Do You Support Rand Paul's Current Position on Foreign Policy?Submitted by BaneMaler on Fri, 08/21/2009 - 12:53
Something has been eating at me for the past few days now and I thought I'd wait for us to reach some kind of high point before bringing us all back down to Earth. I hope this gets considered by many of you here because I feel if there is a place to lay this forth then the DP is the place to do it. I have been very excited about the recent crop of candidates, many of which have had their strong points in various areas which is good and healthy for our movement. My biggest concern is two part and may bring me great criticism. First of all I don't think we have really held the new wave accountable as we have others hoping to attain the office. The recent crop have almost unanimously decided to run with the Republican Party and have all but one notable exception, made a firm and thorough stance concerning wars of aggression abroad.
It seems that many have accepted the line that wars are expensive and hence we shouldn't fight them liberally as a complete thought on this issue. This is hardly all Ron Paul would have to say on the issue. In fact it would seem that his tone on the war often related to morality than on the economics. Are lives measured in dollars and cents? I feel the power of this movement during the election and some time forward centered around the moral issue of foreign adventures, blowback, and doing on to others what we would have done to us.
So what is my point? After several interviews and comments from Rand Paul and Peter Schiff, it is hard for me to tell if they oppose the war on terror or any other empirical actions for all the right reasons. Have they simply not been asked the right questions or do they weigh the reasons to invade countries differently? According to the foreign policy tab at Rand Paul's campaign site his comments give the impression that Iraq was wrong but maybe Afghanistan was right, if only we declared it. Knowing what I know now, I don't see very much difference in the invasion of either country "legal" or not.
Full disclosure to everyone, this ultimately weighed against me participating in yesterdays money bomb. While I do believe both candidates are fathoms above the rest, for personal reasons I hope they address these issues during their campaigns. The stakes are high. Many anti-war liberals attack libertarians and conservatives who base their positions against the war on monetary reasons alone. This only further solidifies the notion that we don't care about people, justice, and dignity. This I know is false because I've met so many good people, thinkers, and philosophers for peace and liberty. One of whom is Ron Paul who has successfully spread a message that at the core I would hope we can adhere to and to some degree hold future leaders accountable to. No Party should control our message. To fear the people not understanding this simple notion is not only deceitful but disingenuous to the core values this movement was built upon.