There is a HUGE difference between acknowledging the reason the muzzies attacked us and your rash, unfounded "interpretation" of what was said.
The proximate reason the Japanese attacked us at Pearl Harbor was because we had cut off scrap metal shipments to them.
Does that mean we should have met their wishes and continued the shipments?
Did that justify the attack?
The point is that, just because our actions -- consistent with our national interest -- might offend some irrational actor, does it give them the right to attack us?
Paul seems to believe it does.
There is a difference between recognizing what is driving our enemies and justifying same.
Which is to say: I would not entrust Dr. Paul with responsibility for our national security for so much as a millisecond.