Ron Paul in 2009: “I Wouldn’t Have Risked American Lives” To End The Holocaust

Big Government ^ | 12/27/11 | Jeffrey Scott Shapiro

[Nachum]

On the evening of Sept. 16, 2009, I was invited to a function for Rand Paul’s U.S. Senate campaign at the headquarters of Americans for Tax Reform.

I had been invited by a friend of mine via Facebook who was a passionate supporter of Ron Paul. Within minutes of arriving, I saw Rep. Paul enter the room, followed by an entourage of several college students.

I immediately walked up to Paul and introduced myself, and Paul smiled at me and shook my hand. I told him that I had always wanted to ask him a question, and that it was a hypothetical question, but I would appreciate his answer nonetheless. Paul smiled, and welcomed the question. At this point there were about 15 people surrounding us, listening.

And so I asked Congressman Paul: if he were President of the United States during World War II, and as president he knew what we now know about the Holocaust, but the Third Reich presented no threat to the U.S., would he have sent American troops to Nazi Germany purely as a moral imperative to save the Jews?”

And the Congressman answered:

“No, I wouldn’t. I wouldn’t risk American lives to do that. If someone wants to do that on their own because they want to do that, well, that’s fine, but I wouldn’t do that.”

[dfwgator]

FDR risked no Americans to stop it either!

So the Normandy Landings had nothing to do with stopping the Holocaust?

[Cyber Liberty]

This approach Paul has is exactly the approach FDR had before Pearl Harbor. Screw the Jews in Germany occupied lands. How many ships of Jewish refugees did FDR turn away?

[presently no screen name]

if I want to cast a primary ballot my only choice will be Mitt.

Plan on staying home, I hear there will be a blizzard that day and roads will be hazardous causing much destruction. Possibility of electrical outages.

[shibumi]

Ron Paul does his impression of the Post Modern Neville Chamberlain.

Somehow I have no problem believing this anecdotal story. It fits in perfectly with his pronouncements today.

[ssaftler]

what would have Roosevelt’s answer been

I think we have a pretty good answer as to what FDR's answer was or would have been. Or, more precisely, his "striped-pants boys" advisors, as Truman referred to them.

And if, as the author of this article claims, this is Paul's position on the Jewish community, he's no better in my book than nObama, regardless of any of his domestic spending positions.

[dfwgator]

Could more have been done? Sure....but it’s folly to think that it could have been stopped....the only thing we could do is try to end the war as soon as possible.

Paul if he were President probably would have negotiated a truce with the Nazis, and left Hitler in power.

[=8 mrrabbit 8=]

Assuming this happened, the question asked was a very loaded question - and a very discriminatory one at that:

1. Why only for Jews? What about Gypsies and Gays in the camps?

(Perhaps Mr. Shapiro is a bigot?)

2. Declaration of War would be required.

3. Does the Constitution authorize us to be the policeman of the world?

4. Should we have done the same for Cambodia? Christians in a particular Southeast Asian country and particular African countries?

5. How about the Balkans?

Ron Paul simply gave the usual Ron Paul answer...

Why is everyone acting shocked?

=8-)

[Kazan]

I’m surprised he even believes the Holocaust occurred.

[Beowulf9]

pinging for later, interesting comments on here.

[Leep]

I realize the truth hurts BUT the US did NOT enter WWII to save the Jews..

Not only that but the progressive in the US prior to Hitler were flirting with eugenics.
Hitler was impressed with what the American Progressive were doing with eugenics.
Still, whats that does have to do with Paul’s seeming dislike of Israel? He sure reads like a anti-semitic?

[HighlyOpinionated]

My gut says that in reality, Ron Paul is not libertarian but anarchist.

[Logical me]

This little turd is certifiable insane. Isolation will eventually destroy America.

[Kazan]

And this is the same Ron Paul who defends Iran’s right to a nuclear weapon while continually making the point that he wants the United States to cut aid to Israel.

His position is even more extreme than that. Paul doesn't think Israel should exist, according one of his former aides.

[Lib-Lickers 2]

nobody knew there was a true Holocaust that had been occuring until the allies started liberating the death camps..

the question to Paul was if he knew 6 million innocent persons were going to be murdered if the US didn’t do some thing about it would he try to help those people and he said he wouldn’t risk one American life to do so

[Le Chien Rouge]

I’m not defending Paul,but History is littered with examples of leaders who failed to stop genocides.

1) Clinton did NOTHING to stop the slaughter of Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda

2) Ford/Carter did nothing to stop the Khmer Rouge

3) No One is stopping the killing of Christians in the Middle East RIGHT NOW.

[Blue_Ridge_Mtn_Geek]

“No, I wouldn’t. I wouldn’t risk American lives to do that. If someone wants to do that on their own because they want to do that, well, that’s fine, but I wouldn’t do that.”

In other words, Paul would have made the same decision as the actual president at the time, FDR, made, e.g., ashcanning the proposed air attacks on the Auschwitz facilities, http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0002_0_01610.html

and the same decision that each of the allied powers made at the time the Ottomans were slaughtering the Armenians in round I of the 20th Century world wars,
http://www.armenian-genocide.org/Education.56/current_category.117/resourceguide_detail.html

and the same decision that the Clinton administration made with respect to the massacres in Rwanda.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2001/09/bystanders-to-genocide/4571/

And so your point is . . . what? That US presidents are bound to put US troops at risk to satisfy your sense of moral outrage at the behavior of the Nazis, or some other band of murderous thugs? Are you volunteering for a mission to root out the North Korean oppressors who are starving their population today? Or to suppress the various slaughters underway in Africa and the disintegrating Middle Eastern states? If you are divinely called to mount such a mission, more power to you. A US president doesn’t have such a mandate. Several have ignored that limitation on their authority, but Ron Paul seems unlikely to follow suit.

[hinckley buzzard]

He gave the obviously correct answer. So what's the beef.

In reality we didn't enter the European war to liberate the concentration camps. We entered for far larger reasons of national security. Nice we were able to save a lot of innocent prisoners in the process, but that was, and should have been, a byproduct not a casus belli. Other wise we should have attacked the USSR and freed up the Gulags, right? Where does it end?

[mnehring]

That wasn’t Ron Paul, it was a ghost actor saying it was him. Paul isn’t responsible for any words that come from his mouth or his pen. He only says and writes things that make him look good, and as soon as it doesn’t look good, it is the responsibility of the ‘ghost’.

[decimon]

And so I asked Congressman Paul: if he were President of the United States during World War II, and as president he knew what we now know about the Holocaust, but the Third Reich presented no threat to the U.S., would he have sent American troops to Nazi Germany purely as a moral imperative to save the Jews?”

Like it or not, the answer is that no American president would have. The American people would never have gone for that.

If there's a 'should have' then that's the 'should have offered sanctuary.'

Should we have militarily saved the Armenians from the Turks? The Kulaks from the Bolsheviks? The Chinese from the Japanese?

[Smokin' Joe]

We didn’t risk American lives to stop the Rape of Nanking, the starvation of the Kulaks, nor to aid the Nationalist Chinese even though the Maoist purges likely killed 30,000,000. Liberation of the camps was not the primary objective in WWII either, defeat of the Axis (after we’d been attacked) was.