In response to:

A Foreign Policy of Arrogant Meddling

zmazurak Wrote: Oct 24, 2012 3:28 PM
What a litany of blatant lies! Firstly, the pending cuts are not mere "cuts in growth"; they are REAL cuts in defense spending. 1st round of the BCA: down from $535B in '12 to $521B in '13. If sequestration kicks in, defense will go down to $469B in '13 and not recover from it for an entire decade. The results will be weapon program killing across the board and drastic cuts in the force structure of ALL services, including the nuclear deterrent. As a result, the US military will be too small to defend even America itself, to say nothing of its allies.
MoreFreedom Wrote: Oct 24, 2012 4:08 PM
It's you sir who've posted lies. Daniel Mitchell wrote regarding sequestration "It shows that spending – including defense spending – will increase regardless of what happens." http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/danieljmitchell/2011/11/18/conservative_members_of_stupid_party_push_tax_increase/page/full/

It's simply the dishonest DC budget math, where cuts are really reductions in the planned increases in spending.

I note you've no references to back your false claims.

A year before Mitt Romney picked him as a running mate, Paul Ryan gave a speech in which he discussed the promise and peril of the Arab Spring. "It's too soon to tell whether these revolutions will result in governments that respect the rights of their citizens or in one form of autocracy ... supplanting another," he said. "While we work to assure the former, American policy should be realistic about our ability to avert the latter."

More generally, Ryan said, "American policy should be tempered by a healthy humility about the extent of our power to control events in...