Ron Paul Rails Against 'King Of The World' Foreign Policy, Asks 'What If We Didn't Hate...

[sailingaway]

Ron Paul Rails Against 'King Of The World' Foreign Policy, Asks 'What If We Didn't Hate Muslims?'

If you scroll down on the page there is also a video with Matt's face behind Ron. Clearly, that is why HuffPo chose it:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/18/ron-paul-foreign-policy_n_2507100.html

Retired Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) called in to Fox News on Friday, championing his well-known stance of non-interventionism to argue against getting involved militarily in the Algeria hostage crisis, in which one American was killed.

Painting the idea as a "foolish" proposition, Paul argued that current anti-Americanism in the Middle East and North Africa had been fostered by a perpetual cycle in which the U.S. has felt compelled to send troops to deal with crises in the region, in turn inviting "blowback."

It's "clear that we should have followed the Founders’ advice of staying out the entangling alliances and staying out of internal affairs of other nations, mind our own business and save a dollar now and then, because we’re flat-out broke," the libertarian-leaning former presidential candidate claimed.

Fox News' Neil Cavuto countered, however, asking Paul if it would be acceptable to give terrorists "free run" even if it was clear that the perpetrators "hated us" and wanted Americans dead.

“They might ask the same question,” Paul said. “What if we didn’t hate Muslims? We have to bring up a lot of hatred for us to go 6,000 miles away and kill people with drones. This is where the conflict is coming. We have to beat the drums of war in this hatred that we go over and do these things and then all of a sudden we have an epidemic of suicides of American soldiers that come back [asking], ‘What am I doing over here shooting drone missiles and little kids dying?’”

Paul went on, referencing recent military suicide tallies -- which last year reached a record high at 349 -- and suggested that the trend, as well as terrorist retaliation, would only "get a lot worse as long as we think we are the king of the world.”

With that, Paul signed off, leaving Cavuto to introduce his next guest, former CIA agent and waterboarding supporter Wayne Simmons.

Simmons quickly took the opportunity to offer a rebuttal to Paul, arguing that "if we did act like kings of the world much more often and showed how powerful we were, we would not be having all the mayhem.”

videos at link

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

“They might ask the same question,” Paul said. “What if we didn’t hate Muslims? We have to bring up a lot of hatred for us to go 6,000 miles away and kill people with drones. This is where the conflict is coming. We have to beat the drums of war in this hatred that we go over and do these things and then all of a sudden we have an epidemic of suicides of American soldiers that come back [asking], ‘What am I doing over here shooting drone missiles and little kids dying?’”

And that is why I love that man.

 

[timosman]

Ron Paul Rails Against 'King Of The World' Foreign Policy, Asks 'What If We Didn't Hate Muslims?'

If you scroll down on the page there is also a video with Matt's face behind Ron. Clearly, that is why HuffPo chose it:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/18/ron-paul-foreign-policy_n_2507100.html

With that, Paul signed off, leaving Cavuto to introduce his next guest, former CIA agent and waterboarding supporter Wayne Simmons.

Simmons quickly took the opportunity to offer a rebuttal to Paul, arguing that "if we did act like kings of the world much more often and showed how powerful we were, we would not be having all the mayhem.”

videos at link

Neil Cavuto Apologizes Re Wayne Simmons

 

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

Neil Cavuto Apologizes Re Wayne Simmons

That was almost hilarious! --until I clicked on the link and listened to Cavuto, that is.

From your subject line, and in context with the previous post, I thought for sure Cavuto was going to come on and say:

I want to apologize for after 12+ years of bringing Ron Paul on here to explain that when one country tries to become 'king of the world', then this is what you get, and then bringing on yet another Pentagon salesman to say "nuh uh'. As much as all of you out there and I lust at the idea of being 'king of the world', 12+ years of 3 million+ dead and setting the world aflame has proven Ron Paul right.

So, I regret being so dense the past 12+ years and promise not to bring any of these Pentagon 'kings of the world' on the show again--especially immediately after Ron Paul explains it to us again for the 8 millionth time. Also, I would like to apologize to the the families of the 3 million dead and all of those left alive and miserable in the wake of the U.S.'s setting the world aflame. To prove that I understand that the libertarian principle of justice requires those who have done damage to their victims to compensate them and make them whole as far as is practical, I propose that the U.S. government open its borders and welfare system to the millions of refugees trying to escape the boiling cauldron the U.S. has wrought in the middle east, central asia, and africa.

Oh well, maybe sometime in the next 12+ years Neil will come around--especially if we can find a candidate in 2020 to sneak into the Republican debates and shock the nation like Ron did in '08 and '12.

 

[sam1952]

And that is why I love that man.

“They might ask the same question,” Paul said. “What if we didn’t hate Muslims? We have to bring up a lot of hatred for us to go 6,000 miles away and kill people with drones. This is where the conflict is coming. We have to beat the drums of war in this hatred that we go over and do these things and then all of a sudden we have an epidemic of suicides of American soldiers that come back [asking], ‘What am I doing over here shooting drone missiles and little kids dying?’”


Powerful words.

anyone remember playing king of the hill as kids, lesson learned.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

Oh well, maybe sometime in the next 12+ years Neil will come around--especially if we can find a candidate in 2020 to sneak into the Republican debates and shock the nation like Ron did in '08 and '12.

Presuming we'll even have another election, that someone who sneaks in 2020 will have to have Ron Paul's principle, plus a special X factor to get him past the known obstacles the establishment throw in the way of a national liberty candidate. Perhaps billionaire level wealth (say, a Peter Thiel) to get past the media blockade, or an Alex Jones to openly challenge the false flag framework that keeps the public at war and too scared to listen to the pro-peace message, or a Judge Nap to shut up even the FOX crew on every issue.

Whatever the candidate, telling the truth (Ron) or finessing the politics (Rand) has proven to be not enough. Our next candidate must be willing to and able to 1) confront the establishment memes emotionally as well as intellectually (as shown by candidates in this cycle), 2) embrace attracting major conservative blocs like the Tea Party and the religious right, and 3) be willing to run as a fusion candidate on several party lines, to compel the major party apparatus to give them the fair treatment needed to win the GOP nomination. Both Ron and Rand were unwilling to do any of the above, thus they had no means of positioning themselves to grow beyond a purist base, and no political leverage to change the way the MSM kept them at the margins.

 

[A. Havnes]

I miss you, Ron!