Posted on 07/03/2009 9:11:35 AM PDT by rabscuttle385
There is no area in which Republicans have further strayed from our traditions than in foreign affairs.
Generations of conservatives followed the great advice of our Founding Fathers and pursued a restrained foreign policy that rebuffed entangling alliances and advised America, in the words of John Quincy Adams, not to "go abroad looking for dragons to slay."
Sen. Robert Taft, the stalwart of the Old Right, urged America to stay out of NATO. Dwight Eisenhower was elected on a platform promising to get us out of the conflict in Korea. Richard Nixon promised to end the war in Vietnam.
Republicans were highly critical of Bill Clinton for his adventurism in Somalia and Kosovo. As recently as 2000, George W. Bush campaigned on a "humbler" foreign policy and decried nation-building.
But our foreign policy today looks starkly different.
Neoconservatives who have come to power in both the Democratic and Republican parties argue that the U.S. must ether confront every evil in every corner of the globe or risk danger at home. We need to "fight them over there" they say, so we don't have to "fight them over here." This argument presents a false choice. We do not have to pick between interventionism and vulnerability. The complexity of our world is exactly why the lessons of our past should ring true and demand a return to a traditional, pro-American foreign policy: one of nonintervention.
Moving forward, I suggest that we as Americans adhere to these five principles:
1. We do not abdicate American sovereignty to global institutions...
2. We provide a strong national defense, but we do not police the world...
3. We obey the Constitution and follow the rule of law...
4. We do not engage in nation-building...
5. We stay out of the internal affairs of other nations...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
The purpose of the United States government is to defend United States citizens and lawful residents and their property against enemies foreign and domestic, not to eradicate evil from the world and consequently entangle itself in the intrigues and ambitions of others, which is exactly what you are advocating.
Judging by your replies to me, I don't think that you read Paul's five points. Either that, or you disagree with them. Let's address them one at a time:
Do you think that the U.S. sovereignty should be subordinate to global institutions (point #1)? I don't.
Do you think that the U.S. should police the world (point #2)? I don't. Paul argues for a strong national defense: "America should be armed with defensive weapons capable of repelling any attack. We should spend all appropriate money to make sure that no country in world can credibly threaten us." In other words, peace through strength. NOT peace through offense. And on this point I agree with him.
Do you think that exceptions can be made to the Constitution in violation of the rule of law (point #3)? I don't.
Do you think that the same Government that has demonstrated its incompetence at domestic nation-building (e.g., Social Security, Medicare, bailouts) can somehow simultaneously be competent at foreign nation-building (point #4)? I don't.
Do you think that the U.S. should be involved in the affairs of other states, particularly when the U.S. would otherwise be a neutral power (point #5)? I don't.
The entire bottom line to your point of view is that you envision Government as some sort of panacea to an eternal problem in this world: the existence of evil. That sort of view is, unfortunately, utterly incompatible with any notions of small and limited government, of democracy, of republicanism, of freedom, and of everything that has defined the American Republic over the past two centuries, as it requires an unlimited, centralized, and powerful State that is above the law and that is capable and willing to restrict freedom at will in the name of "public safety" or "national interest." Furthermore, the status quo Government is a shining example not of freedom but of hypocrisy and schizophrenia. It's idiotic to help terrorists in one decade (Kosovo) and then attack them in another (Afghanistan); it's also idiotic to entangle yourself in another nation's affairs while simultaneously failing to defend your own borders against millions of illegal aliens (and only God knows who else is coming in with them).
They would have to be given nothing of the kind, and still work their will.
Tell me: does Congressman Paul advocate multi-layered, fortified borders manned by armed guards with shoot-to-kill orders? Frankly, I do. Even so, Congressman Paul-- and his partisans-- should look to history.
The brief history of the German "Democratic Republic" shows that people determined to live on the other side of a multi-layered, fortified border manned by armed guards with shoot-to-kill orders can and will cross it. How much more so people determined to die (and kill in the process) on the other side of such a border.
