simply because they perceive our actions to be insulting, or see it as a carte blanche to do all kinds of attrocities...
regelemihai 1 month ago
...against us, then every single actions of ours--whether justified, or dumb (like the invasion of Iraq)--will be perceived in the exact same way by them. If all we want to do is avoid hurting their feelings, then like I said. we'd have to let Indonesia continue to oppress East Timor; because once we helped that minority escape persecution and gain independence, they saw it as their right to bomb 200 people to death. So yeah, in that sense if we don't want to be singled out, we have to allow....
regelemihai 1 month ago
...all kinds of crimes to take place. But complacency will only get you so far. It is why Europe and other countries aren't targeted like us--because they allow the slow radicalization of their culture to Islamic fanaticism without saying a peep. The English and the Spaniards aren't in any way like us, and yet they experienced firsthand what these people are capable of, in 2004 and 2005 respectively. It's sad, but that's the reality.
regelemihai 1 month ago
@regelemihai Those are two different issues, bud. Just because we "go not abroad in search of monsters to destroy" doesn't mean we have to endorse or even tolerate radicalism. You make it sound as though our only two options are all-out holy war with an entire religion, or total appeasement. Why not do what we did for 109 years of our history - set an example for the world to follow, and butt out of other people's irrational squabbles? I say living well is the best revenge.
CountArtha 4 weeks ago
@CountArtha
On that you do have a point. I think it only becomes a problem when taht radicalism spreads out to such proportions as to resemble a second caliphate. When we reach that stage, I don't think we'd be able to afford sitting calmly at home. But until then, I agree to an extent--we should stay home and let those people take care of themselves.
regelemihai 4 weeks ago
@regelemihai Well, creating a caliphate is the ultimate goal of many Islamist groups including al-Qaeda. I doubt they'll make it happen because, frankly, most Muslims like living in the modern age and would never support it.
The Christians who fought in the First Crusade, the Siege of Malta, or the Battle of Lepanto faced a much greater danger to their civilization than we face today, so if this ever does come to a clash of civilizations, it's not likely to be in my lifetime.
CountArtha 4 weeks ago
@CountArtha
I wouldn't be that sure. The cultural influence has been trickling down for decades on in Europe, and hasn't been geting much better. People in response just seem to embrace PC and capitulation. The trends of islamization in the past few years shows that it's not really in decline. While in the Middle Ages the imposition of islam was much more "in yer face", today it's just as strong, only a lot more subtle.Rich and "enlightened" muslims carried out most of the decade's famous...
regelemihai 4 weeks ago
...terrorist attacks; from the London bombings, to the Madrid bombings, to 9/11, to the Texas fort hood massacre, and so on. Their religious fervor trumps their sense of self preservation and comfort. Not everyone, granted, but it is a strong element in their culture.
regelemihai 4 weeks ago
@regelemihai Luckily we have criminal justice system for handling violence within our own borders - Muslim and non-Muslim alike.
CountArtha 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@regelemihai Why only the U.S., though? Why not Canada, or Australia, or Sweden? Heck, most of Europe is more culturally degenerate than America. Fundamentalists will hate America no matter what our foreign policy looks like, but the reason terrorism has MAINSTREAM appeal in the Muslim world is because Osama bin Laden was able to convince them that the U.S. was an existential threat to Islam. We made the case for him by attacking Muslim countries that didn't threaten us.
CountArtha 1 month ago
3:12 - Dude, David Hunt is an asshole.
CountArtha 1 month ago
The gentleman representing the "prowar" party, was really struggling. And I seem to remember him in the past being quite articulate. Looks like Ron Paul's position is pretty compelling.
tacitus7 1 month ago
wow
JoeyPencils 1 month ago
WE WERE ASK TO HELP WITH THE WW2 .
THIS ONE WE JUST WENT IN TO IT. IT WENT NO WERE
GET YOUR ASS BACK HOME. RON PAUL 2012 RON PAUL 2012 RON PAUL 2012
RON PAUL 2012 RON PAUL 2012 RON PAUL 2012
RON PAUL 2012 RON PAUL 2012 RON PAUL 2012
RON PAUL 2012 RON PAUL 2012 RON PAUL 2012
galegregory97comcast 1 month ago
"Hunt, whom O'Reilly has described as 'the feistiest guy we have' repeatedly attempted to link Saddam to terrorism, predicted that the U.N.'s refusal to support U.S. military action in Iraq signaled 'the end of the United Nations' , and suggested that Saddam would 'torch' his country in facing the United Nations inspectors' Hunt added that the Pentagon's mere assertion of that possibility 'is all we need' to invade Iraq.
barbourjohn 1 month ago
Stossel could find someone more articulate for the "pro-war" side.
ghrabi33 1 month ago
Iran wants its people to survive and become energy independent - they have no refinery capacity and need nuclear power for domestic power (requires 3% uranium enrichment) and medical treatment (requires 20% uranium enrichment).They don't have the resources and have no interest in bombing anyone with a nuclear weapon - even if they had one (requires uranium enrichment to 90%)
puppetjaw 1 month ago
Militarism versus sound economic policy
puppetjaw 1 month ago
The news media drag out retired military officers who dismiss peace and non-interventionism every election cycle
puppetjaw 1 month ago
"in time of war!", "especially in time of war!" etc
Is the United States not always at war ?
