Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ron Paul Should be the Zionist Choice for US President
Arutz sheva ^ | 11/15/07, 10:04 PM | Shmuel Ben-Gad

Posted on 11/15/2007 3:18:48 PM PST by Esther Ruth

Published: 11/15/07, 10:04 PM

Ron Paul Should be the Zionist Choice for US President

by Shmuel Ben-Gad

He opposes US foreign aid to Israel.

Since the Six Day War, US presidents and presidential candidates have tended to speak of the US and Israel as great friends and allies. They have also tended to favor the shrinking of Israel's borders. This has reached a low point under the Bush administration, The US alliance with Israel has been a decidedly mixed blessing. which is the first one to explicitly make its policy the establishment of an Arab state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Thus, the US alliance with Israel has been a decidedly mixed blessing.

Israel receives military and financial assistance, and also some diplomatic support at the United Nations, but the US puts pressure on Israel to surrender parts of the homeland. Even worse, this relationship seems to foster a mentality of dependence amongst many Israelis who, it seems, cannot imagine Israel defying the United States in any major way.

In the upcoming presidential election, however, there is a chance to change this dramatically, by electing Congressman Ron Paul, a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination. Dr. Paul favors a non-interventionist foreign policy. He has written:

"Yet, while we call ourselves a strong ally of the Israeli people, we send billions in foreign aid every year to some Muslim states that many Israelis regard as enemies. From the Israeli point of view, many of the same Islamic nations we fund with our tax dollars want to destroy the Jewish state. Many average Israelis and American Jews see America as hypocritically hedging its bets.... It is time to challenge the notion that it is our job to broker peace in the Middle East and every other troubled region across the globe.... 'Peace plans' imposed by outsiders or the UN cause resentment and seldom produce lasting peace.... The fatal conceit lies in believing America can impose geopolitical solutions wherever it chooses."

In this, Dr. Paul is hearkening back to what George Washington counseled in his famous farewell address: "The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible."

The Republican Jewish Coalition (a fervent supporter of the Bush administration, which it claims is a great friend of Israel) refused to invite Dr. Paul to its candidates forum because he opposes aid to Israel. But, as we can see, Dr. Paul's position is based upon a principled, modest, non-interventionist foreign policy - not upon anti-Zionism. Indeed, in a way, his foreign policy is mirrored by his small government domestic policy. Both recognize there are real limits to what a government can usefully do.

It is true that Israel is a small state in a highly dangerous neighborhood, but it is an economically and technologically vibrant country - even more so recently, as the shackles of socialism have been somewhat loosened. Cutting the apron strings to the US would, I think, make Israel become more maturely self-confident, because it would be more self-reliant.

A Ron Paul presidency would be healthy for Israel in yet another way. Dr. Paul is opposed to organizations like the United Nations and the International Criminal Court that dilute national sovereignty. If the United States, in a Paul administration, withdrew from the UN and similar institutions, imagine what a blow this would deliver to their power and Dr. Paul's position is based upon a principled, modest, non-interventionist foreign policy - not upon anti-Zionism. prestige. I find it a thrilling prospect. Maybe Israel would have a wise enough government to follow suit.

Now, I do not support Ron Paul only for Zionist reasons, nor do I think US pressure is the primary cause for the current politically and culturally debilitated conditions of Israel. The primary cause, in my opinion, is the self-debasement of the Hebrew nation both in the homeland and abroad. This manifested itself most severely in the Israeli government's expulsion of Jews from Gaza and northern Samaria, and in the almost total lack of opposition that greeted this from the Jewish Diaspora.

It seems to me a Ron Paul presidency would be good for Israel and for the United States. Its foreign policy non-interventionism and its concern to protect national sovereignty would provide Israel with a greater impetus to increase its own independence and sense of national honor. I hope American Zionists will resist the immediate, meretricious attractions of American financial assistance for Israel. Ron Paul would both end this infantilizing, and even corrupting, aid and respect Israel's national sovereignty.

Taking the long and deep view, Ron Paul should be the Zionist choice. 5 Kislev 5768 / 15 November 07


TOPICS: Israel; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: antisemites; antisemitism; israel; paul; paulestinians; paultards; ronpaul; spam; zionist

1 posted on 11/15/2007 3:18:49 PM PST by Esther Ruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth

Insanity.


2 posted on 11/15/2007 3:19:44 PM PST by SolidWood ("I knew my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush

Target practice...


