Ron Paul on Iranian nuke site: I’m tired of all this military-industrial fearmongering

Hot Air ^ | Sept 26, 2009 | Allah Pundit

[cothrige]

Is Ron Paul saying that the American people have nothing to worry about if the Iranian Government should happen to get Nukes?

I have listened to a chunk of the speech and it seems pretty clear that Ron Paul does not believe that Iran poses any serious threat to America. He doesn't say that Iran is no threat if they happen to get nukes, as you mentioned, but rather seems to take the position that they cannot make them in the first place, which of course is what people say they are trying to do. Specifically, he said "They can't even make their own gasoline, and we think they're going to get a nuclear... intercontinental ballistic missile and nuclear weapons and shoot them at us..."

I think one can make that argument, though surely the opposite can also be said rather forcefully. I do worry about how much we may overreact to such fearful claims, and in that way I am sympathetic to Paul's rhetoric. At the same time I always worry about anyone who uses the phrase "military industrial complex" when speaking. Somehow it always strikes me as a fearmongering of its own type, and reveals a deep undercurrent of bias on the part of the speaker. As much as I worry about overreacting to fear of Iran I also don't wish to overreact to fear about this supposed "military industrial complex."

So, that is my take on what he was saying, and what he meant. As to who is right, and how right anyone is, I wonder. I have a feeling it would be somewhere in the middle.

[puppypusher]

The problem is that when it comes to nuclear weapons that could possibly get into the possesion of religious fanatics such as the Islamics mullas in Iran You,or better yet we cannot take that chance that Iran will never get them or use them for that matter.

The leadership of Itan has sworn to destroy Israel and the United States.When a country tells you that he’s going to take violent action against you,you should listen and prepare for any contingincy.

As of Right Now the U.S. Is fighting a war with Iran,though it’s by proxy. Iran is using terrorist organisation and the are providing weaponry and training.what more of a message do you need before you start to take a country like Iran seriously?

That was my main point.

[cothrige]

better yet we cannot take that chance that Iran will never get them or use them for that matter.

I would say so, though I would think we have to be realistic about how likely that is, and what we can realistically do in our best interest to prevent it. I do hope that we are serious about all possibilities without overreacting in a way that will only cause us more harm than good.

The leadership of Itan has sworn to destroy Israel and the United States.When a country tells you that he’s going to take violent action against you,you should listen and prepare for any contingincy.

Yes, I agree. These folks are certainly fanatical and I think serious about their threats, regardless of how much they can really do to us. Because of that I would hope that we are extremely watchful and serious regarding anything they do or say. I hope that Ron Paul would agree with that, though I am not sure. He may suffer from massive naivete on the subject for all I know.

As of Right Now the U.S. Is fighting a war with Iran,though it’s by proxy. Iran is using terrorist organisation and the are providing weaponry and training.what more of a message do you need before you start to take a country like Iran seriously?

That was my main point.

And I think it is a good point, and I personally agree. What worries me though is the ideological vise grip we may be in. I fear that there are people who desire war in Iran and are inclined to pursue that from the start, and if we listen to them we may end up reacting like a grown man beating up a little girl because she said she was going to hit us. But, at the same time I am equally worried about those ideological doves who have simply convinced themselves that Iran is definitely such a little girl, no matter what, and so they would not consider force in any case. That is as bad as the former, especially when you find out that little girl has a really big gun.

It would seem the real question about this is whether Ron Paul is such a dove. I don't know. Did you watch the video of this speech? I have to admit that I only watched the first ten minutes or so, and got interrupted, but I am not sure. He definitely uses rhetoric that sounds like he may be, like the aforementioned references to the "military industrial complex." He also seems to have a definite idea that Iran is technologically inept, and for all I know they really are. But, does he feel that way because of what he positively knows about their capabilities, or is it simply a case of making the facts fit his noninterventionist inclination? I really don't know. If you have seen the video maybe you can share which way you think he coming at this?