I do understand why some agree with the issues that David Hunt expresses. I just don't agree with them myself.
ToxinalX 1 month ago 2
You wonder if this guy might have an interest in war and stoking the fear and paranoia to keep federal money flowing into the national security state??? Just a little digging and you find:
"Hunt is founder and president of D.A.R. Inc., Global Security Consultants, "an international security consulting firm based in Scarborough, Maine." Hunt is also a member of the Advisory Board of StorCard, Inc., which provides storage and "security solutions" for digital information."
jscott2700 1 month ago
How would any body feel if their son or daughter was under the command of a Col. Hunt when he seems like a nut job, on cocaine, all juiced up? And when will military members have the courage to defend the Constitution by not obey unlawful orders...esp when the orders come from someone like Hunt?
Kevinsouth 1 month ago
Listen to this globalist establishment prick, he just as well said, "what the hell do these soldiers know" Exuse me Adolph but they are the ones who are fighting and dying for these evil wars that you and your rich white buddies start, what a piece of garbage trash this guy is, makes me sick!
Allanlegacy43 1 month ago
Col. Hunt is a typical non-listener. He makes a statement like "Ron Paul's foreign policy is dangerous," and when he's countered with logical, factual arguments his retort is just to restate his opinion. We get what your opinion is, Col., our question is why is that your opinion, and what your answer to the counterarguments are.
jtropeano 1 month ago 14
@jtropeano hehe reminds me of Catch-22
uhhhmm1 1 month ago
"stop helping Israel"
exiquio 1 month ago
Must suck to sit there and realize that you are NOT the smartest man in the room.
TheKaffeeKlatsch 1 month ago
War is peace? Ignorance is strength? We really are living in an Orwellian nightmare! I was raised on military bases, & I can tell you all about people like Mr. Hunt. They have an entirely different way of thinking. More or less, "what can we destroy next"?! Imagine if all the manpower and resources that have been used on war, making our children (& theirs) into hamburger and rivers of blood, had instead been used to; invent, create, & build a better humanity for all of us. We can only dream...
rross27 1 month ago 9
@rross27 1984 should been titled 2012. :p
GhibliOmatiC 1 month ago
The reason why neocon's have to resort to name calling with RP is that their arguments (as you can see here) are just plain ridiculous. And the hypocrisy of 'conservatives' arguing for absurdly wasteful 'defense' spending in this day and age is ripe indeed.
svenp 1 month ago 4
This war monger reminds me of joe pesci in lethal weapon
danbuck333 1 month ago 3
This Colonel is just pissing me off. Can he just stfu already?
sonnybrown 1 month ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
Colonel David Hunt at 3:26 : "The issue of why 3,000 Americans got killed has little to do with Saudi Arabia and everything to do with Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda."
.
The fact that Hunt is completely unaware of the fact that 15 of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 as well as Osama Bin Laden himself were all Saudis is proof of how ignorant he really is when it comes to foreign policy.
schulwitz 1 month ago
Comment removed
schulwitz 1 month ago
The War Monger has a hard time with the question "WHY?"
BuyMMAcards 1 month ago
We have the greatest armed forces in the world, with the most highly advanced weapons, far beyond what anyone knows about. No one can touch us.
How would closing a few bases and ending wasteful military programs suddenly make us isolationist?
CRAPCANNONS 1 month ago
1,5% gdp to Israel each year wow
robertpires87 1 month ago
The Military isn't a voting block? Is that guy high?
atchisrj1 1 month ago 3
@atchisrj1 How can a half million persons not be a voting block? Eh, maybe because the millions of persons who depend on the jobs created by that industry and the billions of dollars in political donations.
One of the few growing industries in US is the arms industry. Sadly that industry is based on destroying wealth. It may create jobs but it is a sinkhole for life, resources and wealth.
deadman12078 1 month ago
@deadman12078 I'm sorry but, are you agreeing with me or not?
atchisrj1 1 month ago
@atchisrj1 I agre with you. The military is just a smaller voting block than those who are dependant on the miltary for jobs/money.
What happened when Clinton closed bases? How many cities died? Though government jobs are not productive jobs they are stll part of the food chain.
What happens when you misallocate wealth? Eventualy there is an equalibrium that must be met. If the US cuts military spending... allot more than military jobs will be lost. Vote war or unemployment
deadman12078 1 month ago
I can't stand war mongers! Ever notice how those who disagree with Ron Paul always try to make him sound like he's crazy.
im1greatman 1 month ago 31
@im1greatman yeah, it is a bit funny how people who want murder on a mass scale are supposed to be the normal ones, lol.
