Skip to comments.Ron Paul on Iranian nuke site: Iím tired of all this military-industrial fearmongering
Posted on 09/27/2009 7:14:55 PM PDT by yongin
As contemptible as this is, Ive got two good reasons to spare you a harangue about it. One: Ive already written that harangue, and after the summer coup in Tehran and another year of cheat-and-retreat on their nuclear program, its truer now than it was then. And two: Thankfully, this old cranks isolationist denialism is so fringe on the right that not even mainstreamers who are sympathetic to his broader agenda, like Glenn Beck, will go near it. Its almost not worth bothering about. But suffice it to say, in the unlikely event that the three-percent rEVOLution ever commands the foreign-policy agenda of the GOP, Ill run not walk into the Blue Dogs arms. As Paul spoke passionately about ending all military operations and keeping government out of peoples lifestyles, a lone heckler began to shout, Tell her! Bachmann remained serene, hands folded in her lap, facing Paul. Bringing up Obamas announcement that Iran had secret underground nuclear facilities, Paul announced that he had had enough of fear-mongering for the sake of the military-industrial complex. Bachmann, who once advocated nuking Iran, kept her eyes trained on Paul as her heckler repeated, Tell her! Tell Michele! Tell her! A few more choice quotes from Think Progress: We should never go to war if theyre telling us a lie about whats happening.
We took the position, over my strong objection, we took the position that we had to have regime change in Iraq. What theyre getting ready to do is put very, very strong sanctions on Iran.
But sanctions, and blockades, and prevention like this is an act of war. Im not sure what lie it is were being told about Iran, but then this is a guy so eager to see American lies at work vis-a-vis enemy powers that hes been known to accuse the feds preemptively of telling them. Anyway, the point to take away about his Iran shtick is that its not an argument about strategy, i.e. Theyre a threat but non-intervention is the best way to stop them. Its an argument about facts, i.e. There is no threat, which it has to be because once he admits that Iran is dangerous his isolationist solution becomes impossible to sell. In that sense he reminds me of opponents of waterboarding, forced to insist that coercive interrogation never ever works because once they admit that it does, their absolutist opposition is politically dead on arrival. Conservatives complain frequently about Pauls penchant for blaming America and here, too, in the blockquote above, hes already laying the groundwork to say we started it if and when Iran tries something but his foreign policy, such as it is, leaves him with no other choice. The only way isolationism works is if literally any form of intervention against an enemy is morally wrong and just cause for disproportionate reprisal. Which is another way of saying it doesnt work. Happy viewing.
Paul needs to ease up on his foreign policy, then he’d be a formidable candidate. This isn’t 1800, where it would take a few weeks to cross the Atlantic.
How in the world are there people who think this fool is THE great hope for conservatism?
Ron Paul has the same talking points of the Left Wing anti war enemy.
Those on FR who are in denial, excuse it, or agree with it
will see America and our allies face far worse than a 9/11.
Iran, Russia, Marxist Venezuela, countries who are entrenched with Al Qaida & Telaban and others who have weapons that can take out American cities, states, sections of America, not to mention the backpack bombers such as the ones who were picked up last week.
This is the reality we face.
Ron Paul and the Left Wing who say, just mind out business,
look the other way will be those who destroy America.
Those who had the same views in 1930s Europe learned the hard way.
Paul is not a Conservative. He is Not a Republican.
He is a Libertarian and doesn’t have the balls to officially label himself what he really is.
HE needs to retire or be voted out.
This makes me sick to my stomach.
Back in the 1920s Adolph Hitler made his intentions clearly known to the world. The isolationists and evil-appeasing elites of the world just laughed.
The leaders of Iran have also made their murderous attentions known to our generation.
Have we learned nothing from history?
If a dog is growling and foaming at the mouth at you, chances are he’s going to bite you if you don’t take appropriate measures to protect yourself, your children, and your community.
I suppose I just broke the rule about dehumanizing our enemies. But in this case I don’t care. These are the rabid enemies of our country, our friends, and of liberty.
All of Ron Paul’s talk about liberty is meaningless, because he seems to not understand what liberty actually is, and he lacks the will to pay the necessary price to protect it.
But that's not happening; he can't help himself, he really believes this.
It is more than a facet of his political character that hurts him; it completely negates anything useful he could give to his country, for this weakness, if he ever got into power, would be the death of us all.
To that end, he'll never, ever be a formidable candidate.