The East Germans didn't even have to deal with much of a coastline. I think our coastline-- excluding Alaska and Hawaii-- is longer than our two land borders.
Proper enforcement of immigration laws is a pitiable shield against those who want nothing more than to mow our lawns-- it just shortens their stay. How much more useless against those who will hide until they are ready to strike?
Better to find such people in their bases among their comrades, and kill'em without a thought to "due process".
The lack of interest in, let alone knowledge of, history in these discussions is very discouraging. It takes a great deal of effort for me to bother to participate. But mark me: if I fall silent, it does not mean I have been convinced. I bide the time, awaiting the opportunity to stand and make a difference. That's my "rugged self-reliance".
(I expect to receive a reply asking why not just open the borders, if they're that useless. If that happens, or something else as ridiculous, I will invoke Proverbs 26:4.)
Moving forward, I suggest that we as Americans adhere to these five principles:
1. We do not abdicate American sovereignty to global institutions...
WHAT? You rabid isolationist, you! We have a "New World Order" agenda to implement!
2. We provide a strong national defense, but we do not police the world...
Don't you know it's America's job to spread 'democracy' throughout the world?
3. We obey the Constitution and follow the rule of law...
That document was written over 200 years ago by a buch of dead white men, so it hardly has much of a meaning in our modern age....besides, interpreting it correctly is kinda like what deciphering the meaning of the word "is" is.
4. We do not engage in nation-building...
Hey, I (GWB) had to say that while I was out campaigning; after all, if we don't nation-build, who will?
5. We stay out of the internal affairs of other nations...
But...but...remember Colin Powell saying that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? Now he wouldn't lie!
I have no problem with Dr. Paul’s five points.
I would add a sixth: “Institute a strong national border so that other countries don’t try to come inside us.”
We have been in Europe for 65 years, since 1944.
We have been in South Korea for 59 years, since 1950.
We have been in Japan for 64 years, since 1945.
We have been in Bosnia for 14 years, since 1995.
We have been in Kosovo for 10 years, since 1999.
We have been in Kuwait for 18 years, since 1991.
We have been in Afghanistan since 2001, and in Iraq since 2003.
No one other than Canada, Britain and Australia, actually help us to maintain the peace with substantial expense and the blood of their young.
We take no one’s oil and no one’s land. We have freed hundreds and hundreds of millions of people since 1944, and our generosity to them gave them a chance at life an liberty.
Yet if America was attacked, there is no doubt in my mind, that no one would lift a finger to help us, preferring to use those fingers to pick through our carcass.
I’m done with being the world’s policeman.
You mess with us, your ass gets kicked into next Thursday.
No more nation building, no more UN, no more building democracy for an ungrateful world.
No one respects America in the world because we don’t demand it. Frankly, I don’t give a fig for “world opinion”.
Any attacks or provocations need to be answered with an overwhelming response to end even the thought of future provocations. The world will learn good behavior faster than Pavlov’s dog.
And that won;t happen until we get a governemnt in DC that actually loves this country. Right now, they are staying awake at night dreaming of ways to weaken and plunder their own citizens.
A pox upon them.
After all the wars, all the conflicts and the maintaining forces we support, we are still the #1 economy, the #1 military power and the greatest force for good in the world. And in "defending the World" we assure our own safety.
You have absolutely no proof at all that we "have made our allies weaker". What country is weaker because we maintain a base there? Japan? Germany? South Korea? I don't think so.
Those who flew the planes into the WTC in NYC in 2001 were all wahabbist Sunni Muslims...mostly from Saudi Arabia...and what do we do with the financiers of of this terrorist organization of the religious Wahhabi faction born in Saudi Arabia? We lick their hands and bow before them to kiss their arse. This must be evident to you Jeff. At least our troops are learning urban warfare. That should provide comfort to those who suspect such tactics would be used to quell any domestic uprising by we the people.
Dept. of Homeland Security Jeff?
The Patriot Act...Jeff?
