To those that question Ron Paul on his foreign policy...

[Rasputin_Vol]

What difference does it make what his views are on the Middle East? Only the Congress has the Constitutional authority to declare war. If Ron Paul is elected, he would more than likely bring in a GOP House and Senate on his coattails anyways.

So what is the big deal?

 

[VOLatile]

Of the two Libertarians in the running, he's the worst.

 

[MG1968]

Hypothetical situations to follow. I know we hate those, but based on things that Paul has said in the debates and in other media appearances, I think this is how a Paul presidency would handle things.

Iran develops and tests a nuclear device. President Paul says that's just ducky, they have a right to join the nuclear fraternity.

Iran proliferates their nuclear weapons. President Paul doesn't care, the US stuck it's nose in their business for far too long.

Tel Aviv gets nuked, but it's not apparent how it happened. President Paul takes Iran at it's word that it had nothing to do with it and further urges Israel to exercise restraint.

Los Angeles gets nuked, Iran's fingerprints are all over the event. President Paul finally asks for a Congressional declaration of war, but only after 10 million people on two continents have been vaporized.

 

[therealUT]

Hypothetical situations to follow. I know we hate those, but based on things that Paul has said in the debates and in other media appearances, I think this is how a Paul presidency would handle things.

Iran develops and tests a nuclear device. President Paul says that's just ducky, they have a right to join the nuclear fraternity.

Iran proliferates their nuclear weapons. President Paul doesn't care, the US stuck it's nose in their business for far too long.

Tel Aviv gets nuked, but it's not apparent how it happened. President Paul takes Iran at it's word that it had nothing to do with it and further urges Israel to exercise restraint.

Los Angeles gets nuked, Iran's fingerprints are all over the event. President Paul finally asks for a Congressional declaration of war, but only after 10 million people on two continents have been vaporized.

Tel Aviv is none of our (US) concern. Also, you are playing with a hypothetical situation that does not involve everything that comes with an isolationist platform.

1. We can still develop defensive measures in America (MDS as an example).

2. Trade would reopen with Iran; that would provide a disincentive for Iran to attack us.

3. We would stop meddling in the Israel-Palestine situation; this would provide another disincentive.

Could an attack on LA still happen? Of course. Is an aggressive-expeditionary foreign-military policy anymore likely to prevent attacks on America than an isolationist policy? One can not reasonable argue one way or the other.

 

[MG1968]

I just don't buy into the notion that Iran will suddenly become our friend if we remove ourselves from the ME.

 

[therealUT]

I just don't buy into the notion that Iran will suddenly become our friend if we remove ourselves from the ME.

I do not buy into the notion of nations having friends. Nations act in their best interests. Money talks, even to Iran (they have a pretty strong business relationship with "godless" China). If Iran is making money off the US, then I do not see Iran killing the golden goose.

 

[RespectTradition]

Tel Aviv is none of our (US) concern. Also, you are playing with a hypothetical situation that does not involve everything that comes with an isolationist platform.

1. We can still develop defensive measures in America (MDS as an example).

2. Trade would reopen with Iran; that would provide a disincentive for Iran to attack us.

3. We would stop meddling in the Israel-Palestine situation; this would provide another disincentive.

Could an attack on LA still happen? Of course. Is an aggressive-expeditionary foreign-military policy anymore likely to prevent attacks on America than an isolationist policy? One can not reasonable argue one way or the other.

I agree with this.

 

[RespectTradition]

I do not buy into the notion of nations having friends. Nations act in their best interests. Money talks, even to Iran (they have a pretty strong business relationship with "godless" China). If Iran is making money off the US, then I do not see Iran killing the golden goose.

I partially agree here, if Iran behaves rationally. If I recall correctly, France was Germany's number one trading partner before Hitler invaded. People are not rational.

 

[therealUT]

I partially agree here, if Iran behaves rationally. If I recall correctly, France was Germany's number one trading partner before Hitler invaded. People are not rational.

This is why you cannot lose sight of building up a strong national defense. France let their guard down (part of that was forced de-militarization).

Kissinger does a fantastic job of portraying the interwar period policies of France, the UK, the US, and Germany in his book Diplomacy. It was astonishing how the first three nations dismantled their militaries while they observed Germany building theirs.

 

[rjd970]

Hypothetical situations to follow. I know we hate those, but based on things that Paul has said in the debates and in other media appearances, I think this is how a Paul presidency would handle things.

Iran develops and tests a nuclear device. President Paul says that's just ducky, they have a right to join the nuclear fraternity.

Iran proliferates their nuclear weapons. President Paul doesn't care, the US stuck it's nose in their business for far too long.

Tel Aviv gets nuked, but it's not apparent how it happened. President Paul takes Iran at it's word that it had nothing to do with it and further urges Israel to exercise restraint.

Los Angeles gets nuked, Iran's fingerprints are all over the event. President Paul finally asks for a Congressional declaration of war, but only after 10 million people on two continents have been vaporized.

You had me until the bolded. Everything I have heard from Paul suggests he would not meddle, including this situation. He has said constantly that we don't treat Israel in an "adult" fashion. If this hypothetical were to happen, he would let Israel make its own decision and Iran/Israel would have to sleep in the bed they made.

 

[RespectTradition]

Hypothetical situations to follow. I know we hate those, but based on things that Paul has said in the debates and in other media appearances, I think this is how a Paul presidency would handle things.