From the so-called Military Industrial Speech given by President Eisenhower as he left office, just for the blind devotees of Ron Paul when they flock in to defend the little messiah,
“We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America’s leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.”
“A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.”
“Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.”
“Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.”
Ron Paul is 74 years old. He’s older than McCain. Paul could be retiring from Congress in the next 4 years. The question is who will be left to pick up the REVolution?
When Ike gave that speech, the world did not have weapons
that could hit America within Minutes as it does today.
Not to mention the activities of a 9/11
It clearly isn’t 1800. We were free and independent then. We clearly are not, now that the globalists and their foreign policy agenda has been implemented.
Mr. Paul is clearly on the side of the Constitution. You clearly don’t believe it’s important anymore.
Spoken like a true globalist! For that, I salute you!
We don’t need Ron Paul’s left wing foreign policy, Obama is surrounded with the same type of mentality and it is destroying America.
Paul and his type are not needed or wanted.
Paul’s an advocate of leaving our friends to the dogs. I’m certainly all for strict adherence to the Constitution, but I simply don’t agree with him on foreign policy.
They had something to justify us having "duck and cover" drills in school prior to that speech.
It might not have been missles, but they sure were concerned with Soviet nukes going off across America.
Ron Paul had better be careful or one night he might find himself glowing in the dark from radiation courtesy of Iran or North Korea.
Let the countries that Iran is actually a threat to deal with them. We don’t ALWAYS have to do the dirty work for our “allies” (ever notice we give all and get nothing in return? Kindof a one sided relationship, huh).
I lived in those duck and cover days.
Living in San Diego with the largest concentration of military you have a better understanding what is going on
including having several relatives in the military currently.
When the Koreans can’t even get a functional Dong? C’mon. Fearmongering only works when it’s based in SOME reality.
On October 6th, 1961, just months after Ike’s speech in January, JFK advised the “prudent” American family to build a bomb shelter.
You are a Newbee in more ways than one.
You need to read Ahmadinejad’s speeches.
You need to watch the video of the planes going into the towers in NYC and the people jumping from 80 stories up.
I grew up around dozens of people with numbers on their arm
just a few years out of the concentration camps.
They were there because of peope with your mentality.
If not us, who?
If not now,when??
and during those days I remember the TV stations
here breaking in telling crews of various ships, report back to your ship.
“If not us, who?
If not now,when??”
I wish he never gave the speech.
There are dozens if not hundreds of countries that would love to attack us. But they, like Iran, don’t have the means to do it. We shouldn’t always be saddled with defending another country (let alone paying them in foreign aid). The Israelis and the Saudis are directly threatened by Iran with or without a nuke, and they need to step up and eliminate that threat instead of waiting for Big Brother to do it.
BTW, don’t play that holocaust card on me. I’m not advocating turning a blind eye to Iran, I’m advocating the Israelis back up their favorite saying with action: “Never again.”
I remember those days all too well. I grew up in South Florida and recall Castro’s revolution and the Cuban missle crisis.
It wasn’t a calm and peaceful time.
You don’t think the arms industry has a MASSIVE hand in our foreign (if not domestic) policy?
That’s where we step in and put the speech back in to context.
The left only lifts selected sentences out, ignoring teh gist of his words.
Still, I can’t totally disagree about his not having given the speech.
You have worked out your own little scenario to feel nice and safe.
I will listen to many relatives in the military who have done many tours and those who are there right now.
K-12 education costs almost as much as the military. Add in social security, medicare, medicaid,welfare, Pell Grants,student loans, food stamps and other social spending and its the union/educrat/social spending complex which runs American, not the military industrial complex.
Eisenhower warned that if we didn't watch it, military spending could eat out economy alive. It never did. The New Deal and Great Society social engineering has. Ironically, while the KGB and Democrats were distorting Ike's speech, the Soviet economy was being eaten alive by a military/industrial complex.
At the beginning of the presidential campaign some Ron Paul supporters called to give me a code number and instructions about participating in a conference call with Dr. Paul. I am in agreement with many of the positions Ron Paul has advocated over the years. The exception was his insistence that the only reason America is hated in the Middle-East is because we are in their countries trying to take their oil and bombing their citizens. The last time I looked we were trying to buy oil in the Middle-East and kissing Muslim butt in the process.