Secret FISA Courts Jeff?...You support these Acts? And call yourself a Patriot?
“If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.” —
George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796
Nyet Jeff...Remember the fake Gulf of Tonkin non incident used by our Government to kill over 50,000 of our brothers before saying...oops, never mind. We bugged out of Nam and left over two million of our allies in Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam to be slaughtered. What do you think will happen when we withdraw from our current “War in Iraq”
No Jeff...John Quincy Adams was right.
Speech to the U.S. House of Representatives on Foreign Policy (July 4, 1821)
John Quincy Adams
Transcript
AND NOW, FRIENDS AND COUNTRYMEN, if the wise and learned philosophers of the elder world, the first observers of nutation and aberration, the discoverers of maddening ether and invisible planets, the inventors of Congreve rockets and Shrapnel shells, should find their hearts disposed to enquire what has America done for the benefit of mankind?
Let our answer be this: America, with the same voice which spoke herself into existence as a nation, proclaimed to mankind the inextinguishable rights of human nature, and the only lawful foundations of government. America, in the assembly of nations, since her admission among them, has invariably, though often fruitlessly, held forth to them the hand of honest friendship, of equal freedom, of generous reciprocity.
She has uniformly spoken among them, though often to heedless and often to disdainful ears, the language of equal liberty, of equal justice, and of equal rights.
She has, in the lapse of nearly half a century, without a single exception, respected the independence of other nations while asserting and maintaining her own.
She has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings, as to the last vital drop that visits the heart.
She has seen that probably for centuries to come, all the contests of that Aceldama the European world, will be contests of inveterate power, and emerging right.
Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be.
But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy.
She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all.
She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.
She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example.
She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom.
The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force....
She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit....
[America?s] glory is not dominion, but liberty. Her march is the march of the mind. She has a spear and a shield: but the motto upon her shield is, Freedom, Independence, Peace. This has been her Declaration: this has been, as far as her necessary intercourse with the rest of mankind would permit, her practice.[]
Totalitarian administrative absolutism is our new form of government though most are unaware of that...Our Republican Democracy ended as every preceding one did. Romes Imperial asperations put an end to her Republic...This end of this Republic began with the centeralization of Government to Washington DC following the Civil War. We are no longer the United States of America that John Quincy Adams was addressing that July 4th in 1821.
Be well.
I grew up with the US being the the world police force, the savior of the planet, fighting evil, blah, blah, so I never realized this...if you think about it, we are an occupying force all around the world.
We would not allow another country to occupy our country and build a base here. Why should we continue to do that in other countries? I thought WWII is over, why are we still an occupying force in Europe and Japan? The Korean war isn't really over, but why are we still there? I thought we were friends.
Our allies are weaker because they don't have to be stronger. We'll do that for them. Proof? Use your head. By treaty, Japan was allowed only a limited self defense force. They are rethinking that treaty now that N. Korea is acting up.
Germany, England, France and to a much lesser degree S. Korea have had all those US bases and troops hanging around to take care of them. Why should they spend their money on their defense when we'll spend ours?
I would rather see those countries being more like Israel. She takes care of her defense and is a strong country, but we are still trying to tell the Israelis how to live, where to live, etc. How arrogant. Small voices like George Washington's warned us against this.
It's long past time to take the training wheels off and let the other countries learn to ride again. We'll be around if they need us.
What has it cost us? The lives of the brave service members who have died in various jihads around the world (remember what happened to the Marines in Lebanon? The USS Cole? 9-11? etc., etc., etc.) & TRILLIONS of $$$ over the several decades. Yes, we may have the #1 economy & be the greatest military power in the world, but I think it's safe to say that we would have had an even better one had we not wasted all of that $ & kept it in the US.
If "defending the world" is that important to you, I wanna see you put your $ where your mouth is: starting TONIGHT, I crown you the "Defender of Your Neighborhood". It is going to be YOUR responsibility to saunter about your neighborhood looking for evildoers who threaten your neighbors or your family.