3 posted on 11/15/2007 3:20:04 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson; Allegra; ejonesie22; lormand; Petronski; mnehrling; drpix; Mr. Silverback; darkwing104

4 posted on 11/15/2007 3:22:55 PM PST by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle ("Ron Paul and his flaming antiwar spam monkeys can Kiss my Ass!!" -- Jim Robinson, 09/30/07)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth

5 posted on 11/15/2007 3:24:46 PM PST by WakeUpAndVote (I smell turkey and stuffing!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth

I wish I knew how to post that little vomiting thingie,
because thats what this article makes me want to do - vomit.


6 posted on 11/15/2007 3:28:06 PM PST by svcw (There is no plan B.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth

This is a very good explanation of Ron Paul’s position on foreign aid. I’m old enough to remember when conservatives opposed foreign aid.


7 posted on 11/15/2007 3:32:02 PM PST by Sue Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth

Does it follow that an atheist would be the best choice for Pope?


8 posted on 11/15/2007 3:32:47 PM PST by SampleMan (Islamic tolerance is practiced by killing you last.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alouette

Self-Hating Jew Alert.

9 posted on 11/15/2007 3:33:29 PM PST by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle ("Ron Paul and his flaming antiwar spam monkeys can Kiss my Ass!!" -- Jim Robinson, 09/30/07)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth
Don't they mean ANTI-Zionist choice ?
10 posted on 11/15/2007 3:34:53 PM PST by fieldmarshaldj (~~~Jihad Fever -- Catch It !~~~ (Backup tag: "Live Fred or Die"))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth; OrthodoxPresbyterian; NapkinUser; DreamsofPolycarp; The_Eaglet; Irontank; Gamecock; ...

Ron Paul campaign website

Ron's weekly message [5 minutes audio, every Monday]
PodcastWeekly archive • Toll-free 888-322-1414 •
Free Republic Ron Paul Ping List: Join/Leave


Yet another Israel ping. Maybe we've had too many lately, considering that Ron Paul doesn't mention Israel that often.
11 posted on 11/15/2007 3:35:28 PM PST by George W. Bush (Apres moi, le deluge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: svcw
Ah. One of these, you mean...? ;)

Free Smiley Face Courtesy of www.FreeSmileys.org

12 posted on 11/15/2007 3:41:04 PM PST by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle ("Ron Paul and his flaming antiwar spam monkeys can Kiss my Ass!!" -- Jim Robinson, 09/30/07)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Sue Bob

“when conservatives opposed foreign aid.”

Do you mean like the 900 million dollars just approved from the World Bank to loan to Iran? Thanks to Robert Zollick, the president of the WB.

US taxpayers will end up funding these loans.


13 posted on 11/15/2007 3:42:36 PM PST by rineaux (How dare you, how dare you question the Clinton's wrecked record.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth
They have also tended to favor the shrinking of Israel's borders. This has reached a low point under the Bush administration, The US alliance with Israel has been a decidedly mixed blessing. which is the first one to explicitly make its policy the establishment of an Arab state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

Israel needs to stick with its real ally. The Almighty One!
14 posted on 11/15/2007 3:43:09 PM PST by Redhd2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush

Just read the article. Thanks for the ping.


15 posted on 11/15/2007 3:43:23 PM PST by rineaux (How dare you, how dare you question the Clinton's wrecked record.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: rineaux

“Do you mean like the 900 million dollars just approved from the World Bank to loan to Iran? Thanks to Robert Zollick, the president of the WB.

US taxpayers will end up funding these loans.”

That is nuts! From my understanding, we pretty much ARE the WB. So, our government says that Iran is our enemy while we fund it loans! Ron Paul addresses this kind of scenario repeating itself over decades in his foreign policy book. It’s schizophrenic. We proclaim countries enemies and then loan them money or give them aid.


16 posted on 11/15/2007 3:51:02 PM PST by Sue Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle

Thats the one.


17 posted on 11/15/2007 3:51:05 PM PST by svcw (There is no plan B.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth

There were Jews who backed Stalin and Jews who backed Hitler. The longtime head of the American Nazi Party was Jewish. Next to them, Ron Paul is nothing. If you look hard enough (and you usually don’t have to look that hard), you’ll find that at least a couple of Jews supporting anything... we are a strange people.


18 posted on 11/15/2007 3:52:27 PM PST by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rineaux
Your welcome. I was a little worried that everyone would think we've had too many lately. I keep thinking we've had something else from this writer before, maybe on SJackson's list. Or maybe Schmuel is a more common name than I thought and it just looks familiar.

