How will Ron Paul handle Iran?

[shadowhooch]

I'm having a hard time convincing my dad to go with Ron Paul because my dad isn't convinced of the "non-intervention" foreign policy.

He asks "what is he going to do if Iran gets nuclear weapons?" "What if they are giving those weapons to terrorists?"
Iran already hates us and it will take years and years before the relationship in the Middle East is better. In the meantime, they are trying to get weapons of mass destruction. What would Ron Paul do to prevent a catastrophe from happening?

And the Iran situation is a bit different than USSR. We don't want Iran to be a "super power" with nukes, do we?

How do I answer what many Americans fear?

 

[pwnsey]

Iran will never be a super power. It may some day have nuclear weapons, but it will never be a super power. To be a super power you must possess economic strengh and military strength, those two things Iran will not have. Pakistan has nuclear weapons, are they a super power? no. If Iran got nuclear weapons it would be very unlikely that they would ever be able to hit us with them, because they would be a newly nuclear country without all the same technologies that we have. Even if they ever did launch nuclear war against us, they would be doomed, and I think that they know that.

Preemptive war has always been the strategy of our enemies and it has never been the American way to practice a preemptive strike.

Anyone let me know if I'm wrong about this...

 

[Chester Copperpot]

Iran will never be a super power with nuclear weapons. If Iran got nuclear weapons it would be very unlikely that they would ever be able to hit us with them, because they would be a newly nuclear country without all the same technologies that we have. Even if they ever did launch nuclear war against us, they would be doomed, and I think that they know that.

Preemptive war has always been the strategy of our enemies and it has never been the American way to practice a preemptive strike.

YEah personally, I think Iran just wants to be left alone.... its funny how the 'Axis of Evil' are the same countries that dont follow the rules of the world bank... anybody else find this a bit suspicious?

 

[rich34]

Pakistan and India both have nukes and they're not considered a "super power."

We're not worrying about them country's day and night like the neocons are making us worry about Iran. It's just a fear tactic to convince the people we need to go to war so the military industrial complex can make more profits. I say screw em both. If Iran wants to make war with us they'll get more than they asked for, but we should NOT go looking for fights nor go starting preemptive wars. The leaders of Iran are not so ignorant that they would attack us first because they no what would happen in return. It's just simple logic.

 

[KingTheoden]

I would imagine that Ron Paul would address Iran as any other nation. Their internal affairs are their own business however if and when they were to directly and genuinely threaten the security of the United States, they would be countered. Iran is rather far away and relatively small compared to the United States; it would not be in their interests to strike us because it could never damage the us as much as we could damage it.

While I severely doubt Iran would ever do something like hinder transport of oil from the Gulf, were that to happen I would surmise that Ron Paul's strategy would be to deploy the Navy to escort vessels. I think he would also allow domestic oil drilling against as well as nuclear power plant construction thus deemphasizing the need to be intimately involved in Middle Eastern affairs.

You could also address the issue with your dad by bringing up the fact that Iran has agreements with China, Russia, and India . It is probably an unwise thing to be considering an attack on a nation with such potential backers. Beyond that, our military forces are too few in number to consider a full-scale war with Iran especially given the situation in Iraq.

 

[Shellshock1918]

Just ignore them. If Israel feels threatened, Israel will take action.

 

[ARealConservative]

1) He won't fabricate evidence or try to drum up support for a preemptive war.

2) He won't support language that seeks to isolate Iran or antagonize them in order to push for war.

3) If congress votes for war, he will fight to win the war, not Iranian hearts and minds. American Troops will always come first with him as commander in chief.

 

[LibertyEagle]

YEah personally, I think Iran just wants to be left alone.... its funny how the 'Axis of Evil' are the same countries that dont follow the rules of the world bank... anybody else find this a bit suspicious?

Yup. I noticed that myself.

 

[lucius]

YEah personally, I think Iran just wants to be left alone.... its funny how the 'Axis of Evil' are the same countries that dont follow the rules of the world bank... anybody else find this a bit suspicious?

I agree as well.

 

[Ed W]

...

 

[ronpaulhawaii]

Iran does not hate us. It is angry about the interventionist policies of the war-profiteering/empire building/globalists (international aristocrats) manipulating our Gov't. Most of the world knows this and are dismayed with our ignorant support of those dinosaurs.

A Ron Paul presidency would be the first step in righting many wrongs the world, justfiably, holds against us. It would show the we are not as ignorant and un-caring as we seem to be

my2cents

 

[Meistro1]

It's not impossible that Iran will give a nuclear weapon to a terrorist organization; this is why you shouldn't go around bombing other countries. It makes for a lot of pissed off people who want to kill you. Now the question is : what do you do?

The only thing you can do. Secure the borders, bring the troops home from all over the world, and stop making enemies by killing Muslim babies for twisted political ends. Step up security, stop creating Jihadists with more unjust wars and occasionally even direct funding of the Jihadists, stop taking sides in regional / internal conflicts and hope like hell they don't attack.

Any military strike in the middle east makes it MORE likely, not less likely, that someone will smuggle a nuclear bomb into an American city.

 

[Kregener]

"what is he going to do if (insert country here) gets nuclear weapons?" "What if they are giving those weapons to terrorists?"

The nuclear genie is out of the bottle, nothing can be done to reverse that. Period.

United States 5,735/9,960[3] 1945 ("Trinity")
Russia (formerly Flag of Soviet Union Soviet Union) 5,830/16,000[4] 1949 ("RDS-1")
United Kingdom 200[5] 1952 ("Hurricane")
France 350[6] 1960 ("Gerboise Bleue")
China 130[7] 1964 ("596")
Other known nuclear powers
India 70-120[8] 1974 ("Smiling Buddha")
Pakistan 30-52[9] 1998 ("Chagai-I")
North Korea 1-10[10] 2006 (The Beginning)[11]
Israel

And Israel will not even openly admit they even have nuclear weapons.