You can do it pre-emptively, too: if you hear gossip from "credible" sources that such-&-such a person is going to rob your house or pose a threat to your neighbors, then go over to their place & kill them before they can hurt you. If you can find a few close friends ("allies", "coalition partners", etc.) to help you in your efforts, then more power to you. Don't call the police -- after all, YOU are the "Superpower" of The Neighborhood, & it's YOUR job to keep your neighborhood safe!
Comparing his illegal acts in Serbia to Bush's actions in Afghanistan and Iraq are ludicrous on their face.
I clearly disagreed with Bush on numerous issues, some of which you have raised, but I did not, and do not disagree with him on Afghanistan or Iraq...except in Iraq for the reasons stated for going to war. He should have simply stated that Hussein had repeatedly violated the terms of the cease fire signed with us after Desert Strom, and was clearly providing support to our enemies and the enemies of our allies.
The intelligence on the WMDs I actually think was more accurate than not...we just gacve Hussein too much time to dispose of them...but not all, because the gas and biological prgrams and their results were still existant.
As it was, thought they are now anxious to forget it...and this even though Iraq is proving much more of a success than they had hoped...the congress voted support of the effort before it was taken.
Anyhow, as I said, I support Ron Paul on many, many issues. I have met him personally and spoken with him in Kentucky at a Porperty Owners meeting he attended there one year while I was apssing through and when I had been invitied to the same meeting...but have not agreed eith him on this partticular part of foreign policy, specifically Iraq and Afghanistan.
I would love to see the UN sent to Toronto and us out of that tin pot dictator loving association.
Besides interventionist, globalist, neo-con fascists, who can argue with these principles?
1. We do not abdicate American sovereignty to global institutions...
2. We provide a strong national defense, but we do not police the world...
3. We obey the Constitution and follow the rule of law...
4. We do not engage in nation-building...
5. We stay out of the internal affairs of other nations...
(Because our interventionist meddling has been so successful? What would the Middle East do without our tax dollars going to fund THEM and THEIR arch enemy, Israel?)
There is no wishing, we are one, and as such, a super power does not have the luxury to adhere solely to non-intervention foreign policies. The history of world super powers proves such.
The last "super power" was the USSR. I wonder where the USSR is today.
Does it matter to this discussion other than suggesting that the US will eventually fall from superpower status?
At any rate, did the USSR adhere to foreign policies of non-intervention?
Policy centered around Big Government, a necessary prerequisite for interventionism and central planning, is always and everywhere a hallmark of un-American statism. Doesn't matter whether the policy is foreign or domestic.
Why ever would you want to call yourself a “conservative” if what you are “conserving” is not the Constitution for the United States and the Constitutional Republic it establishes? There is no mention made in the Constitution of being a “super power” which means there is no such authority granted to FedGov to do ANYTHING OF THE KIND. There is no room in America for such a travesty of what the Founders gave us, which, sadly, has been eagerly embraced by folks like you on both sides of the political spectrum.
We, as a Nation, have ZERO, ZILCH “obligation” to defend the “world from bullies,’ as you so smarmily put it. We have an obligation to PROTECT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION FOR THE UNITED STATES. There is no mention, in the oath I took numerous times during my adult life, of protecting and defending the whole bloody world. Not one word. It all comes down to the simple fact that we who serve do so to protect and defend the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Period. You have never served, have never even OFFERED to serve, yet you would send MY SON and MY MONEY to anywhere that suited your fancy, JUST LIKE A BLOODY ROMAN EMPEROR or an English King. And you have got just exactly the wrong idea of what this nation stands for.
Now, if you want to be an EXAMPLE of freedom, a shining beacon to the world, I could have no argument with you. But for you to be willing to put OTHER AMERICAN LIVES at risk for your notion of being a “super power,” then, honey I got a flash for ya: That is NOT what this country was founded to be.
Nobody but communist sympathizer, child molesting, No-Nothings.
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.