Prediction, Romney will get nominated then lose to obama in 2012.

Quote from 377OHMS:

Panty fire!

I'm going to vote in the general election for the republican candidate.

Certainly a damned yankee moderate from Massachusetts isn't my first choice but compared to Barrack Obama any of the remaining republican contenders would be more capable. If left to choose between Romney and Ron Paul I would vote for Ron Paul in the primary. I agree with his economic policies but disagree with his foreign policy. Still, he would be vastly better than Obama.

My guess is that if Ron Paul were elected some reality would be injected into his foreign policy after he was briefed on what is really going on around the world.

You can't agree with his economic policy if you disagree with his foreign policy. They aren't separable.
 
Quote from 377OHMS:

...Take the Korean penninsula. What would happen there if Ron Paul were president assuming he had sufficient congressional support to implement his policies.?

He has said he would bring all troops and equipment home from South Korea. If he did that what would happen?

I'm convinced that nothing would happen....
I think we should bring home troops from S.K. and I also doubt anything would happen.
 
Quote from 377OHMS:

He has been very frank about it and said himself that he would need congress to go along for his policies to work. He said he didn't think congress would do that. I could see him being in a major battle with congress almost from the start.

In trying to better understand Ron Paul I've dwelled on a small thought experiment. Instead of trying to speculate about what would happen worldwide I just concentrate on one small example.

Take the Korean penninsula. What would happen there if Ron Paul were president assuming he had sufficient congressional support to implement his policies.?

He has said he would bring all troops and equipment home from South Korea. If he did that what would happen?

I'm convinced that nothing would happen. I don't believe North Korea would immedietely attack South Korea or overrun Seoul. I don't think North Korea would attack Japan or really do anything they aren't already doing. If that is true then maybe he is right and we don't need to keep a single soldier there. I think probably South Korea would try to develop nuclear technology but part of me thinks they already have. The South has a large industrial base and produces some very good scientists and engineers. They probably already have their own nukes or we may have supplied them. It is likely the status quo would remain intact.

That makes me considerably less dismissive of Paul. It at least makes me wonder "what if he is right?".

I guess it is obvious I'm not liking Romney. :)

Now you are getting it bro.
 
Quote from KINGOFSHORTS:

So what if South Korea gets invaded by North Korea. That means now more corporations will think about outsourcing work to these countries.

Unable to process...non sequitur.
 
Quote from 377OHMS:

H
He has said he would bring all troops and equipment home from South Korea. If he did that what would happen?

I'm convinced that nothing would happen. I don't believe North Korea would immedietely attack South Korea or overrun Seoul. I don't think North Korea would attack Japan or really do anything they aren't already doing. If that is true then maybe he is right and we don't need to keep a single soldier there. I think probably South Korea would try to develop nuclear technology but part of me thinks they already have. The South has a large industrial base and produces some very good scientists and engineers. They probably already have their own nukes or we may have supplied them. It is likely the status quo would remain intact.

Are you just saying that as a guess, or are you familiar with the current relationship between north and south Korea and have formed an objective opinion.

I ask because I think it is a bit crazy how little press the Korean situation gets compared to the middle east. When was the last time you heard of a country in the middle east launching long range weapons in the direction of their enemy, then burying them in the ocean? When was the last time you heard of a middle eastern country aggressively sending battleships into enemy waters, simply to stir the pot and test the US for a reaction?

My point is that these things happen frequently in Korea even though the press here doesn't cover them much. North Korea is dangerous for one main reason. They don't have any trade relationships to protect. Their main source of foreign revenue is from weapons sales. Iran must protect its oil industry, so they are served by not causing too much trouble.

North Korea is actually rewarded for causing more trouble and without the US presence the war between north and south would already have resumed.
 
Quote from tomdavis:

Wow... you're really going out on a limb predicting Romney.

Intrade pegs him at an 80% chance of winning the nomination.

http://intrade.com/v4/markets/contract/?contractId=652757

Incumbent presidents get re-elected over 70% of the time, so that's not much of a prediction either.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/28/approval-ratings-and-re-election-odds/

If you're going to dazzle us with your predictions, please predict something that isn't so obvious that the entire world already knows it.

The OP likes to live on the edge. :D
 
Quote from Epic:

Are you just saying that as a guess, or are you familiar with the current relationship between north and south Korea and have formed an objective opinion.

Just a guess.
 
Quote from 377OHMS:

LOL he is "all-in" on the sun rising in the east tomorrow morning. :D

Hey I'll take some of that action. I'll put a sawbuck on the sun, they don't call me a high roller for nothing.
 
Back
Top