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

To: secretagent
Paul would call for an end to all U.S. funding of Israel, I believe, along with an end to U.S. funding of Egypt and the PLO via the U.N. Israel might collapse without U.S. welfare, and then pose no counter to Saddam.

I'm certainly a big fan of Paul's perpetual excoriation of our entangling alliances with the UN.

Can you source his stand on the funding of Israel?

22 posted on 10/04/2002 9:45:36 PM PDT by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: Askel5
Actually, his stand on foreign aid to Israel is based on the libertarian/classical liberal (i.e. pro-free market) view against ALL "foreign aid" (or as Lord Peter Bauer put it: "government-to-government transfer"). This in no way implies a lack of moral support for Israel, nor a denial of the right of any private organizations, individuals or groups to fund Israel. Government-to-government transfers are nowhere near as effective as direct funding. In the case of Israel, their economy (market liberal to some degree) is far more robust than any of their neighbors. Rest assured that Israel would not collapse without U.S. welfare. In so many ways, they would be better off without US aid and all the strings attached to it.
29 posted on 10/04/2002 9:58:24 PM PDT by austinTparty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: Askel5
I'm certainly a big fan of Paul's perpetual excoriation of our entangling alliances with the UN.

Can you source his stand on the funding of Israel?

Yes. He has the traditional libertarian view:

Our policy of subsidizing both sides is ludicrous. We support Arabs and Jews, Pakistanis and Indians, Chinese and Russians. We have troops in 140 countries around the world just looking for trouble. Our policies have led us to support Al Qaeda in Kosovo and bomb their Serb adversaries. We have, in the past, allied ourselves with bin Laden, as well as Saddam Hussein, only to find out later the seriousness of our mistake. Will this foolishness ever end?

A non-interventionist foreign policy has a lot to say for itself, especially when one looks at the danger and inconsistency of our current policy in the Middle East.

source

I'd like to add another point. We currently plan to help North Korea build two nuclear reactors. Yet Bush called North Korea one of three nations in the "Axis of Evil", along with Iran and Iraq.

So we spend billions of dollars to invade one evil nation, Iraq, because it might have or soon acquire nuclear bomb material. Meanwhile we actively help another evil nation, North Korea, acquire nuclear bomb material.

75 posted on 10/05/2002 8:00:47 AM PDT by secretagent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

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