Ron Paul’s Foreign Policy

Ron Paul - Air Force Veteran

I’ve been fairly attentive to the Republican primaries this year. My interest mainly has to do with Ron Paul, the Texas congressman who espouses a libertarian political philosophy. While in the last primary Ron Paul was looked on as more of a fringe candidate whose views were extreme, this time around the language of the debate shows that he’s had a very positive impact. Now other candidates are talking about auditing the Federal Reserve, which is a big part of Paul’s economic agenda.

If there is one area where Republicans and conservatives continue to think that Ron Paul is extreme is his foreign policy. As a constitutional expert, Ron Paul knows that US foreign policy is non-interventionist (note: not isolationist). This means that the US are not to be the world’s policeman, nor are they to occupy other countries with their military bases, nor are they to intervene in sovereign states. Since the close of the Second World War this non-interventionist policy has not been followed, often to disastrous effects. Take for instance the ongoing situation in the Middle East, specifically with Afghanistan, Iran, and Iraq. Ron Paul has taken a lot of heat from within his own party for being staunchly against the Middle East wars and his calling for troop pullouts in Iraq. What people don’t realise is that Ron Paul has history, the CIA, and academics all on his side.

The Ron Paul campaign has produced some excellent videos, but the following dealing with his foreign policy is the best so far. If you want to find out about Paul’s view, and more broadly, if you want to learn about US foreign policy, and consequences like “blowback,” you really should spend the 10 minutes or so and watch this video. There’s a reason why veterans of the recent wars are so supportive of Ron Paul. It’s also a good reason why, if you’re American, that you should vote for Ron Paul both in the GOP primary and for president.



Filed under libertarianism, politics, republican, ron paul, war

10 responses to “Ron Paul’s Foreign Policy

  1. Considering how good his hit video on Gingrich was, I’ll be surprised if his foreign policy video isn’t high quality. Don’t have time to watch it now but will do so ASAP. It’s interesting that Paul is finally tackling his main problem with the Republican base – his foreign policy. I think he’s been the most consistent “conservative” in terms of foreign policy…but talk radio, neoconservatives, etc. have so successfully moved the goal posts to the right when it comes to what “conservative” means. Interesting article, though. I wonder what’ll happen if Paul wins or gets second in the Iowa primary. What sort of things could he hope to force the eventual nominee to add to the platform in return for the support of Paul’s delegates, if he stays in the race and accrues a bunch (as seems likely.)

    • Thanks for posting your thoughts! I’m looking forward to the debate tonight, hopefully this issue will come up, because viewers and voters now have much more to go on that Paul’s necessarily short answers. Lemme know what you think of the video when you finally get to watch it.

  2. Leo Monterosso

    Foreign policy is one of the key reasons to vote for Ron Paul. The whole Iran situation is directly connected to the overthrow of the Shah of Iran. What a difference a democratically controlled Iran would have had for 60 years! Think too how different the 60’s would have been if the United States had not chosen to allow French Colonialism to continue in Vietnam and had recognized them in 1945?

  3. Pingback: Out And About 12/16/2011 » All Things Expounded

  4. John Bell

    Whose reasoning do you find most convincing regarding the American war in Iraq – Ron Paul or Christopher Hitchens?

    “Decide this day whom you will serve” :)

    • That’s easy, Ron Paul’s. I think Hitchens gives a good argument that I have a lot of sympathies for–mainly his anti-totalitarianism. And if that were the only issue, I’d go with him. But there are bigger issues like blowback, the legality of the wars, the economic drain, etc., that set a context that overrides Hitchens’ concerns. Why not go into Syria? Why not go into North Korea? Why not go into China? The list goes on and on.

  5. Dan

    Nice to see more conservative-minded people coming around to what I thought in 2002, no hard feelings :)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s