To all you people...?

Question

To all you people who think Ron Paul's policies are too "extreme" to be used in the real world...

All he is advocating is a drastic reduction in the size and scope of the federal government... and to stop using our military to create animocity against America around the world.

Can someone out there tell me EXACTLY what policies of his you disagree with?

For example... some people think that a non-interventionist foreign policy is too niave.. that we have to send troops to all these different countries to "protect American interests". What has that gotten us? Uncontrollable debt, and hatred towards Americans. Can someone explain to me how I am wrong? There are plenty of powerful countries on this planet that don't go around using their military to get their way.

I've also heard that "he wants to dismantle our government and most of it's agencies." Can you tell me what agencies in our government do their job efficiently? Ones that we just cannot do without?

Answer 1

we were non-intervetional for WWII as well, look what happened there

Answer 2

I don't know much about this guy but it sounds like there is a lot of sense in what he is saying.  

As an Englishman I can certainly say that US foreign policy post WW2 has been almost a complete unmitigated disaster - no one has 'wooed' people in other countries away from supporting the US: successive US governments have alienated them through blunt, militaristic, power politics-based thinking: an 'us and them' mentality... there is no other logical explanation based on someone's books or speeches.

This is always easier to see if you turn the picture around and consider what if things were in reverse.  The best example I can cite is the British Empire - how could such a small country dominate so much of the world for so long?  The answer was that blunt force was often counter productive in the longer term, so there was a lot of 'going native' and collaboration built on mutuality, investment and trade... which was spectacularly successful.

The US is now doing exactly what the Russians did - and in the same place... amazingly ironic.  The Bush government is bankrupting it's economy on military adventures.  It is also fundamentally flawed in its rationale... if not then why was North Korea not the target ahead of Afghanistan and Iraq?

The US needs to be engaged with the world but not based on an unsuccessful 'power politics paradigm'... it would win a lot more friends and influence if it applied its policy positively and if it was seen to 'live its values', especially in terms of international law and democratic principles.  

Cash spent on military operations would be far better spent in aid in most cases... I believe the US military spends more than the next 8-10 countries combined, but its main weakness is in its thinking and the political 'us and them mentality' I outlined earlier.  Interestingly this is the very same limitation that makes US military policy prone to failure - the lack of discrimination the US used in Vietnam patently wasn't working... the the result was that successive US governments simply did even more of the same!

If the US had considered the picture in reverse and thought that the Vietnamese were people like Americans, a lot more discrimination would have been used... which would have won hearts and minds and that would have provided far more intelligence for accurately targeted operations.

Answer 3

The Us is a land of foreign policy-not domestic law!

Answer 4

I have not researched Ron Paul, cause I have always felt that he has been out for the count.  However, I do think this intervention policy we have that dictates our foreign policy is stupid because it has brought us more trouble and has done nothing to keep the world safe (Spain and London terrorist attacks, that were linked back to Al-Queda, as an example).  So I don't think we should force democracy onto people around the world.

The only government agencies that I don't think we could not do without are the EPA and OSHA.  I know the EPA has had many scandals, mostly under Bush, but I do think that there should be some agency that protects the environment.  Then OSHA protects workers from hazards in the workplace so we don't loose limbs or lives.  I think that is pretty important too.

Answer 5

Great Question!!!  You are right if you are thinking that none of the agencies in our government do their job efficiently.

This is not the country that I grew up in and THAT MY FRIENDS is VERY SAD.

FDA allows bad food to come here, they jail our Border Patrol, thus Illegals can come in and some are terrorist wheat her we like it or not.

Answer 6

Every time I hear Ron Paul he makes good sense.  Yet it seems to me, since he has been a Libertarian for so long, a lot of his supporters seem to be more interested in legalized drugs than Foreigh Policy, although I may be wrong.

I would love it if the Federal government were confined within the box of the Constitution.  It has grown like 'the blob' way outside it's prescribed boundaries.  I realize nobody has actually read the Constitution for a long time, but it's proper functions are -provide the military, -Courts, -provide sound money, -regulate commerce between the States, -deal with foreign governments, etc.

But you are forgetting something important.  And this is why Ron Paul will not succeed in his goals.  After the 1776 Revolutionary war, Federalism was invented; the idea that the States should have a Federal government.  That worked for a long time until the Civil War.  When that was over, State's Rights were finally subjugated to the Federal government.  States are no longer very Sovereign, now they are cells in a larger organism called USA.

Therefore the original concept of a sort of minimalist FedGov is obsolete.  Washington DC is now 'The Man'.  I'm not very happy about that but that's the way it is and it is not going to change no matter who we elect.

As for using the military to create animosity around the world, I'll make you a deal.  You find a way to stop Hitler, USSR, and WorldWideJihad inc. without awesome military Force and I'll put flowers in my hair AND wear sandles with recycled car tire soles.

This is why Ron Paul, no matter how sensible he sounds, will not work.  USA is the policeman of a significant part of the world and that is a job which must be done.  Otherwise, chaos.

A little of that chaos spilled over onto our shores on 9/11.  We don't want that to happen again so we have taken the fight to those who have vowed our destruction and the subjugation of Western Civilization.  Our adversaries wish to drag the world back to the 8th Century.  USA will not allow it.

Answer 7

Mere caution! he sounds too good to be true, kinda like promising the 'moon' His first followers were a rowdy, loud , obnoxious bunch, by demonstration, but then so were the 'Green mountain boys' Loud @ss yankees they!