Wesker1982 1 month ago
@im1greatman
I cant stand Ron Paul. Anyone whos disagrees with him is labeled a neocon or a warmonger.
See what I did there? You ron paul people are so stupid and hypocritical, you cant even see it. Sorry, just because you arent afraid to go to war, doesnt mean you are a warmonger. ron paul is a pussy.
girzwald3 1 month ago
@im1greatman That's because those who do not have a legitimate argument, usually resort to name calling.
MyDadsRubberBroke 1 month ago
War mongering neo-cons are painful to listen to.
MyOwnYTAccount 1 month ago 17
Whenever one hears, "blaming us for 9/11" you know the person hasn't even given any serious investigation into Ron Paul's foreign policy stance.
David Hunt's essential argument is that the motivations for a crime don't matter, only who commits the crime matters.
3 Billion dollars a year in aid to Israel is 1.5% of Israel's GDP. wow..
David Hunt needs to read a little about the non-aggression principle.
Reckless3057 1 month ago 5
Hitler couldn't even cross the English Channel. There was zero chance of an American Invasion by Hitler; it's ridiculous. They propagandized the hell out of the whole thing, just as they did in The Great War, just as they did in the Spanish-American war, just like they're doing today.
Countries in Europe and Asia fight with each other. It's what they do. We should capitalize on our good fortune of living an ocean away and stay out of their retarded squabbles. War IS avoidable for us.
calctube 1 month ago
This military man needs an interpreter. He is most definitely not a public speaker.
justicetrooper 1 month ago
I just wonder how much money the war supporters think we can continue to print and wage against the future of many generations. Are you willing to completely bankrupt what is left of this country? I guess you will be safe from terrorism while you starve to death
daizee106 1 month ago
@daizee106 There is much more spent on welfare as a category of government spending than defence. Add into that, unfunded liabilities. Long term defence spending on US bases and fleets was cut by Bush Snr and Clinton. Since 2001 the wars are short term or temporary spending. When the Afghan war ends, this temporary spending will be obvious. But the welfare budget will only grow. Defence spendng isnt the only elephant in the room.
Siegetower 1 month ago
@Siegetower I totally agree with you on that
daizee106 1 month ago
ron paul is wrong. and if he gets elected, national security will be compromised.
wwclay86 1 month ago
@wwclay86 Ron Paul is all for national security.. just not occupation, nation building and pre-emptive attacks. Halfing $700 billion budget to $350 B, still means the USA is much bigger than China at $150 B... and that's just the income statement, the USA's military balance sheet is vast!
dmg46664 1 month ago
@dmg46664 But that's accounting. China doesn't have to pay the same wages etc. for what it gets. The US has very few naval units left. That's a fact. Just because the war spending is stupid doesn't mean the US is ready. Others develop weapons to precisely counter US carriers and other assets. That's what I don't get with Ron Paul. Why no details on what cut specifically? I guess he doesn't know as a flight surgeon.
scepticsteve 1 month ago
@dmg46664 go sell that to someone else. im in the military, and i do beleive that preemptive action is the way to go. any political candidate that even looks soft on national security wont get my vote. the term prepostioining should ring a bell when it comes to the basing of us forces. by having troops, ships, planes ect in a area saves time and money instead of hurrying to get forces into a troubled sector or area....
wwclay86 1 month ago
@wwclay86 Saves time and money? It wastes countless Billions to keep them there. You must be glad the American tax payer is paying for such waste as it keeps your paycheck rolling, but that is not a rational cost/benefit analysis basis for keeping the bases there. America should be protecting it's assets... not other nation's assets, that's just international welfare, which is never a good idea. Let Korea protect Korea, and Germany protect Germany.
dmg46664 1 month ago
@dmg46664 if we had of acted instead of sitting around on our asses , ww2 coulda had a different out come.. it costs more to suddenly surge troops and send them from the mainland then to to use predeployed troops.... and guess what... i dont do my job for the money. its never been about the money. there are real patriots left ya know....
wwclay86 1 month ago
@wwclay86 Wars are almost always won by the country who is more powerful economically. At the start of WW2 the USA had the 17th most powerful military in the world. By the end, it had the most powerful! That's despite it's loss at Pearl harbour! The private sector can switch to building warfare on a dime when the risk is great! America needs to get it's budget in order, or it will fall like Rome fell. Economic reality trumps military reality.
dmg46664 1 month ago
@dmg46664 lets get one thing straight. i dont do my job for money. i dont do it to opress other people. i do it keep AMERICANS and our allies safe. i dont get paid much to do it. yes we could save alot of money if we all sat stateside and did nothing. but we cant do that. it wouldnt be right. it may take another big attack to get everyones mind in the right frame....
wwclay86 1 month ago
@wwclay86 I'm sure your motives are noble. I don't question them. I question that in your noble motives you fail to make rational assessments of risks and rewards... Is the tax payer getting the bang for his buck. There the answer is no. tinyurl(.)com/d5ubj3n
dmg46664 1 month ago