View Full Version : Horrible Attrocity the world weeps for ______

12-27-2007, 08:51 PM
For those that are not aware of what a non-interventionist foreign policy means.

If like in Darfur there is a mass genocide, this is non of the business of congress to do anything with our money unless they declare war. If congress decides to declare war then we go to war.

On the other hand this policy allows individuals to spend their money any way they see fit to help those in need in that area.

The job of the Us Federal Government is to Defend this nation. Not to police the world. No matter how grave the atrocity it is non of the Federal governments business unless congress declares war.

A group of citizens could form a private volunteer army and go to that country if they wanted (and if the country would accept them).

They can risk their own lives and property to do what they see fit. Whether that be as a missionary or as a freedom fighter. They cannot risk others lives and property in that goal. That is the difference.

Self determination allows all people to choose the path that they will follow. At the same time police actions in the world do not allow the citizens who are against a war to have their rights defended.

This same policy works for all things. Whether it be any kind of individual contracts or what one chooses to do with ones own body.

12-27-2007, 08:53 PM
Go here:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/gfx_RedWhiteBlue/buttons/firstnew.gif (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=66462) Concerning Bhutto... (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=66462) (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/gfx_RedWhiteBlue/misc/multipage.gif 1 (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=66462) 2 (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=66462&page=2))

12-27-2007, 08:55 PM
That was exactly the reason I posted this. Some people are aware that Dr. Paul is a non-interventionist but have not picked up what that actually means as of yet.

12-27-2007, 08:59 PM
NGOs are far more effective, efficient, and WELCOME.

People get agitated when foreign troops are hanging out in their country.

And top-down aid rarely makes it to the people that need it, instead enriching corrupt leaders.

12-27-2007, 09:05 PM
So what is happening in Dafur now that we have chosen to ignore the problem? I mean if there was a genocide going on I would think it would make the news more often. I mean there is a lot of starving people, but it seems a lot of charity is working out pretty well.

12-27-2007, 09:13 PM
That was a for instance...

Same goes for Pakistan.
Same goes for any country that is having problems like that.

For there to be true freedom in a country the citizens have to take it upon themselves to secure that freedom. Outside intervention does not accomplish that goal. NGO's can help problem areas.

12-27-2007, 09:17 PM
Just a thought! Civil unrest in Pakistan, the President being a CIA plant, who has taken in billions of dollars from the U.S. The U.S. is worried about the Pakistan's N-Weapons not because of it falling into the hands of Al-Queda but because it poses a trifecta. 1. Access to Bin Laden, 2. Another route to attack Iran and 3. N-Weapons in the back yard of China and Russia. Wow, our foreign policy getting us ready for WWIII.