Posted on 08/10/2007 8:19:02 AM PDT by xjcsa
Ron Paul, That Big Tall Strong Texan, is the Man for the Job....
I know he has really impressed me /not
“Ron Paul has no chance at this run. No chance at all.”
If he truly has “no chance” why spend so much time and bandwidth reassuring yourself?
the key here is that pirates attacked and hijacked american ships. Jefferson authorized limited military action to protect american trade from piracy. that is a legitimate, constitutional use of limited military powers-—as was the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, in response to an attack and a direct threat.
That's low, you S.O.B.... Great argument! (lol)
Yes, I signed up just to answer this question. I am a Constitutional Conservative who can’t even believe he is posting at what is essentially a NeoCon site. But your ? was asked in good faith, and with all due respect, so I feel you deserve an answer.
The direct answer to your question is that there was no American policy or action that led to this attack. The answer to your implied question - “aren’t all Muslims going to hate and attack us no matter what we do?” is, most emphatically, no.
I have traveled all over the world, including many Arab Muslim countries, and many countries that are Islamic without being Arabic. The VAST majority of Muslims either (1) couldn’t care less about America, or (2) have a passive mistrust or suspicion of America, but not one that would lead them to strap bombs to their children and send them off to kill other people in suicide attacks.
Despite what people around here say, the large majority of Muslims are not itching to kill any non-Muslims and impose Sharia law. I say this as a committed and devout Christian. Most Muslims would, frankly, rather fight people from neighboring tribes or clans. Our backing of tyrannical regimes in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Yemen, and our support for Israel (who is our “ally” for reasons that no one can explain without using circular logic) are the DIRECT reason for the hatred that radical Muslims have for America.
Yes, the Koran says to spread Islam by the sword. The Christian Bible says to love your enemies, and when someone attempts to rob you, you should willingly and happily hand over your property. I don’t see too many Christians doing that.
Except for the issue of freedom of the seas, both the Federalists and Democratic Republicans agreed that the United States was incapable of allying with other nations without risking a major war. Jefferson may have acted against the Barbary pirates in part because the British Navy was too busy in its war against France to deal with such matters. In any case, Jefferson did back down from confrontations with the Brits over the impressment of seaman from American merchant vessels and trading with French-dominated Continental Europe and instead promoted the Embargo Act. Although this move angered merchants and bankers, the United States lacked the capacity to confront the world's greatest navy.
The foreign policy decisions of Washington, Adams, and Jefferson, and indeed of American presidents through Cleveland, must be understood in light of the nature of the United States and its lack of ability to project military power worldwide. It is ironic that many of the America First advocates of the pre-Pearl Harbor days had no problem with American expansion into the Caribbean and the Pacific Basin. Perhaps Frank Chodorov, Garet Garrett, and John Flynn were consistent isolationists, but others were not.
In the present time, the United States cannot be a gigantic Switzerland; no nation of our size and economic power can be, as history has demonstrated. That being said, the United States has made a large number of bad foreign policy decisions, whether motivated by hubris or misguided idealism. Liberals and neo-conservatives are sometimes as motivated by the same lack of realism that infects libertarians and Buchananites. The Vietnam redux in Iraq and Afghanistan is one of them. We have spent four years fighting ineffectively there. We need to win this war by using our massive military powers and abandoning the chimera of a democratic, unified Iraq. Tacitus complained about the harsh measures the Romans used to subdue the Britons: that they had made a desert and called it peace. Nonetheless, British rule was firmly established over what is now England for three centuries thereafter.
Bandwidth is cheap, but have you seen movie prices now days, and comedy clubs, forget about it...
I meant to say: Roman rule was firmly established over what is now England for three centuries thereafter.
I’m pretty sure Ron Paul voted in favor of the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. So I don’t see where the original post is much of an argument.
Are you saying we don't have a good reason to be allied with Israel?
good points - I’d add that why is it acceptable for Bush supporters to discard one or two of his policies here and there - yet Paul supporters are forbidden - and thier support means they support every single policiy he has
To answer your question, sir - Had Paul been President on 9/11, there's no doubt that he would have immediately asked Congress for a full declaration of war. None of this going to the UN or waiting to see what the "international community" thinks. I'm sure Paul would have done the same in the 1700s, since these were American interests being attacked.
But what do I know. I'm just a kook. Time for me to hit the bong.
Ron Paul's supporters would do better defending his positions with facts rather than channeling the founders.
Would you be offended if I asked you what it was?
Wasn’t characterizing either of you as supporters or non-supporters, I don’t know.
I’m a Ron Paul supporter but I don’t think the war is illegal. It’s a little rediculous to claim that when Congress authorized the action like you stated. But the actions of muslims back then are not really that applicable to recent times. Do Christians still burn people at the stake for being witches? No. So just because one thing is true back then doesn’t mean it still is.
Either way, I can stomach pulling out of Iraq to fix our government back home.
Welcome to FreeRepublic. I suggest you make that the centerpiece of your candidate's campaign, and stress it here as often as possible.
Go Ron Paul Go!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.