Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: globelamp
Isolationist policy would ban the supply of weapons to anyone. That's the nature of isolationism. Our standard of living would drop dramatically. Secondly, a Ron Paul adminstration would be the last administration to do anything for the Israelis.

Ron Paul says one crack-pot statement after another, and his drones not only ignore it, but make excuses for it. Ron Paul has extended his hands to the Mullah and Ayatollahs of Iran, not the Israelis. Ron Paul is the Jihad's Useful Idiot.

The Islamists in Iran wish to thank Ron Paul and his dead-ender supporters.

92 posted on 11/10/2011 7:13:53 AM PST by lormand (A Government who robs Peter to pay Paul, will always have the support of Paul)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies ]


To: lormand

“Isolationism” could mean many things. The Ron Paul approach is (in my view) indeed dangerous, and more importantly, morally blind, there you will have no disagreement from me.

Like any policy, for “Isolationism” to be workable, it needs to be built on a moral foundation, and to be non-dogmatic and capable of responding to a changing world. You are entirely correct to note that, for instance, cutting off trade with the rest of the world would be the wrong thing to do if one wishes to preserve the US standard of living.

Nor would it be wise to cut off the supply of arms to our friends and allies around the world. Nor would it be wise to disarm the US.

However, the basic attitude of attempting to isolate the US from threats and dangers, instead of attempting to manage every troublespot in the world actively, is probably sound.

On such basic observations about the limits of isolation, a sound isolationism that enhances US security, and reduces the costs associated with “world management” could be built. My vision of an “isolated” US, for instance, would mean:

- Not having middle-eastern flight school students running around the US (and into US buildings).

- Not allowing massive unskilled and / or illegal immigration into the US.

- Not attempting to micro-manage the politics and societies of the Middle East and Africa through warfare and nation building.

- Not keeping troops garrisoned in countries that can obviously provide their own security, such as South Korea and Germany.

In practice, a more “isolationist” US would be focused on policing US borders and immigration instead of invading Iraq while attempting to reform Afghan society, conducting drone strikes in Yemen and bombing Islamists into power in Libya.

Sadly, the Isolationism championed by Ron Paul is both morally blind and dogmatic. Isolationism deserves a better class of champion.


93 posted on 11/11/2011 2:31:48 AM PST by globelamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson