PDA

View Full Version : Ron Paul's Foreign Policy Views Not So 'Dangerous'




bobbyw24
01-05-2012, 06:51 AM
Ron Paul’s opponents in the race for the Republican presidential nomination don’t mince words about his foreign policy views.

Mitt Romney says Paul would endanger Israel and that he “thinks it’s OK for Iran to have a nuclear weapon.” Newt Gingrich describes Paul as “stunningly dangerous” and bluntly says he wouldn’t vote for the Texas congressman. Former rival Michele Bachmann once said Paul would be a “dangerous president” who wouldn’t act against Iran “until one of our cities was wiped off the map.”

But the attacks on Paul, who finished a strong third in Tuesday’s Iowa caucuses, miss two essential points. First, several of Paul’s proposals closely track positions held by both Democratic and Republican foreign policy specialists. Second, a President Paul would have little ability to actually implement controversial ideas like eliminating foreign aid to Israel or closing American military bases in Germany, Japan and Korea.

“I tend to see Ron Paul as the only real traditional conservative out there today, and not at all out of sorts with strong American traditions that dominated the Republican Party up to 1952,” said Sean Kay, a political science policy professor at Ohio Wesleyan University. “Ron Paul has very appropriately challenged two fundamental assumptions about the war on terror and national security: that terrorism is a tactic and cannot be defeated in any conventional sense… and that the U.S. Constitution should matter on things like counter-terrorism and national security.”

http://nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/paul-s-foreign-policy-views-not-so-dangerous--20120104?mrefid=election2012

Warrior_of_Freedom
01-05-2012, 06:56 AM
Russia has thousands of nuclear warheads, and we're worried about a middle eastern country having a few crappy ones that wouldn't travel 50 feet. It's insane how stupid people are to buy into that stuff.

bobbyw24
01-05-2012, 06:57 AM
Russia has thousands of nuclear warheads, and we're worried about a middle eastern country having a few crappy ones that wouldn't travel 50 feet. It's insane how stupid people are to buy into that stuff.

Yep that's what Ron Paul said on TV last night

Bern
01-05-2012, 07:07 AM
That was a meandering, pointless article IMO. I also believe it mischaracterizes a couple of Paul's positions:
... Few Americans likely share his belief that the United States should have worked with Pakistan to arrest Osama bin Laden rather than unilaterally sending a Navy SEAL team into Pakistan to kill him. ...

Paul advocated using Letters of Marque and Reprisal to get OBL immediately after 911. He was not timid in calling for OBL's head.


... Many of Paul’s core views on foreign policy have been shaped by his belief that the Bush administration overreacted in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terror attacks ...

Pretty sure Paul's core views were pretty strongly held before Bush was elected to his first term. This is a minor quibble though.

William R
01-05-2012, 07:12 AM
bump

Diurdi
01-05-2012, 07:23 AM
Pretty sure Paul's core views were pretty strongly held before Bush was elected to his first term. This is a minor quibble though. Yup, he's warning of blowback already pre 9/11.

Probably eats away at a man when you've been warning of blowback for a long time and then 9/11 happens.