No arguement from me on that one. On Jul 2, 8:33 am, "M. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote: > Wednesday, July 1, 2009'Fight them over there vs. over here' a false > choiceOPINION/ANALYSISThere is no area in which Republicans have further > strayed from our traditions than in foreign affairs. > Generations of conservatives followed the great advice of our Founding > Fathers and pursued a restrained foreign policy that rebuffed entangling > alliances and advised America, in the words of John Quincy Adams, not to "go > abroad looking for dragons to slay." > Sen. Robert Taft, the stalwart of the Old Right, urged America to stay out of > NATO. Dwight Eisenhower was elected on a platform promising to get us out of > the conflict in Korea. Richard Nixon promised to end the war in Vietnam. > Republicans were highly critical of Bill Clinton for his adventurism in > Somalia and Kosovo. As recently as 2000, George W. Bush campaigned on a > "humbler" foreign policy and decried nation-building. > But our foreign policy today looks starkly different. > Neoconservatives who have come to power in both the Democratic and Republican > parties argue that the U.S. must ether confront every evil in every corner of > the globe or risk danger at home. We need to "fight them over there" they > say, so we don't have to "fight them over here." This argument presents a > false choice. We do not have to pick between interventionism and > vulnerability. The complexity of our world is exactly why the lessons of our > past should ring true and demand a return to a traditional, pro-American > foreign policy: one of nonintervention. > Moving forward, I suggest that we as Americans adhere to these five > principles: > 1. We do not abdicate American sovereignty to global institutions. The > purpose of the United States is to protect the liberty of the American > people. We should never allow the WTO, NAFTA, the U.N. or the Law of the Sea > Treaty to transfer power from America to an international body. > 2.We provide a strong national defense, but we do not police the world. > America should be armed with defensive weapons capable of repelling any > attack. We should spend all appropriate money to make sure that no country in > world can credibly threaten us. > Unfortunately, our foreign policy is undermining our security. We have more > than 700 military installations in 135 countries around the globe. We have > 50,000 troops in Germany, 30,000 in Japan, and 25,000 in South Korea. Worse, > we have our brave men and women bogged down occupying Iraq and Afghanistan in > the midst of ethnic strife and civil war. > We spend more than $1 trillion per year on our foreign policy, and our > military is stretched thin. We can no longer afford to be the world's > policeman. We must bring our troops home from around the world, cut overseas > spending and strengthen our national defense. > 3. We obey the Constitution and follow the rule of law. The Constitution > clearly states that only Congress can declare war. Congress abandoned that > responsibility during the buildup to the Iraq war and must never make that > mistake again. When wars are undeclared, they drag on with no clear plan or > exit strategy. If we must fight, we should do so with overwhelming force, win > as quickly as possible and promptly withdraw. > 4. We do not engage in nation-building. Conservatives know government is a > poor tool to solve problems. It then makes no sense that we would think that > our government could build civil societies and solve the tremendously complex > problems of a developing country. Nation-building does not work. It places a > tremendous burden on our military and takes directly from the pockets of the > American taxpayer. The best thing we as Americans can do is offer friendship > while setting a good example of what a free and prosperous society looks > like. Ronald Reagan wanted America to be a "shining city on the hill." We > should make that our goal. > 5. We stay out of the internal affairs of other nations. America should > conduct trade, travel and diplomacy with all willing nations. Intervention, > however, always has unintended consequences and almost always gets us in > trouble. For example, in 1953, our CIA helped overthrow Mohammad Mosaddeq, > the democratically elected prime minister of Iran and installed the Shah of > Iran, a ruthless dictator. The blowback from our actions was in large part > responsible for the extremist Iranian Revolution of 1979, the taking of our > hostages and the many problems we have had with Iran ever since. So much of > our intervention makes no sense. We backed Saddam Hussein for much of the > 1980s, and then twice went to war against him. In the 1990s, we bribed North > Korea not to pursue atomic weapons with nuclear technology, and Kim Jong-il > used that assistance to build several nuclear bombs. > Intervention simply does not serve our long-term interests. > The world is a dangerous place and we should be concerned, but intervention > and militarism cannot solve our problems. The answers to our foreign policy > problems lie in defending our soil, scaling back our global military > footprint and trading with all willing partners. We have strayed far from > this philosophy, but we can get back on track by looking to our Constitution, > our traditions and the example of our Founding Fathers.Ron Paul, a > Pittsburgh-born obstetrician and Republican House member from Texas, > campaigned for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination on a > limited-government > platform.http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jul/01/fight-them-over-there-vs-over-here-presents-a-fals/?feat=home_columns --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
