How The Campaign Should Address Our Foreign Policy Position

[No Free Beer]

A lot of "conservatives" like Santorum believe that we got attacked because "we are free". They say that it is "irresponsible" to think that our presence overseas may have caused such horrible crimes on our land. But Santorum and other conservatives' logic doesn't seem to add up. They say, "I don't care what Osama says..." Yet, how do you learn without being aware of your enemies words? If someone punches you or slaps you, don't you ask them "why"? If a friend/coworker/family member is mad at you, don't you ask "why?" Isn't that logical? Well, lets take a brief look at our history and see if it tells us anything...

1979-81 Iranian/American Hostage Crisis
1993 WTC Bombing
1998 US Embassy Bombings
2000 USS Cole Bombing
2001 Attacks on WTC Buildings & Pentagon.

Over and over again they tell us WHY they attacked us, not once was it because of our freedoms.

As I listed, these are just a few of the attacks on us that have happened since we started meddling in their affairs. Before we were meddling in their affairs, were they attacking us? When we became a country in 1776, were Jihadists boating over here and destroying our land? How about before WWI? Before WW2?...How about after WW2? Yes! That is when it started! Why? Well, that is when we started MEDDLING on their holy land...

[samuel]

In 2004, page 40 of a Defense Science Board report read (http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/ADA428770.pdf): (underlined for emphasis/brevity purposes)

American direct intervention in the Muslim World has paradoxically elevated the stature of and support for radical Islamists, while diminishing support for the United States to single-digits in some Arab societies.
• Muslims do not “hate our freedom,” but rather, they hate our policies. The overwhelming majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and the longstanding, even increasing support for what Muslims collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan, and the Gulf states.
• Thus when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy. Moreover, saying that “freedom is the future of the Middle East” is seen as patronizing, suggesting that Arabs are like the enslaved peoples of the old Communist World — but Muslims do not feel this way: they feel oppressed, but not enslaved.
• Furthermore, in the eyes of Muslims, American occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq has not led to democracy there, but only more chaos and suffering. U.S. actions appear in contrast to be motivated by ulterior motives, and deliberately controlled in order to best serve American national interests at the expense of truly Muslim self-determination.
• Therefore, the dramatic narrative since 9/11 has essentially borne out the entire radical Islamist bill of particulars. American actions and the flow of events have elevated the authority of the Jihadi insurgents and tended to ratify their legitimacy among Muslims. Fighting groups portray themselves as the true defenders of an Ummah (the entire Muslim community) invaded and under attack — to broad public support.

If that doesn't legitimize Paul's foreign policy position, what will?

[nasaal]

Convince the populous that just because the American government has done some awful things and gotten blowback for it; does not mean that it is the fault of the American people or that we deserved the attack by any means. It was simply action and reaction and not excusable.

[eleganz]

I'll tell you what guys, we're NOT BOWING DOWN FROM IGNORANCE!

This is the shortlist of the many evils America has committed against the rest of the world, not to mention all of the assassinations of the heads of state which is a blatant war crime.


China 1945-46, 1950-53
Korea 1950-53
Guatemala 1954, 1960, 1967-69
Indonesia 1958
Cuba 1959-61
Congo 1964
Peru 1965
Laos 1964-73
Vietnam 1961-73
Cambodia 1969-70
Lebanon 1983-84
Grenada 1983
Libya 1986
El Salvador 1980s
Nicaragua 1980s
Panama 1989
Bosnia 1985
Sudan 1998
Former Yugoslavia 1999
Iraq X2 1991 and 2003(?)-20??
Afghanistan 1998, 2001-02

[1836]

Well, these are good points. But this foreign policy thing is a make or break for us winning this whole deal, I am becoming convinced. I am watching the replay of the debate/post coverage right now. Then I will make a post about this as well. Foreign policy can be a strengh among many primary voters if we play it correctly. I am not sure we are right now, and right now is a crucial time for this campaign.

[eleganz]

Ron didn't even get that many boos from his foreign policy response, he sure got more applause than boos thats for sure. We don't know if they're a tiny group support Santorum or whatever but the boos were NOT rampant throughout the audience, listen to it again.

[D.A.S.]

This foreign policy deal is being overblown, frankly. Media is trying to pull another hatchet job on Paul, which is expected, but the comment sections are lighting up in support of Ron Paul, saying that what he said about 9/11 is 100% true.

You just wait and see. It's blunt moments like these that earn us ardent supporters and wakes people up. It forces a conversation otherwise avoided.

[davidhperry]

This foreign policy deal is being overblown, frankly. Media is trying to pull another hatchet job on Paul, which is expected, but the comment sections are lighting up in support of Ron Paul, saying that what he said about 9/11 is 100% true.

You just wait and see. It's blunt moments like these that earn us ardent supporters and wakes people up. It forces a conversation otherwise avoided.

