Comments on: Is 2008 lost for the GOP?

By: Lee P

Lee P — Sun, 27 May 2007 05:35:16 +0000

I like Ron Paul a lot. I disagree with him about the Iraq War, but I agree with you that most of the “conservative” attacks on his position have been disingenuous and unfair. I just wish we could find someone with his domestic policy views - and his extraordinary talent for explaining them - to replace Bud Cramer.

By: Brian

Brian — Thu, 24 May 2007 02:42:11 +0000

I have no idea how Paul (or anyone else for that matter) would handle the Dear Leader. It is always complicated dealing with irrational dictators or religious extremists (i.e. Iran). Bush’s strategy hasn’t exactly been a resounding success and I would argue that Clinton’s policy merely set the stage for failure.

By: Reactionary

Reactionary — Wed, 23 May 2007 15:55:07 +0000

Congress did not declare war against the Barbary States. Rep. Paul may not have approved. I agree that we weren’t looking for a fight; another lesson is that appeasement doesn’t work.

I don’t think you can separate Gulf1 and Gulf2; Gulf2 is a resumption of hostilities - not preemption. Plus I think that the terrorist / Saddam links (ansar al-islam, 93 WTC bomber, PLO terrorists, etc) - plus the other reasons Congress voted on - plus sanctions weren’t working - justified Bush’s implementation of US policy (bi-partisan under Clinton) to remove Saddam. I think that Bush’s biggest failure has been in sustaining public support for the war.

North Korea is a big problem - Bush inherited a bad situation and it’s gotten worse - and I don’t know of any good solutions. Bush has been all hat and no cattle. How would Rep. Paul handle the Norks? You can’t just say we shouldn’t be there and walk away, can you?

I’m trying to keep it short or else I’ll have to learn the formatting. But on the main point - Iraq and 2008 - I don’t agree but you may be right; the GOP in Lincoln’s day had it tough before an election too.

By: Brian

Brian — Wed, 23 May 2007 11:18:17 +0000

Reactionary,

We did not initiate the Barbary War. In 1784 our government began paying a tribute to pirates in the region for passage of our vessels. Jefferson did not approve and when he became president he ceased the payments. The Pasha of Tripoli declared war (without a formal document) on the U.S. by cutting down the flagstaff in front of the U.S. embassy. Other Barbary states followed suit. Jefferson responded to the declaration of war on us. I would hardly say that we were looking to get into a fight.

By contrast, Iraq did nothing to harm us or place us in immediate danger. Bush took the foreign policy approach of drawing a line in the sand and Saddam crossed it by refusing to allow inspectors to verify his disarmament. I initially supported the war because I thought Bush’s foreign policy was sound, but I’ve since realized I was wrong. We chose to preemptively fight Iraq. The results speak for themselves.

The failure of Bush’s “line in the sand” policy was quite apparent with North Korea. Bush talked tough about not letting them acquire nukes, but they did and he had no recourse to follow through with his policy because of how badly he has screwed up Iraq. Instead he looked impotent because he tried to take a position of strength and essentially bluffed.

I’ll take your lack of rebuttal of my main point that Iraq will decide 2008 and that the GOP will be taking a walk off a plank if they field a pro-war candidate as an implicit agreement.

By: Reactionary

Reactionary — Wed, 23 May 2007 05:41:20 +0000

Brian, after reading a few of Rep. Paul’s speeches I found that I liked much of his domestic policy, but he is wrong about foreign policy. For example, he says: “The Founders of this country were precise in their beliefs regarding foreign policy. Our Constitution reflects these beliefs, and all of our early presidents endorsed these views. It was not until the 20th Century that our nation went off to far away places looking for dragons to slay.”

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2002/cr012402.htm

This is historically incorrect (our first real war after independence was the Barbary War - the ‘Shores of Tripoli’ - when Jefferson fought the pirates / terrorists - without a declaration of war). Jefferson arguably knew more about the Constitution and the Founders than does Paul.

I’m certain he will not be the GOP candidate and I doubt that he will even keep his Congressional seat.

By: TOM

TOM — Wed, 23 May 2007 04:44:08 +0000

Come by.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/index.php

Oh, and also be sure and Subscribe to RP’s YouTube site if you haven’t already. We’re almost at 10,000. That’s more than any other candidate.

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=RonPaul2008dotcom

By: Aaron

Aaron — Wed, 23 May 2007 02:39:31 +0000

even if you don’t agree w/ ron on everything - surely we can agree that he is brave and honorable to stand up against the neo-conservatives who are pro-war at any cost. If you are concerned about our aggressive foreign policy of “empire building”, “policing the world”, “pre-emptive strike” and going to war without declaring war (WWII was the last time we declared war as the constitution says we should) think about how many people needlessly die when we don’t declare war - yet we go over in North Korea, and Vietnam. If you stand against this dangerous direction you should support Ron Paul - even if you don’t vote for him (but please do–and you may need to register as a republican to do so - find out for your state) but even if you don’t, we should support the truth on the left and the right - so that we all move closer to rational foreign policy. yeah, i’m a total nerd, i know. good night.

By: dbassam

dbassam — Wed, 23 May 2007 02:17:30 +0000

As Dr. Paul likes to say, our choices will be between the welfare state and the warfare state. I for one will stay home if those are my only options