Golden Ruled Out

by rex on January 29, 2012

in election 2012

I’ve posted before about my stance on Ron Paul. I agree with just about all of his positions. However, his comment at the South Carolina debate was just off the chart – bad.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not a war-monger and don’t believe we need to attack nations for no reason. I also don’t believe we need to be involved in nation-building. However…..

For Ron Paul to think (basically) that we can just leave the Muslims alone and they will leave us alone is just plain wrong. Has Ron forgotten the Barbary Pirates?

He is right – these people don’t hate us because of our freedom and liberty. They hate use because we are non-Muslim – and that is the point Ron Paul misses drastically.

We took the liberty to make some inquiries concerning the Grounds of their pretensions to make war upon a Nation who had done them no Injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our Friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation.  The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise. — Thomas Jefferson and John Adams to Continental Congress, March 28, 1786

I’ve decided that while I support most of Ron Paul’s stances I simply cannot stand 100% behind a candidate who would definitely put the security of our country at risk by asserting the “Golden Rule.” This is dangerously close to Barack Obama’s foreign policy stance – at least when he was a candidate – and that rules him out.

FACEBOOK Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

Tagged as: barbary pirates, gop, ron paul, thomas jefferson

  • Ann Fraley

    Whatever the secrets are, hidden in their hearts, your use of the barbary pirates is perfect.  Those pirates were the inspiration for the Power of Marque and Reprisal. You will find this language in Article I, Section 8:11.  
    To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

    That is the entire item, with nothing taken out to change the context.  Dr. Paul entered a bill to invoke the power of Marque and Reprisal against Osama Bin Laden, an activity for which we are much more equipped for success, these days.  Dr. Paul does not suggest that we bring home our troops simply to end the wars, and save money and lives.  He truly believes we can be safer at home with our troops on our own borders, keeping out imposters posing as day laborers and those visiting family, but who are actually terrorists and criminals.  And it would also be more effective and cheaper to have troops to catch the ones who slip over in the dark of night.  Combine that with a greater ability to funnel resources previously wasted on unconstitutional mandates to the states to manage our visa system and an end to birthright citizenship and entitlements to illegals and the whole morass would virtually sort itself out.
    In short, Dr. Paul’s vision of American defense is perfectly suited to the real-life nature of terror threats as they exist today than is that of his opponents.

  • ron paul 2012!

    The facts are that over 95% of all suicide terror attacks are claimed by the terrorists as reactions to foreign occupations (see http://cpost.uchicago.edu/). This is not a lie, nor some made up fantasy by Ron Paul, it is specifically taught in the Quran (see http://youtu.be/HcOAzRwNTRI). There is no doubt that radicals within Islam are often schizophrenic and could use the Quran to justify acts of violence against non-Muslims – Paul has never denied this. Paul’s point is that the CIA and the 9/11 Commission Report admit that foreign invasions are what motivates attacks. So, ending our wars will take away 95% of their
    motivation. The likelihood of an attack would be slim to none. But all of this begs the question: if Christian morality (the Golden Rule, etc.) does not extend to international relations, then by what standard do we hold the government to ANY Christian principles? If we say, “Christian morality doesn’t apply in X”, how can we say that Christianity *does* apply in Y or Z? Please Google the Bible & Ron Paul video series.

    • Anonymous

      Ok – so name the Islamic areas that we have occupied over the last 30 years?

      • ron paul 2012!

        To clarify, what I mean is the “perception” of occupation/invasion, regardless of intent, duration, or invitation of the intervening country. What you may term “presence” is viewed as an occupation, just as we would consider foreign troops walking our streets as an occupation – an act of war – regardless of their stated intent. Same goes for sanctions, bombings and siding with one nation over another in international conflicts. So, to answer your question: Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Kenya, Tanzania, Lebanon, Iran, Libya, and Pakistan just to name a few. Please see http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/interventions.html for a comprehensive list of U.S. occupations, bombings, sanctions and picking-sides in international affairs. Our argument is not that America should never get involved. If we declare war against a nation we will attack, bomb, invade, etc. regardless of how it is perceived and that is legitimate. But because we *aren’t* declaring war, we have no direction, no stated objective and no clear path to victory, how can we blame the civilians of these countries for resenting us? That doesn’t mean they are justified in killing innocent Americans in return, which is why Paul was the only congressman to submit the Sept. 11th Marque & Reprisal Act to specifically target and capture Osama. Terrorist attacks have increased since 9/11, they have not decreased. Why not? Because we only keep fueling their fire. And for what purpose? “To keep the world safe” – but it clearly is not. It’s a vicious circle that will never end until we draw back our forces and instead lead by example and encourage the sending of missionaries to these lands, not armed forces. Please research Prof. Robert Pape’s comprehensive data, with one exception. Pape tries to say that Islam has nothing to do with terrorist attacks, but he is clearly wrong in that interpretation. The Quran specifically teaches retaliation to invaders as the Bible & Ron Paul series proves. So, you can still critique Islam while not ignoring the facts.

    • Anonymous

      Ok – so name the Islamic areas that we have occupied over the last 30 years?

    • Anonymous

      Ok – so now explain the attacks on other nations who are not perceived as “occupiers”.

      • ron paul 2012!

         Please give me an example of another nation that is being attacked by terrorists from Islamic countries and we can pursue that.

Previous post:

Next post: