PDA

View Full Version : Beltway Think-Tank Can’t Stand Ron Paul’s Foreign Policy




Paulatized
05-25-2011, 06:41 AM
Does the Tea Party Need a Foreign Policy?
Because of the negative implications of the word “isolationism,” those who advocate this approach often prefer the term “non-interventionism,” which can be understood as a foreign policy of political or military non-involvement in foreign relations or in other countries’ internal affairs. This commitment to remain disengaged necessarily diminishes the importance of a robust military prepared for potential threats. Several authors have advocated this non-interventionism doctrine,[6] but the most well-known proponent is Ron Paul, who has described it as “the Founders’ foreign policy.” According to Paul, the Tea Party’s foreign policy should advocate a “return to the traditional U.S. foreign policy of...non-interventionism.”[7] Paul misrepresents the Founders’ foreign policy, however, because America’s early foreign policy was neither isolationist nor principally non-interventionist.

Judge Napolitano needs to take this on.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/politicaltheatre/2011/05/beltway-think-tank-cant-stand-ron-pauls-foreign-policy/

Warrior_of_Freedom
05-25-2011, 08:55 AM
Every time the word "Think-tank" comes up, I imagine a bunch of people huddled over a round table pretending they are smart.