Skip to comments.GOP's Ron Paul wants all troops home
Posted on 09/12/2007 7:21:50 AM PDT by presidio9
Amid a lineup of what ought to be called "big government conservatives," Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul stands out like the Lonesome End on Army's 1950s football teams.
Asked his policy on U.S. troops fighting in Iraq, the Texas congressman, now serving his 10th term, replies: "I would get them home as soon as possible."
And U.S. troops in Europe?
"I would get them home," Paul said in an interview Tuesday. "Having them stationed abroad doesn't serve our national interest, and that goes for forces in Japan and Korea.
"We should only send U.S. forces abroad when our security is directly threatened. Right now, nobody threatens our national security."
Such sentiments make Paul the odd man out in GOP debates. Other candidates have been seen smirking as he speaks.
Although described as a libertarian, the physician-politician is a throwback on stands that used to define "conservative" in America -- defense of individual liberties, a minimalist federal government and freedom from foreign entanglements.
"I call it a non-interventionist, constitutional foreign policy," he said Tuesday. "We should have a strong national defense. But we should stay out of other countries' internal affairs. Our role is not nation building, and not to be world policeman."
In Paul's view, the U.S. invasion of Iraq worked to encourage al-Qaida. "The motivation by suicide terrorists is that we have invaded territory that is not ours," he argued.
Paul will spend a hectic Friday in Seattle this week.
The events on his schedule range from a public lecture on the U.S. Constitution, set for 1:30 p.m. Friday at Seattle University's Campion Tower Ballroom, to a $2,000 private briefing scheduled for 3:30 p.m. at the College Club. Then a $1,000-per-person reception at the Westin reception will be followed by a 7:30 p.m. rally in the Grand Ballroom.
If you missed the movie "Twister," the Republicans' 2008 field offers lots of blustery, changing winds. Mitt Romney has reversed past stands on abortion and gay rights. Fred Thompson is trying to explain how he gave legal advice to a pro-choice feminist group. The thrice-married Rudy Giuliani is seeking to court the religious right.
Paul is not a man for campaign conversions -- even on a week that takes him to three liberal West Coast cities.
"My message is exactly the same wherever I go," he said. "If it is a liberal city where I am speaking, I try to teach them the virtue of economic liberties. If it is a conservative religious town, I try to stress why individual liberties are important."
Paul was a lonely Republican vote against passage and reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act. He feels the landmark post-9/11 law violated the Fourth Amendment, which provides Americans with guarantees against unreasonable search and seizure of their property.
If elected, said Paul, "I would do everything I can to repeal it. ... We do not need to spy on the American people to provide for our national security."
Born in Pennsylvania, Paul served in the Air Force as a flight surgeon, and moved to Texas to practice obstetrics and gynecology near Houston. He was drawn to politics when President Nixon severed the connection between the dollar and gold in 1971.
He would radically downsize the federal government. "I don't think there is any need for the Department of Education, the Department of Energy or particularly the monstrous Department of Homeland Security," he said Tuesday.
Asked what role he sees for the federal government in education, Paul replied: "None. Nothing in the Constitution provides for a federal role."
Paul would seek to divest the federal government of its vast landholdings in the West. "I would always move in the direction of moving those lands to the states, except in special circumstances such as national parks."
The Paul campaign has taken in about $3 million as of midyear, a fraction of money raised by the Romney ($43.5 million) and Giuliani ($35.4 million) juggernauts. In the West, Paul registers among donation leaders only in Montana and Wyoming.
Yet, the physician-politician has become a hit on the Internet. He is the candidate of voters, left and right, who would otherwise fill in "None of the Above" on pollsters' questionnaires.
Paul relishes being apart from the field, especially in talking about two favorite subjects -- Iraq and individual liberties. Of Democrats, he said: "They were elected to do something last fall, and they've done nothing. They've identified themselves as the party of civil liberties, and done nothing."
Nor does Paul have any sympathy for Republican "conservatives" who stress economic liberty but see nothing wrong with a government that pushes around its citizens. "You cannot have a Supreme Court that protects economic liberties and not individual liberties," he said.
On assisted suicide, talking as a physician, Paul said: "Taking someone's life is not something I want to get involved in." Yet, he describes legalization as "a state issue."
"I don't support abortion, but I don't want to pass any federal law to regulate it," he added.
In Texas, it is possible to run simultaneously for Congress and president. Paul intends to file for re-election to his House seat.
Has he seen any other Republican candidate he could support for the White House? "So far, nobody," he replied.
Idiot isolationist L.Ron is popular with Seattle liberals?
You can't make this stuff up.
My, what a champion of the unborn. He's personally opposed, but . . .
