President Ron Paul's foreign policy - analysis and implications

[ChoicestHops]

First off I would like to say I am nowhere near an expert on this but this is my analysis on the subject. There were three reasons given by OBL why Al Qaeda attacked America on 9/11. We stationed troops in Saudi Arabia and continue to have troops in the Arabian Peninsula, continual support for Israel, and U.S. aggression against Iraqis. Well suppose Ron Paul becomes the Republican candidate and he wins the election in '08. He instantly pulls all troops out of Iraq and decommissions every single military base around the world, which estimated is about 700+ bases worldwide in 50+ countries. He completely overhauls the foreign policy which is one of the main factors since the early 1990s that was a factor of terrorism against America.

Does OBL, Al Qaeda, and the other groups out there suddenly forgive "The Great Satan?" Do they instantly end their hate of America and disband their terrorist cells? America has stopped aggression on their holy land and is no longer supporting Israel either, but would that really change anything? Even if America pulled out of the Middle East situation entirely, I never see peace happening between Palestine and Israel. The fighting will continue to go on and terrorist groups will always remember how America was side by side with Israel for the last 60 years.

I've recently jumped on the Ron Paul bandwagon because I do not like the foreign policy one bit, but I am starting to question how realistic his ideas are when they would actually be applied. Are we too deep into this to suddenly overhaul our foreign policy and stop terrorism against us? I really think that if Ron Paul became President and changed foreign policy terrorism wouldn't stop against America at all. It seems everyone except Kunich and Paul realize this because the next step is obvious and it's happing very soon:

[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
I really think that if Ron Paul became President and changed foreign policy terrorism wouldn't stop against America at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not anytime soon. But we'd have billions and billions of dollars to better defend Americans within America itself rather than project power across the globe. For the cost of this Iraq fiasco alone, we probably could inspect shipments of cargo into the US for a long, long time -- and have saved 4000 American lives and tens of thousands of Iraqis. And have constructed a missile defense shield within our borders.

And we'd have a leader committed to preserving our freedoms at home simultaneously: Odds of being killed by terrorist <<< Odds of being impacted (killed, imprisoned) due to an authoritarian anti-terror/anti-drug/anti-personal_freedom administration

[Borodog]

Headline: "Iran Continues Saber-Rattling; Threatens US Interests."

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
Does OBL, Al Qaeda, and the other groups out there suddenly forgive "The Great Satan?" Do they instantly end their hate of America and disband their terrorist cells?

[/ QUOTE ]
Probably not. I think the "Great Satan" is an excuse, not a cause. Power hungry men use such excuses to manipulate others and gain more power for themselves. And the more our foreign policy interferes with the lives of everyday people over there, the more plausible the excuses become. So while leaving doesn't solve the problem of power hungry men, it makes the excuse that the Great Satan is responsible for the misery people are feeling much less plausible.

[BeatUp]

No way, but it would be nice to see someone try. Even if Ron Paul were elected, which I would love, he'd never be able to pull that off. He'd be in great danger of going out like JFK. He actually said if he got elected he would be in danger. There are just too many people with more money, power, and greed that have a vested interest in our globally destructive foreign exploitation policy.

I think for the money we've spent doing next to nothing in Iraq we could've rebuilt the entire K-12 education system in America and hired some well-paid, well-educated, teachers.

[JayTee]

[ QUOTE ]


I think for the money we've spent doing next to nothing in Iraq we could've rebuilt the entire K-12 education system in America and hired some well-paid, well-educated, teachers.

[/ QUOTE ]

New here? Hold on tight.

[Taso]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


I think for the money we've spent doing next to nothing in Iraq we could've rebuilt the entire K-12 education system in America and hired some well-paid, well-educated, teachers.

[/ QUOTE ]

New here? Hold on tight.

[/ QUOTE ]

haha, amen.

Gotta say I agree with Kaj though about fully here. I do question moral responsibility in letting people live under tyrants and evil dictators. For me this has always been a moral dilemma, which is why I might like to see an Iraqi vote taken, if they want us to stay, we stay, if not we go and use the money to help us, instead of them - in this case, and I firmly believe they'd vote for us to leave, I feel the moral responsibility is gone.

In any case, I support Ron Paul on this, and maybe it's wrong to legislate morality, and if Americans want to help Iraq they can do so individually, by their own means.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


I think for the money we've spent doing next to nothing in Iraq we could've rebuilt the entire K-12 education system in America and hired some well-paid, well-educated, teachers.

[/ QUOTE ]

New here? Hold on tight.

[/ QUOTE ]

haha, amen.

Gotta say I agree with Kaj though about fully here. I do question moral responsibility in letting people live under tyrants and evil dictators. For me this has always been a moral dilemma, which is why I might like to see an Iraqi vote taken, if they want us to stay, we stay, if not we go and use the money to help us, instead of them - in this case, and I firmly believe they'd vote for us to leave, I feel the moral responsibility is gone.

[/ QUOTE ]

As long as you're not employing tyranny in the form of taxation to fight this tyranny, you can feel morally responsible all you like. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


I think for the money we've spent doing next to nothing in Iraq we could've rebuilt the entire K-12 education system in America and hired some well-paid, well-educated, teachers.

[/ QUOTE ]

New here? Hold on tight.

[/ QUOTE ]

hahah,

[j555]

They wouldn't all of a sudden forgive us, but it would be a good start towards establishing peace. As Paul said at the debate last week, if there is a mistake being made then we should correct the mistake, not continue it. This is why the whole war on terror is bogus because the attack on 9/11 started this whole thing and was caused by our involvement in their region. So it's one thing to go after the attackers on 9/11, but it's another thing to invade a country that posed no threat to our national security. Now we're at greater risk because we're more involved over there so why continue it? As Kaj said, we would have a lot more money to defend our borders, toughen down on illegal immigration, and by not getting involved in other people's business they would have less reason to attack us and probably wouldn't be able to recruit people as easily to give up there lives to do so.