Actually, I don't feel bad. This article expresses well the benefits to Israel if we stop hosting a hostile forum to it at the United Nations and stop imposing such horrible agreements on it. I still think they'd be better off. But we would have to stop meddling in their internal affairs and their foreign policy for it to really benefit them. Israel could be such a dynamo in the region if we would stop holding it back.
19 posted on 11/15/2007 3:52:47 PM PST by George W. Bush (Apres moi, le deluge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth
Et tu, Esther? : (

Ron Paul is a DNC plant, if not an alien plant, but we believe the aliens support Dennis Kucinich.

20 posted on 11/15/2007 4:10:57 PM PST by Caipirabob (Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush

A few Rabbi’s are upset with our latest Peace Plans to take place in Annapolis. Saying if the process goes through, destruction will come down on us.

I recall an article similar to this was posted here on FR.


21 posted on 11/15/2007 4:17:28 PM PST by rineaux (How dare you, how dare you question the Clinton's wrecked record.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth

Frankly “Zionist” is the term used by people who hate Israel the most. They use it to polarize the debate. I sure hate it when folks who seem to support Israel uses that term.

I support Israel. I’ll pick who I think is best to support it and sound policies in the U.S.


22 posted on 11/15/2007 4:20:44 PM PST by DoughtyOne (California, where the death penalty is reserved for wholesome values. SB 777)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth

If you like folk supported by Jewhaters and racists, he’s fine, as Michael Medved puts it, the neonazi candidate.


23 posted on 11/15/2007 4:28:51 PM PST by SJackson (every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and figtree, none to make him afraid,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sue Bob
I’m old enough to remember when conservatives opposed foreign aid.

They still do. This new lot is not conservative. Never have been and their stripes are showing. From funding the 40 year old space bus (NASA) to throwing tax dollars around the world to Every Child Left Behind, their pitiful understanding of conservatism is about as strong as 1st grader's understanding of physics

Dr. Paul as usual is right on this issue as well. But instead of providing the Constitutional basis for wasting my tax dollars here and around the world, they'd rather call names

24 posted on 11/15/2007 4:42:45 PM PST by billbears (Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it. --Santayana)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: billbears

I totally agree with you. Also, as to the name-calling, they are employing tactics straight from Alinsky’s (and his disciple Hillary Clinton’s) playbook Rules for Radicals:

http://www.vcn.bc.ca/citizens-handbook/rules.html

I would expect no better from Michael Medved, who is mentioned by one of the commenters above and who attended Yale and ran in the same circles as the Clintons. He is no conservative in my opinion.


25 posted on 11/15/2007 5:11:16 PM PST by Sue Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth
http://www.cjd.org/paper/jp2war.html

I didn’t post this here to see the Pope bashed but that was the result anyway. Idealogical leaders of conservatism...religious leaders...former highly respected military officers, and all others who see our foreign policy as flawed are pilloried at this site as traitors.

Reasoned dialog is discouraged unless it fits a particularly narrow range of ideology...And that ideology imo is not a conservative one.

26 posted on 11/15/2007 6:19:03 PM PST by KDD (A nod is as good as a wink to a blind horse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush

Hypocrisy in the Middle East

February 26, 2007

Hundreds of thousands of American troops already occupy Afghanistan and Iraq, a number that is rising as the military surge moves forward. The justification, given endlessly since September 11th, is that both support terrorism and thus pose a risk to the United States. Yet when we step back and examine the region as a whole, it’s obvious that these two impoverished countries, neither of which has any real military, pose very little threat to American national security when compared to other Middle Eastern nations. The decision to attack them, while treating some of region’s worst regimes as allies, shows the deadly hypocrisy of our foreign policy in the Middle East.

Consider Saudi Arabia, the native home of most of the September 11th hijackers. The Saudis, unlike the Iraqis, have proven connections to al Qaeda. Saudi charities have funneled money to Islamic terrorist groups. Yet the administration insists on calling Saudi Arabia a “good partner in the war on terror.” Why? Because the U.S. has a longstanding relationship with the Saudi royal family, and a long history of commercial interests relating to Saudi oil. So successive administrations continue to treat the Saudis as something they are not: a reliable and honest friend in the Middle East.