We were the first to invent these weapons, so just HOW did all these other nations end up with them? Theft of technology. It cannot be stopped.

Pakistan was referenced above. Pakistan has more terrorists than you can shake a stick at. Their nuclear arsenal is probably the least secure of any country that possesses them.

Russia sponsored more terrorism than ANY country, EVER. Why did we not pull a "pre-emptive war" on them?

Oh yeah, they could defend themselves.

Ron Paul will engage Iran in free and open trade. He will NOT meddle in their affairs of state or attempt "regime change" to suit American desires.

People the world over just want to live and raise their families, Islamics included, despite the propaganda to the contrary.

 

[Nash]

I'm having a hard time convincing my dad to go with Ron Paul because my dad isn't convinced of the "non-intervention" foreign policy.

He asks "what is he going to do if Iran gets nuclear weapons?" "What if they are giving those weapons to terrorists?"
Iran already hates us and it will take years and years before the relationship in the Middle East is better. In the meantime, they are trying to get weapons of mass destruction. What would Ron Paul do to prevent a catastrophe from happening?

And the Iran situation is a bit different than USSR. We don't want Iran to be a "super power" with nukes, do we?

How do I answer what many Americans fear?

Iran is a democracy. They don't have nukes

North Korea is a dictatorship and they do have nukes.

I'm a lot more worried about North Korea launching a nuke against Japan than I am about Iran launching one against Israel.

Either way we clearly don't have our priorities straight. Not saying we should attack North Korea but the justification that bad people getting nukes is reason to invade their country is insane and we aren't following this policy anyway.

 

[max]

for your dad

show this to your dad.

it's a open letter to the US people by the president of iran
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/11/29/ahmadinejad.letter/

 

[Kuldebar]

Well, understand that Ron Paul doesn't want to "handle" any other nation. Our foreign policy of "handling" often equates to a very bad touch.

30 odd years of peace and trade with Vietnam have done wonders, it's an example Paul often uses. He relies on this example a lot because there simply aren't many modern examples that people can see for themselves. We fought a vicious undeclared war over in South-East Asia to "fight the spread of Communism" and can anyone say that it was worth it? I think the last 30 years or so indicate otherwise.

Look at China. We certainly don't have a perfect non-interventionist approach with that nation, but the meter is pegged more in that direction. Remember, one of Nixon's greatest achievements was "talking to China"? They say only Nixon could go to China, kind of stupid when you think about. But, at least he did, otherwise we might have been involved in a far more serious 3-way Cold War or worse.

Think about Cuba. We certainly aren't non-interventionist with that nation. Trade restrictions, sanctions, declarations, military presence and lots of rhetoric aimed at Cuba for the last 40 years.

Has anything improved because of it?

I am of the mind that if we talked and traded more with Cuba and demanded and threatened less, we'd have more influence on the people of Cuba.

Instead we isolate ourselves from Cuba's people.

 

[ctb619]

So what if they get nuclear weapons? What are they going to do with such a weapon? Attack Israel? Israel's nuclear arsenal is far superior to anything Iran could scrounge up in the next decade or two. Pass them off to a terrorist cell? The Iranian leadership wants to stay in power, why would they pass off their most valuable weapon to a group they can't fully control, risk detection, and likely national obliteration?

If anything the weapon is being pursued as a deterrent to US-led aggression, and it makes a lot of sense from their perspective, as they are surrounded by threats (US troops in Afganistan, Iraq, Azerbaijan, NATO member Turkey, US ally Pakistan). In my opinion, they would be foolish to not pursue the ultimate equalizer, particularly after Bush decided to put them on the "Axis of Evil". Look what we did to Iraq.

 

[1000-points-of-fright]

show this to your dad.

it's a open letter to the US people by the president of iran
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/11/29/ahmadinejad.letter/

No, don't. As much as I'd like to believe all his peace love and brown rice rhetoric, I can't. He has a point about our foreign policy, but all his talk of human rights, truth and justice is bullshit.

Your dad will probably think the same thing and wonder how he raised such a gullible son. There are much better pieces supporting RP's foreign policy.

 

[Kuldebar]

No, don't. As much as I'd like to believe all his peace love and brown rice rhetoric, I can't. He has a point about our foreign policy, but all his talk of human rights, truth and justice is bullshit.

Your dad will probably think the same thing and wonder how he raised such a gullible son. There are much better pieces supporting RP's foreign policy.

I really think people have a really tainted view of what living in modern day Iran is actually like. I think many people would be pleasantly surprised.

Considering that it has only been a few decades since they were a police state (thanks to U.S.) and a violent revolution, Iran is emerging from all this quite well.

The distorting force of violence takes many years to shrug off, yet such a force is being applied once again from radicals on both sides.

 

[paulitics]

Pakistan has nukes and is where Al quada breeds and lives.(you see that is more of a problem for our country than Iran). The neocons along with the media empire has peddled their BS into the minds of Americans, tricking them into thinking Iran and Iraq are the enemies. Iran and Iraq were pretty sovereign from the world banking elite, and had their own culture, and that was a problem. They are also rich in oil which = $$ for darth cheney, oil cartels, and chronies.
Iran is a threat to ISRAEL, and Israel profoundly influences foreign policy. Pakistan is under extreme instability, and terrorist groups are gaining control of territories and may threaten to overthrow Musharrif. When Barack Obama brought this up, the neocons balked calling him a war mongerer and naive on foreign affairs. Its disgusting to know they have undermined our liberties all in the name of terror, that either does not exist , or does, yet for some reason they are doing the exact opposite of what needs to be done.