Iran develops and tests a nuclear device. President Paul says that's just ducky, they have a right to join the nuclear fraternity.

Iran proliferates their nuclear weapons. President Paul doesn't care, the US stuck it's nose in their business for far too long.

Tel Aviv gets nuked, but it's not apparent how it happened. President Paul takes Iran at it's word that it had nothing to do with it and further urges Israel to exercise restraint.

Los Angeles gets nuked, Iran's fingerprints are all over the event. President Paul finally asks for a Congressional declaration of war, but only after 10 million people on two continents have been vaporized.

I think you mistake principles for naivete.

 

[volinbham]

I think you mistake principles for naivete.

If there is no action does it matter why?

 

[volinbham]

Interested here in the notion that if another country gets nuked it's none of our business and our only reaction should be to protect the home front. I guess I'm surprised that so many subscribe to that.

 

[Weezy]

If Israel gets nuked, Iran is off the map regardless.

I do think we should try everything in our power to dissuade Iran from developing Weapons, simply because I don't trust the people of Iran to not proliferate material to terrorists. It certainly doesn't help that Israel is stocked.

 

[RespectTradition]

Interested here in the notion that if another country gets nuked it's none of our business and our only reaction should be to protect the home front. I guess I'm surprised that so many subscribe to that.

What makes it any of our business?

If we invade, I dunno, Afghanistan or something, does that give a friendly neighbor like, Pakistan, any business to attack us? or intervene? why? why not?

 

[volinbham]

What makes it any of our business?

If we invade, I dunno, Afghanistan or something, does that give a friendly neighbor like, Pakistan, any business to attack us? or intervene? why? why not?

I think it is definitely their concern; particularly if we nuked them rather than strategically attacked only military targets and made every attempt to minimize innocent deaths.

I don't mean this to be a challenge or said with disrespect but given your strong Christian faith don't you see some good Samaritan role for countries if their innocents are wantonly killed?

 

[RespectTradition]

I think it is definitely their concern; particularly if we nuked them rather than strategically attacked only military targets and made every attempt to minimize innocent deaths.

I don't mean this to be a challenge or said with disrespect but given your strong Christian faith don't you see some good Samaritan role for countries if their innocents are wantonly killed?

I am not gonna get in a long drawn out religious talk about this since a couple of others and I beat that horse into glue, but to answer your question: I am a pacifist because of my religious beliefs. I can never support military action.

However, even before I arrived at that belief, I wasn't a fan of using US forces, paid for by US citizens, to act in any way that doesn't defend the US. Committing our troops and our money to a situation is a very serious and grave undertaking. Sometimes a ship has an accident in a harbor and it is not the result of the Spanish trying to provoke us. Our politicians then, and now, as well as the media then, and now, have agendas. I don't trust them any more now than, as history has shown, we should have then.

 

[volinbham]

Fair enough on the military action question. I would suggest however that a ship accident or even us going into Afghanistan is significantly different than Tel Aviv (or Tehran) for that matter getting nuked.

 

[RespectTradition]

Our government has no business spending our hard earned money protecting anyone other than us. While I have no desire to see Tel Aviv nuked, it could happen in a way that does not threaten me, my family, my neighbors, etc. In that case, as bad as it is, we have no business getting involved.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Hypothetical situations to follow. I know we hate those, but based on things that Paul has said in the debates and in other media appearances, I think this is how a Paul presidency would handle things.

Iran develops and tests a nuclear device. President Paul says that's just ducky, they have a right to join the nuclear fraternity.

Iran proliferates their nuclear weapons. President Paul doesn't care, the US stuck it's nose in their business for far too long.

Now you are being facetious.

Tel Aviv gets nuked, but it's not apparent how it happened. President Paul takes Iran at it's word that it had nothing to do with it and further urges Israel to exercise restraint.

That ain't true. How israel chooses to respond is really of no concern to us, if you actually follow Ron Paul's line of thinking. So I wouldn't see him calling off the dogs or cheer leading. He would probably stay out of it. Probably...

Los Angeles gets nuked, Iran's fingerprints are all over the event. President Paul finally asks for a Congressional declaration of war, but only after 10 million people on two continents have been vaporized.

Protecting the border at Tijuana and actually enforcing Federal law would do a lot to prevent the Doomsday scenario you are creating here.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

I just don't buy into the notion that Iran will suddenly become our friend if we remove ourselves from the ME.

Nor do I believe that staying in that region for any extended period of time will create any new friends in the area. Staying there longer makes it just as hard to make more friends.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Interested here in the notion that if another country gets nuked it's none of our business and our only reaction should be to protect the home front. I guess I'm surprised that so many subscribe to that.

We can't save everybody.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

I don't mean this to be a challenge or said with disrespect but given your strong Christian faith don't you see some good Samaritan role for countries if their innocents are wantonly killed?

Have you paid attention to the last 50 years of ME intervention by the US?

No good deeds go unpunished.

 

[DEFENDTHISHOUSE]

Funny how people call a strict constitutionalist an isolationist.

 

[n_huffhines]

Interested here in the notion that if another country gets nuked it's none of our business and our only reaction should be to protect the home front. I guess I'm surprised that so many subscribe to that.

Israel would wipe Iran off the map. I'm not worried about them in the least. What I don't understand is why we give aid to Israel's enemies.