The same is true of Pakistan, where General Musharaf seized power by force in a 1999 coup. The Clinton administration quickly accepted his new leadership as legitimate, to the dismay of India and many Muslim Pakistanis. Since 9/11, we have showered Pakistan with millions in foreign aid, ostensibly in exchange for Musharaf’s allegiance against al Qaeda. Yet has our new ally rewarded our support? Hardly. The Pakistanis almost certainly have harbored bin Laden in their remote mountains, and show little interest in pursuing him or allowing anyone else to pursue him. Pakistan has signed peace agreements with Taliban leaders, and by some accounts bin Laden is a folk hero to many Pakistanis.

Furthermore, more members of al Qaeda probably live within Pakistan than any other country today. North Korea developed its nuclear capability with technology sold to them by the Pakistanis. Yet somehow we remain friends with Pakistan, while Saddam Hussein, who had no connection to bin Laden and no friends in the Islamic fundamentalist world, was made a scapegoat.

The tired assertion that America “supports democracy” in the Middle East is increasingly transparent. It was false 50 years ago, when we supported and funded the hated Shah of Iran to prevent nationalization of Iranian oil, and it’s false today when we back an unelected military dictator in Pakistan- just to name two examples. If honest democratic elections were held throughout the Middle East tomorrow, many countries would elect religious fundamentalist leaders hostile to the United States. Cliché or not, the Arab Street really doesn’t like America, so we should stop the charade about democracy and start pursuing a coherent foreign policy that serves America’s long-term interests.

A coherent foreign policy is based on the understanding that America is best served by not interfering in the deadly conflicts that define the Middle East. Yes, we need Middle Eastern oil, but we can reduce our need by exploring domestic sources. We should rid ourselves of the notion that we are at the mercy of the oil-producing countries- as the world’s largest oil consumer, their wealth depends on our business. We should stop the endless game of playing faction against faction, and recognize that buying allies doesn’t work. We should curtail the heavy militarization of the area by ending our disastrous foreign aid payments. We should stop propping up dictators and putting band-aids on festering problems. We should understand that our political and military involvement in the region creates far more problems that it solves. All Americans will benefit, both in terms of their safety and their pocketbooks, if we pursue a coherent, neutral foreign policy of non-interventionism, free trade, and self-determination in the Middle East.

Dr.Ron Paul


27 posted on 11/15/2007 6:40:30 PM PST by KDD (Ron Paul did not approve this post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SolidWood
"Insanity."

Are you disputing this statement?

"Yet, while we call ourselves a strong ally of the Israeli people, we send billions in foreign aid every year to some Muslim states that many Israelis regard as enemies. From the Israeli point of view, many of the same Islamic nations we fund with our tax dollars want to destroy the Jewish state."

And if not, do you approve of funding Israel's enemies?

28 posted on 11/15/2007 6:47:37 PM PST by incindiary (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJDqneN4weE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: billbears
"They still do. This new lot is not conservative. Never have been and their stripes are showing. From funding the 40 year old space bus (NASA) to throwing tax dollars around the world to Every Child Left Behind, their pitiful understanding of conservatism is about as strong as 1st grader's understanding of physics.

Dr. Paul as usual is right on this issue as well. But instead of providing the Constitutional basis for wasting my tax dollars here and around the world, they'd rather call names."

Amen, and QFT.

29 posted on 11/15/2007 6:49:35 PM PST by incindiary (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJDqneN4weE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: incindiary

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926497/posts

more blowback.


30 posted on 11/15/2007 8:30:13 PM PST by KDD (Ron Paul did not approve this post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: KDD

Thanks for the ping.


31 posted on 11/15/2007 9:21:21 PM PST by incindiary (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJDqneN4weE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth
Ron Paul is right, we are doing more harm to Israel then good.

Israel can handle any nation in that region, she doesn't need to have her hands tied by pro-Islamic U.S. foreign policy.

32 posted on 11/15/2007 11:09:08 PM PST by fortheDeclaration (We must beat the Democrats or the country will be ruined! - Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration

Good old Ron Paul. He’s got the NeoCons and their Globlists friends all tied up in knots.


33 posted on 11/15/2007 11:12:54 PM PST by eternity (I like IKE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: eternity

Buh...buh...but Ron Paul is supported by the Zionist Neo-Nazis and the Multicultural White Supremacists and besides he is certifiably insane. Some guy in the Faux News focus group said so. What are ya’, some kinda kook?


34 posted on 11/16/2007 12:22:59 AM PST by Hatband
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson