Take Action: Oppose $30 Billion in Military Aid Package to Israel

onelongsong wrote:

i'd tell them where to shove their request and stop all aid.
what they're saying is that they want our help and money; they just want to set the terms in how we give it to them. it's like if i wanted to help you pay this months rent and you tell me no; i'd rather have a big screen tele. if you don't need the help why should i help?
the ____ is going to hit the fan and there's bad times ahead. when we have to start evacuating our shorelines we won't have the money to give them. in fact; we don't have the money to give them now; yet we cut our own throats to help them. they're just a bunch of ungrateful bastards.

I'm pretty much perfectly aligned with Ron Paul's message on the economy and foreign policy.

The only problem is that those that want America to fail realize that the best thing to do is keep things raging in the Middle East to waste as much resources as possible. I'm afraid it all might have been a bit like stepping into quicksand (no pun intended).

What if we all pull out, and another 9/11 happens to lure us back into the vicious spending spree? Right back to square one with a gun I suppose. Damned if you do damned if you don't. The key (so they say) in dealing with terrorism is not to play into the game in the first place.

I think the US, or where ever it happens (if it happens), is going to have to be prepared to turn the other cheek at the next "event". The smartest thing in retrospect would have been to do that for 9/11 (as hard as it would have been), The states had world sympathy at the time. Everyone was sided with America after 9/11.

I think we're at the point that everyone is just reacting poorly. I like Kucinich's idea of a peace dept in the govt. The media needs to start promoting peaceful messages, and feelings of security to calm things down. I think the media is not being used to its full capacity, it's an extremely powerful device when focused.

I'd like to think we'll get to see some kind of peaceful resolution to all this in our lifetimes. I just can't accept the alternative.

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

I think the US, or where ever it happens (if it happens), is going to have to be prepared to turn the other cheek at the next "event". The smartest thing in retrospect would have been to do that for 9/11 (as hard as it would have been), The states had world sympathy at the time. Everyone was sided with America after 9/11...

I disagree. The smartest thing we could've done was not attack a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. That's what lost our international support.

Or do you mean we shouldn't be involved in Afghanistan either?

JD Sal wrote:

I disagree. The smartest thing we could've done was not attack a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. That's what lost our international support.

Or do you mean we shouldn't be involved in Afghanistan either?

That's pretty much what just finished saying. But yeah no Afghanistan either.

You play into it and you lose. Basically what's happening right now. If anyting wait,and gather eventual world community support before going in, instead of telling the world to f - off and go in anyway.

Definitely not a full scale occupation at any cost either...occupation mode is a disaster.

The problem is when the world community opinion sours. That's the biggest loss of the battle.