[mike1001]

Ron Paul is partly talking about the pre-emptive war policy that George Bush declared in his National Security Directive back in 2002 — affectionately called “The Bush Doctrine”.

The Bush Doctrine is clouded in a lot of talk to make it sound like a good policy but it is basically a big middle finger to the rest of the world. Basically Bush declared that the U.S. has the right to pre-emptively attack any nation which it deems as a threat, regardless of whether the threat is valid or not. Under the Bush Doctrine the United States can invade or attack any country without having to provide valid reasoning and justification for it.

[gas0linealley]

And while he has been holding up his big middle finger to the rest of the world, the illegals have been stealing his pants.

[GeorgefromGeorgia]

“Under the Bush Doctrine the United States can invade or attack any country without having to provide valid reasoning and justification for it.”

That is pure BS. Show me where Bush has articulated that we can attack any country for any reason without justification.

I suppose Paul would have opposed the Israeli’s preemptive attack on the Arab countries in 1967 that were getting ready to try to push the Jews into the sea?

[Durus]

Under the Bush Doctrine the United States can invade or attack any country without having to provide valid reasoning and justification for it.

Provide valid reasoning and justification for it to whom? If congress votes for war then we don't have to provide jack to anyone else. One of things I agree with Ron Paul about is that we should have voted for a declaration of war. I get the distinct opinion he would have voted against it, which would be a fantastic question to ask him in a debate. If he would have opposed the war, regardless if we had gone about it via the constitutional method, then part of his argument is pure sophistry. Regardless I think we can all agree that the "horse has left the barn" on the matter of Iraq. I think there was more then enough justification for war, even by the "Christian war" model. Of course Ron Paul ignores this too.

I guess my biggest problem with Ron Paul is that if he isn't talking about the constitution or dealing with a problem not covered by the constitution he doesn't hew to any notable ideology but seems to swing wildly leftward.