I agree. When you really listen to it, Ron didn't get booed by very many people.

[AlexAmore]

Conservatives think government should be small because it pretty much can't do anything right and all these well intentioned programs such as social security and medicare just cause more problems than they solve.......................except when it comes to FOREIGN POLICY. Idiots.

[TheLasersShadow]

Ron's foreign policy is where he gets the majority of the flack, although correct to those of us who have a brain and like to use it. He needs to come up with better sound bites or rather a better way to communicate these TRUTHS to the voting public. The media statement he issued in 2008 with Michael Scheuer giving Rudy Giuliani his reading list needs to be repeated with Santorum just in a bigger way.

[Butchie]

Many were bothered by the booing, I thought it was a boost, that crowd did not go over well with alot of Americans, I will agree tho he should always be clear that he blames policy and not the innocent civilians who got caught up in it all.

[LibertyEsq]

Conservatives think government should be small because it pretty much can't do anything right and all these well intentioned programs such as social security and medicare just cause more problems than they solve.......................except when it comes to FOREIGN POLICY. Idiots.

Then why didn't Ron say it like that? He had terrible messaging. Shouldn't have mentioned OBL in his answer. Should have just said foreign intervention builds resentment which contributes to motivation for unjustified and evil terror attacks. See? Now there's no dilemma and Ron rides the wave that Perry just crashed from.

[No Free Beer]

Liberty, its harder in the moment than on a computer. Ron's answer was spot on. It is time for the truth..

[Bern]

Santorum was trying his best to muster the same incredulity that Guilinani displayed in the 2007 debate. Ron needs to give him the same reading list.

[specsaregood]

I'd like to see it simplified to just a financial/economic issue, hell even make an advertisement about it.

You have 2 choices: more war and spending overseas or food on your table at home in the US. You can't have both guns and butter.

[KingNothing]

I'd like to see it simplified to just a financial/economic issue, hell even make an advertisement about it.

You have 2 choices: more war and spending overseas or food on your table at home in the US. You can't have both guns and butter.

As would I, for political reasons. But as Ron has stated, he's out to change the course of history, not to win an election. The implication to the economic justification for avoiding war is that if a nation has enough money, it can engage in empire-building with impunity. Ron is cutting that line of thinking off at the pass by saying that imperialism is dangerous and immoral, in addition to being bad economic policy.

[Anti Federalist]

Conservatives think government should be small because it pretty much can't do anything right and all these well intentioned programs such as social security and medicare just cause more problems than they solve.......................except when it comes to FOREIGN POLICY. Idiots.

Yes, that's right.

To them, government can do nothing right except kill Muslims, spy on enemies, torture jihadists and execute criminals.

[specsaregood]

As would I, for political reasons. But as Ron has stated, he's out to change the course of history, not to win an election. The implication to the economic justification for avoiding war is that if a nation has enough money, it can engage in empire-building with impunity. Ron is cutting that line of thinking off at the pass by saying that imperialism is dangerous and immoral, in addition to being bad economic policy.

I agree, but for political reasons. "Even if you disagree with me, the financial fact is that you can't have both. The other candidates talk a good game about cutting spending, but you can't balance the budget without cutting out the wars and overseas spending."

[Bruno]

Santorum was trying his best to muster the same incredulity that Guilinani displayed in the 2007 debate. Ron needs to give him the same reading list.

Though this would go against the rule in politics of "don't punch down", maybe Benton could send an open letter to Santorum with that reading list, including the 9/11 report, as Benton did with his letter to Perry last week.

[KingNothing]

I agree, but for political reasons. "Even if you disagree with me, the financial fact is that you can't have both. The other candidates talk a good game about cutting spending, but you can't balance the budget without cutting out the wars and overseas spending."

And Ron says that CONSTANTLY. He just didn't say it last night.

[Anti Federalist]

I agree, but for political reasons. "Even if you disagree with me, the financial fact is that you can't have both. The other candidates talk a good game about cutting spending, but you can't balance the budget without cutting out the wars and overseas spending."

This +1776

I have found this works well. Cede the point, "Hey maybe you're right, but, even if you are, it doesn't matter. We're broke."

[specsaregood]

And Ron says that CONSTANTLY. He just didn't say it last night.

That is why I suggest maybe even a campaign ad. He doesn't need another perry attack ad. But ad on this subject could be used to attack ALL the other candidates and break through the minds of some of the anti-paul people.

[KingNothing]

Yes, that's right.

To them, government can do nothing right except kill Muslims, spy on enemies, torture jihadists and execute criminals.

In their defense, government is pretty amazing at killing people.

[Duckman]

That is why I suggest maybe even a campaign ad. He doesn't need another perry attack ad. But ad on this subject could be used to attack ALL the other candidates and break through the minds of some of the anti-paul people.

+1. The campaign needs to change minds on this issue in order to reach the support of 51% of Republican primary voters. Bottom line.