So, taken from this context, am I to assume that you'd rather just let the world get shaped by whatever forces happen to be stronger and better organized, and wait until we're overmatched and attacked to defend ourselves?
Are you one of those neighbors that never waves at anyone, refuses to become part of neighborhood watch, and people just comment after reading your obituary, "Oh! That's who lived there!"
I'd rather the US government not undertake counterproductive policies. I've cited some US intelligence that opines that the war in Iraq has strengthened the jihadist movement...do you have any objective sources that say otherwise? (not to say there are not...if there are I would be interested in reading them...I've just not seen any)
Here is another study (from another like-minded source?)...from the Department of Defense itself
As part of its global power position, the United States is called upon frequently to respond to international causes and deploy forces around the world. America's position in the world invites attack simply because of its presence. Historical data show a strong correlation between US involvement in international situations and increase in terrorist attacks against the United States.
--October, 1997 Summer Study Task Force on Department of Defense Responses to Transnational Threats
1997 Study Task Force on Department of Defense Responses to Transnational Threats
I do not mean to be disrespectful, but you simply do not seem to grasp what the traditional American Foreign Policy, which Ron Paul advocates, is, nor how it actually functions. Please feel free to visit my web site, if you want further analysis, but the following are some basic concepts:
We are not isolationists. We never were. We simply avoid entangling alliances, other than for ad hoc purposes, which are in our own interest in dealing with problems of a moment in time. (See Washington's Farewell Address.)
We treat others with respect. We do not meddle in their affairs. We do not permit them to meddle in ours. We recognize the fundamental principle of the Law of Nations, that each Nation must be the judge of its own internal affairs. On the other hand, as Jefferson advised Washington--as our first Secretary of State--you must punish the First Insult.
Nothing in this policy prevents our defending ourselves. We are not meddlers. But we are not pacifists.
When you are attacked, not by a Nation but by a band of lawless internationalists--such as the Anarchists of yesterday, or Al Qaida, today--you take appropriate and necessary action. Dr. Paul's original proposal to issue letters of Marque & Reprisal, was a reasonable response to the attack, which might have avoided the trap which we have fallen into, whereby we have over-dramatized the ongoing threat, and actually helped our enemies to recruit many, many new terrorists.
It is also basic to our Constitutional system, that any use of the military must be directed to the Common Defense of these United States. Our military is not the personal play thing of the Government in Washington; and the Government in Washington have a solemn duty, not to misuse the American military for purposes not directly related to the Common Defense of the United States.
The traditional American policy, also called for calm assessment of any situation. There was little place for the "Drama Queens" of modern politics.
The Founding Fathers were steeped in human history. Their approach to dealing with others were derived from a study of the entirety of human experience, and shaped by a value system that is still sacred to American Conservatives.
William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site