Friday, June 15, 2007

Ron Paul: Isolationist VS Non-Intervention

In an earlier post on Ron Paul (here) Ric asked:
There are a lot of assumptions and accusations but there are no real
arguments or reasoning behind them, Could you please explain in detail at least
one of these issues so that we can have a constructive and not a destructive
dialogue???Ric

Ric is being reasonable in asking his question and polite, which seems a difficult quality for many RP supporters, in his asking. Thank you Ric.

Ron Paul says he is not an Isolationist:
Thomas Jefferson summed up the noninterventionist foreign policy position perfectly in his 1801 inaugural address: “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations- entangling alliances with none.” Washington similarly urged that we must, “Act for ourselves and not for others,” by forming an “American character wholly free of foreign attachments.”

In a 1791 letter concerning the Barbary Pirates, Jefferson wrote:
"lastly our determination to prefer war in all cases to tribute under any form,
and to any people whatever."

In 1801 when Jefferson became President, he refused to pay tribute, or bribes, and he changed his earlier declarations of the US only needing a small coastal navy for defense by sending a squadron of ships to kick Tripoli's butt. They did, we got our sailors back and the issue of tribute was solved.

In today's world, terrorists ask us to pay tribute and to bribe us, in many forms, through terror. The enemy is different, but the concept is the same. I think Jefferson answered Congressman Paul adequately by his actions and by his own words.

By not going after terrorism where it breeds and by not redirecting the terrorist's energy to another place, such as Iraq, is not only incredibly stupid, it would also ignore precedent set by one of our Founding Fathers. If today, a theoretical group of Barbary pirates used our planes to kill our citizens and regrouped to do worse so as to "bribe" us into doing their bidding, President Jefferson would act forcefully and immediately. He wouldn't have allowed a UN to qualify our soveriegnty.

Not interfering with France's economy for our financial gain is non-intervention. Not going after those that have attacked us is isolationism. And pretty damned stupid.