Friday, September 14, 2007

Is Ron Paul unpatriotic?

Or just objective and honest?


I received an email with an article from Lew Rockwell on some things Ron Paul said during the Republican Presidential debates in South Carolina. Here are a few excerpts:
...
Ron was asked if he really wants the troops to come home, and whether that is really a Republican position.
...
"Well," he said, "I think the party has lost its way, because the conservative wing of the Republican Party always advocated a noninterventionist foreign policy. Senator Robert Taft didn't even want to be in NATO. George Bush won the election in the year 2000 campaigning on a humble foreign policy – no nation-building, no policing of the world. Republicans were elected to end the Korean War. The Republicans were elected to end the Vietnam War. There's a strong tradition of being anti-war in the Republican party. It is the constitutional position. It is the advice of the Founders to follow a non-interventionist foreign policy, stay out of entangling alliances, be friends with countries, negotiate and talk with them and trade with them."

...
He was then asked if 9-11 changed anything.

...
He responded that US foreign policy was a "major contributing factor. Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attacked us because we've been over there; we've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East – I think Reagan was right. We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. So right now we're building an embassy in Iraq that's bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us. "
...
And then out of the blue, he was asked whether we invited the attacks.

...
"I'm suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it, and they are delighted that we're over there because Osama bin Laden has said, 'I am glad you're over on our sand because we can target you so much easier.' They have already now since that time – have killed 3,400 of our men, and I don't think it was necessary."

...
Giuliani didn't like that and protested Paul's remarks. Ron Paul had this comeback:
...
Ron Paul was invited to respond, and concluded as follows:
...
"I believe very sincerely that the CIA is correct when they teach and talk about blowback. When we went into Iran in 1953 and installed the shah, yes, there was blowback. A reaction to that was the taking of our hostages and that persists. And if we ignore that, we ignore that at our own risk. If we think that we can do what we want around the world and not incite hatred, then we have a problem. They don't come here to attack us because we're rich and we're free. They come and they attack us because we're over there. I mean, what would we think if we were – if other foreign countries were doing that to us?" - Lew Rockwell

3 comments:

  1. Things that make you go "Hmmmmm"

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good question. I go w/the latter.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Georgette1:19 PM

    This man's character just blows me away -- courageous and honest in one package. They sure don't make 'em with virtue like that any more. May God bless him and keep him!

    Thanks posting this, Terry!

    ReplyDelete

Anonymous comments will no longer be accepted.
Please comment with charity and avoid ad hominem attacks. I exercise the right to delete comments I find inappropriate. Be sure and double check if your comment posted after you do the verification deal - sometimes it doesn't print if you made an error.