I followed the instructions and was involved in the call. There was to be a half hour conversation and Ron Paul gave his stump speech for 17 minutes. Finally I spoke with Ron Paul and asked whether he was overlooking the Wahhabie Muslims who are raised to believe it their religious duty to kill all infidels. His response was that there was a recent study that showed that jihadists were having a much harder time recruiting suicide/homicide bombers.
The answer was non-responsive to my question. At that moment I knew that no matter how much I agreed with Ron Paul on most of his issues I did not want to see him become POTUS. Personally, I think he is just a little nutty. I also discovered over time that most of the people who I know to be Paul supporters are also a little nuts.
That presents a problem that I don’t have an answer to. Barack Obama is president. There is no question that his agenda is to reduce the influence and prosperity of America. Would a slightly crazy Ron Paul be less a threat to America than the third world Marxist who is now president?
Expedite Iran’s nuke program—send them some warheads lickety-split. Say, in 28 minutes?
It’s a good speech. It’s the left that perpetuates misinformation about it. Imperative need balanced by recognition of grave implications. Makes sense to me.
“Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. “
I agree with you that our domestic policy is just as insane, but does a big government domestic policy excuse a big government foreign policy, especially when many who are in charge of such policies have direct connections to the arms industry which stands to make a bundle on these interventions?
Explain how an Iran with nuclear know-how is not a threat to us.
His son is running for the senate in KY (I think it’s KY) is he as kooky as his father?
I have talked face to face many time with Paul supporters, they give out the same talking points of the Code Pinkos and other far left groups.
They are at the Tea Parties giving out papers pushing 9/11 Truther propaganda and the ant war line.
His son Rand has the same line only more smooth.
Sadly, that 'weakness' has already been elected (three years to go) and puts everyone in danger. See, without a clear 'leader', the world's nations will act like punks on the playground- those who bully the most will reap the most.
After his Azholian Address to the UN, we're now no better than any other nation, which means: we'll not be there to punch some puke-face dictator in the mouth should the need arise. This comes directly from Chicago's streets where 'community' is the end, and the 'leaderless' collective strives toward that end using presuasion and collective pressure (think peer pressure) to acheive it.
Well, guess what? Ain't no dictator in the world that's gonna listen to 'street boy' lecture them when he hasn't the balls to stop them, is there?
The difference between Paul and Obama is that Paul thinks you can ignore them, whereas Obama thinks you can browbeat them into conformity and community. Both are wrong.
This world's nutcases need a parental figure to smack them down when they go off half-cocked.
The first day we learned Iran was building enrichment facilities, we should have flattened them. The second day we learned of another facility, we should have flattened that too. The key is to know you 'are' the leader and to act as such. That's why the next few years will be dangerous: on this, teleprompter boy is clueless.
“Thy have no delivery system, no to mention that we’re arguably third on their target list. “
That’s comforting. You mean we’ve got some time to get our affairs in order and make our peace with God before they get around to nuking us?
The GOP establishment has rallied around Rand Paul’s primary opponent, Trey Grayson, Ky’s Security of State. So, Rand Paul isn’t getting much press.
And as far as Israel, they have been standing up and defending themselves for years. The only reason they have not take out those reactors is their "allies" have held them back, for fears of their own.
Not only does Paul want to slash the size of the US military, he wants to undermine our national defense capabilities and eliminate the DHS, CIA and the FBI. Leaving America without any intelligence apparatus whatsoever.
Ron Paul, pacifist and isolationist. What a combo!
Paul will never be a formidable candidate and you can take it to the bank. Easing up is disguising his true thoughts and frankly I want to know where a candidate stands.
Knowing some of the Ron Paul people here — not thanks. They helped write the worst platform I have ever seen in my life which contradicted parts.
The stand against our military overseas made me see red but they were just following the lead of Paul. As far as they were concerned 9/11 didn’t happen.
No thanks to Ron Paul EVER! He couldn’t even be counted on to vote for the Bush Tax Cuts.
Same here! We have a Ron Paul candidate running against my Congressman. We have two major bases in the 4th District — Tinker AFB and Ft Sill in Lawton. The Ron Paul supporter is against both being in Oklahoma. Wouldn’t give you two cents for any of his supporters I have met here.
In fact in my precinct, I was taken out as the chair illegally by a Ron Paul person who didn’t live in the precinct at the time of the election. I was not running for the seat as I am doing other things in politics but our County Chair didn’t hold a new election which we demanded and instead appointed another Ron Paul person to head the precinct. Then the County Chair got mad when I went to the State Chair about what happened. Crooked bunch of people at least here.