There was once a guy named Neville Chamberlain who thought like this.
Posted on 12/19/2007 5:34:25 AM PST by 50mm
Ron Paul is the only Republican presidential candidate saying we should get our troops out of Iraq now. Here's more of my edited interview with the congressman.
Some people say that if we don't attack the enemy there, they'll attack us here.
Ron Paul: I think the opposite is true. The radicals were able to use our bases in Saudi Arabia and the bombing of Iraq (from 1991 to 2001) as a reason to come over here. If China were to do the same thing to us, and they had troops in our land, We would resent it. We'd probably do some shooting.
Is this case not different? Religious fanatics hate us and want to kill us because of our culture.
I don't think that's true. It is not Muslim fanaticism that is the culprit. The litmus test is whether we are actually occupying a territory. In the case of Saudi Arabia, that was holy land.
Many say the surge in Iraq is succeeding, that we're at a turning point now, and we are creating a model of democracy in a part of the world that hasn't seen that.
That's the propaganda. I don't happen to believe that.
And if in most of Iraq, some religious fanatic comes to power and has money to buy nuclear weapons, we should just leave him alone?
The Soviets had the technology. They were 90 miles off our shore, and they had nuclear weapons there. But we were able to talk to them. We took our missiles out of Turkey. They took the missiles out of Cuba. We should be talking to people like this. It's the lack of diplomacy that is the greatest threat, not the weapons themselves.
You say we shouldn't be the world's policemen. Isn't it our responsibility to help others?
It's OK for us to personally help other people. But to go around the world and spread democracy -- goodness, no -- too many unintended consequences. It usually requires force. I think we should only do those things under the prescribed conditions of the Constitution.
Is war ever justifiable?
Sure. If you're attacked, you have a right and an obligation to defend (your) country. I do not believe there is ever a moral justification to start the war.
So in World War II, we were justified?
Sure.
How about going into Afghanistan after Sept. 11?
I voted for that authority to go after those responsible for 9/11.
The Korean War?
Totally unjustified.
Kosovo?
Absolutely unjustified.
Vietnam?
A horror.
The first Iraq war? Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. He might have invaded the next country, and the next.
I bet Israel would have done something about it, and I bet Saudi Arabia maybe would have talked to Israel. I think if it would have been left to the region, they might have taken care of Saddam Hussein in 1990 and we wouldn't have the problems we have today.
What if there's genocide and terrible suffering in a country?
It's a tragedy, and we can have a moral statement, but you can't use force of arms to invade other countries to make them better people. Our job is to make us a better people.
You'd pull American troops out of Korea, Germany, the Middle East, everywhere?
I would. Under the Constitution, we don't have the authority to just put troops in foreign countries willy-nilly when we're not at war.
If North Korea invades South Korea, we should just leave it alone?
Sure, but it's not going to happen. South Korea's about 10 times more powerful than North Korea.
If China invaded Taiwan?
That's a border war, and they should deal with it.
If Canada invades Montana?
I think that might be a little bit different. Montana probably could take care of it, but we'd probably help them out from Washington if that happened.
That's a role for the federal government?
Oh, sure.
Next week: Ron Paul on subsidies to special interests.
So taxed2death, the only question I have is MIHOP or LIHOP?
I never said that Ron Paul was a conspiracy nut, but it is a certainty that many of his supporters are.
There was once a guy named Neville Chamberlain who thought like this.
“If this were true, then there was a conspiracy. And you just admitted you believe it.”
____________________________________________________________
You can’t be serious can you? I think you’ve been reading a bit too much conspiracy stuff. I’m sure OBL had underlings (soldiers) and such at his disposal. Would you at least agree with that? Do you really think OBL did this all by himself?
I thought my analogy was pretty clear? Do you think that there is a human being alive today...let’s just use our own military as an example...ok?....who could come up with a plan....do all the recon needed, have all the pieces to the puzzle fit and execute an attack like that... without help from those under his command?
Do you think we have one General in command who could micromanage an operation of this difficulty? GAWD, I would hope we are that lucky!
You sound like a nut.
Isn't that just like Paul... words over actions.. he denounces truthers in one breath and courts them on Alex Jones' radio program and takes part in Alex Jones' truther documentaries in another breath. Having your cake and eating it to.
You think that OBL recruited, trained, etc., all those people himself??!?! REALLY?!?!
Talk about nutty!
“...there has to be some big “conspiracy” which was probably cooked up by “globalists” who were no doubt doing the bidding of the “Zionists.” Then again it could have all be Halliburton’s doing.”
Can’t you get anything right? You left out the neo-cons.
“Who do you think is ultimately responsible for recruiting them and setting it all up?
Thanks for proving my point. There’s a big difference between being the big cheese.....and being the SOLE operator of an attack.
“He is “spot on,” in saying that we have no business waging war to change other people’s cultures.”
You don’t think we changed the ‘culture’ of Japan and Germany following WWII? We certainly do have the right to change the culture of any country who resorts to violence against us if no other reason than to make sure we don’t have to whip their butts a second time.
I’m pretty sure that one of the Paulistinians recently informed me that a neo-con was nothing more than a globalist who supports Israel.
But the Big Cheese is always the #1 target of any military action. If you cut off the head, the body dies. At the same time, if you injur the body enough, it dies as well. You shouldn’t go after one without the other.
How often does he refer to statements like the ‘military/industrial complex’?
Again, let George Washinton's admonitions in his Farewell Address, answer the arguments of the interventionists, in the precise context of the President's address:
George Washington's Answer To President Bush.
William Flax
You flatly brought the question of OBL's "responsibility" for 9/11. The implication, of course, is that "others" were responsible.
Now you state: "I’m sure OBL had underlings (soldiers) and such at his disposal. Would you at least agree with that? Do you really think OBL did this all by himself?
Of course not. OBL did not act alone. The 19 hijackers, as well as others within his organization is testament to that. But this in no way removes him from responsibility.
Do you think that there is a human being alive today...let’s just use our own military as an example...ok?....who could come up with a plan....do all the recon needed, have all the pieces to the puzzle fit and execute an attack like that... without help from those under his command?
Again, of course not. But in your initial sentence you question his responsibility. And the fact he'd built an organization that carried out 9/11 does in no way mean others beyond that organization were implicit. But it doesn't rule that out, either.
You call me a nut? You're the nut for even getting into this discussion. You opened the door. I closed it on you. I suggest now you back off big time because you've not only dug yourself a hole, you're adding to it.
I see our war in the ME against Islamic fascism as a retaliatory war. We didn't start this. They did. None of the evidence I've seen to date, and I've seen a lot, leads me to any other conclusion. We either go there and destroy them, or we WILL get hit again here.
I don't like the way the war is being fought, but it still needs to be fought. Duncan, IMO, is the best man for the job.
Nope. But the posts have been about a conspiracy beyond OBL's organization. So, which is it: MIHOP or LIHOP?
“You don’t think we changed the ‘culture’ of Japan and Germany following WWII? “
Nukes have a way of coalescing ones thoughts and making one more receptive to another POV.
LOL
“To quote you: “if one is to believe he is responsible for the 911 attacks and if one is to believe what he wrote
You flatly brought the question of OBL’s “responsibility” for 9/11. The implication, of course, is that “others” were responsible. “
Nonsense. Splitting hairs. You play a part in an attack you are culpable. No one man is an army. No one acted alone.
“I suggest now you back off big time because you’ve not only dug yourself a hole, you’re adding to it.”
Riiiiiiiighhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhht.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.