Well, heck, Ron, let’s just disband the entire U.S. military while we’re at it and let every man go for himself. I’m game!
I swear he sounds like a ranting liberal
Oh, OK. "This is just a wonderful, rosy World we live in, Ollie."
“GOP’s Ron Paul wants all troops home”
GOP’s LLS wants paul to STFU!
Perhaps he ought to return to the Libertarian Party, if he has so little in common with the Republican Party.
We all want our troops home. It is a matter of when and under what conditions.
Actually, his position is the correct one under the Constitution. The Fedgov has no authority under the Constitution to regulate abortion, either for or against---it's a state function.
Don't get me wrong--I'm as opposed to abortion as anybody, but I also believe that our Constitution should be followed---AS WRITTEN (or amended---and NOT by Supreme Court).p Now, if you can persuade enough members of Congress and sufficient state legislatures to pass an actual Constitutional amendment prohibiting abortion--then I'd be all in favor.
I am embarrassed that this weenie is from Texas. The sooner he loses the better.
I may fall in love with Paul, as I also agree that the Fed claims to control too much land. Recently, I saw that they have expanded the set aside of TR by ten times. They do a lousy job of managing it. However, I would reenact the Homestead law so the land goes to people, not states.
He has some very devoted backers, too. His signs appear everywhere around here.
Paul/Kucinich in 08!
They could unite the parties, and the American people!/
What a relief. Thanks, Ron!
I want Ron Paul home.
Paul is an embarrassment to the Republican Party and his supporters are moonbats.
I was expecting his head to keep on turning counterclockwise...
(That's a LEFT turn...)
Until it fell off and hit him in the foot...
That remains a physical impossibility...
With both feet ... IN HIS MOUTH!!!!
What an idiot....
Im cheesy with money. Im the Weenie King. Invented the Texas Weenie. Lay off em, youll live longer.
The Palm Beach Story.
Do you have the Wyler’s ready? You know the Paulestinians will be here momentarily.
“Asked what role he sees for the federal government in education, Paul replied: “None. Nothing in the Constitution provides for a federal role.”
It took two pings after yours.
Yep. . .just like John Kerry.
I might have been able to repect his view in respect to the troops in Iraq, I.E. get then out as soon as possible(assuming we have the situation stable over there), but in the same breath he wants to pull out all our troops around the world.
To say nothing of saying that Iran wasn’t a problem and we should just let them be. This guy is a loon of the highest order.
Not anymore. 'Conservative' is now defined by whatever the administration says it is for that day.
That's certainly debateable.
The primary right all humans were endowed with by their creator is the right to life. Obviously, without life, none of the other rights matter.
Seems very strange to me that some think it is constitutional to allow the taking of innocent life.
Throw the bum out!
Nothing in the Constitution provides for a federal role in the shrimping industry either, but as we all know, Ronnie submitted earmarks for the shrimping industry in his district.
He is worse than a ranting liberal, he is raving moonbat, and worse yet he managed to get on our side of the isle!
My only question, do we stay in Puerto Rico, FALN terrorists motivated by the occupation being a fact. There's hope for the Aztlan movement as well.
We have been living under the modern equivalent of the Dred Scott Decision for 30+ years. Your assessment is conveniently ignoring that fact.
I'm not a candidate, but when he speaks, I'm usually smirking too.
Why not, imagine what can be accomplished with a few militia groups who take action based on letters of Marquis. We can be a country of Mercenaries and Pirates. The Jack Sparrow division.
Man50D: The Socialists say the same thing.
So does the NIE.
The Iraq conflict has become the "cause celebre" for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement. Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight.
I wonder why we keep focusing on the 'Shrimp' earmarks, when in that list of earmarks, there is one that is far more disturbing, the creation of a Federal Child Tracking Database. (ala Digital Angel.)
This hits against what people claim Paul stands for on several fronts.
I'm with you on this one, and I am interested in hearing RP's plans for transitioning from an aggressive FP to a non-interventionist one. My own position is that Iraq must be secure from al Qaeda before we leave, with OBL dead or in custody. I think that it's possible for Iraq to resolve its internal differences, secure its borders, and resist Iranian intervention with al Q gone as to do so would be in their own self-interest.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think that the question has even been asked. Upholders of the party line seize on certain remarks by RP that are intended to provide a historical context for our troubles in the ME and blow them way out of proportion without waiting to hear and evaluate conclusions. That's OK, it's going to be a long election season.
That's exactly where the majority of the American public stands on the subject, and the other GOP candidates ignore this at their peril. Ron Paul isn't going to win the nomination based on this belief, but the eventual Republican nominee might well lose the general election over it.