0 votes

What is Ron Paul's stance on Iran?

I have a friend who says that if elected president Ron Paul would allow Iran to get Nukes and that's bad since they have made it clear they want to attack us. They are friends with North Korea (our enemy). Is this true? Can someone clear this up for me?

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I follow the news pretty well, and I've never heard any inkling

of any desire by Iran to attack the U.S. with or without a nuke - at least not unprovoked.

They HAVE threatened retaliation on us if we help Israel attack them first. (as I would expect ANY country to do that is being threatened with war)

They did this to him back in

They did this to him back in 2007, asking him the same question:


"There's nobody in this world that could possibly attack us today," he said in the interview. "I mean, we could defend this country with a few good submarines. If anybody dared touch us we could wipe any country off of the face of the earth within hours. And here we are, so intimidated and so insecure and we're acting like such bullies that we have to attack third-world nations that have no military and have no weapon."

Video: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2007/10/1...

Your friend suffers from prolonged exposure to war propaganda

It's a difficult syndrome to treat, but there is still hope.

Firstly he frames the question entirely wrong (just echoing what the war party has been pumping into his ears of course.) The question isnt if you will 'let' Iran get a nuke, the question is if you want to invade yet another foreign country along with all the murder and destruction and ruinous costs on both sides that will bring, simply because they *might* one day get a bomb.

As Dr. Paul has explained on several occasions, there is no credible evidence that Iran is working on a bomb. US Intelligence Agencies do believe that Iran once had a program aimed at least at developing the technologies that would be needed to develop a bomb, but also that they discontinued this program YEARS ago. Iran is a party to the NPT treaty (as is the US) and Iran has never been shown to be in breach of that treaty, which means that there is no evidence that their nuclear program aims to produce a bomb - only nuclear reactors and medical isotopes. This treaty recognises and guarantees Irans inalienable right to pursue nuclear power for peaceful ends, so when Dr. Paul says we should leave them be, he is really only saying we should keep our word, and honour our treaty.

The Iranian government are not nice people, this much is true, but the war propaganda makes them out to be much worse than they are, and obscures the real issues. The Iranian democratic opposition has hard work in front of them and every time we rattle our sabres we make their work harder. Iran has never threatened the US. Iran might be said to rattle sabres with Israel (and mainstream war propaganda always conflates the two) but even there it has been exagerated beyond reason. The famous statement that 'Israel we will wipe off the map,' for example, was a mistranslation and almost certainly a very deliberate one. What he said is 'the regime occupying Jerusalem will vanish from the pages of time' - this was not a threat, but a prediction, as a predecessor had famously used the same idiom in reference to the Soviet Union, once a seemingly omnipotent giant in the area, and now indeed vanished from the pages of time - not erased by military action, but collapsed under the weight of its own failed policies. This was not a threat to nuke Israel, but a prediction that no matter how powerful the current government of Israel seems, the occupation cannot go on forever.

And if Iran DID produce a nuke? What would they do with it? Certainly the only utility it could have for them is a deterrent. Many of their neighbors have nukes, India, Pakistan, Russia, and Israel, with the latter two having massive arsenals of hundreds or thousands of these weapons. They could not possibly hope to use such a weapon offensively, against anyone, without the entire world coming down on them. The mullahs may not be paragons of rationality but they are very interested in their own survival so they would never risk this. They would only use it as a hedge, a deterrent, against attack from the outside. The only way that would be a threat to the US would be if WE went over there and started something with them, which of course is exactly what the war party is working overtime to convince us to do.

But going abroad in search of monsters to destroy is the last thing we have any legitimate need to be doing.

This is an extensive view on why we should stop interferring

To start with, YES Ron Paul would allow Iran to get nukes. But you need to ask the question WHY?

#1 We need to stop interfering with other countries. Telling others what to do just doesn't work and breeds hate. It also doesn't coincide with the philosophy of liberty.

#2 Iran knows that we and Israel have hundreds of nukes to fire back upon them if they ever tried anything funny.

#3 We spend billions of dollars in foreign aid to other countries and can no longer afford it.

#4 Vietnam is the greatest example of non-interventionism at work. We got out of there, talked with them, and traded with them, and now they are considered a fairly "westernized" country.

#5 The wars need to stop because they are too expensive and thousands of people are dying. We can't afford this and everybody wants world peace right? Besides, we have continually interfered in Iran's government and actually took down their democracy and installed a dictator.

If they are friends...

...why aren't they getting them already? I mean after all, Iraq got all kinds of evil *stuff* from US back in the days when 'we' used to be pals...


the Iran threat talk is the

the Iran threat talk is the war propagandists starting up the old fear machine again. When you're in the business of selling bombs/guns you always need a war so you can keep selling new arms and keep raking in the dough.

Now you couldn't just keep going to war with every country in the world, unless you had the support of the public. To get the support of the public you have to scare them into thinking the war is necessary and that we will all die if we don't fight this war. So really its not even a choice for the public to support the war. Theyll actually call you unamerican for not supporting it.

As Eric said below:
1) Iran has to import gasoline because it does not have the infrastructure to process enough to meet its own country's demand.
2) The CIA recently said Iran is a long time away from creating a nuke
3) although Iran has said they would like to wipe Israel of the face of the earth, they have zero nukes while Israel has over 300 nukes.
4) Iran has not invaded another country in over 100 years.

The lead in phrase on #3 is in error. Please correct it or

provide evidence to the contrary.

Before you go looking, if you intend to reference a certain speech made by Iran's President about 3 years ago, I suggest you do thorough homework.

The widely reported translation resulting in "wipe Israel off the map" is entirely false.

It more accurately translated to "the regime occupying Qods (Israel) shall vanish from the pages of time." It was a prediction - not a threat. He was in context, saying that the "geopolitical nation" of Israel will cease to be similarly as has the Soviet Union ceased to be. He said nothing of destruction of the land or people there - merely that the "regime" which occupies it will cease to be. He said this will happen not because of OUTSIDE forces, but like the Soviet Union, because of forces from within.

From what I heard from

From what I heard from Santorum, Ron Paul wants the US to give Iran all our nukes so they can blow up israel...

If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...

I think that's been confirmed by Associated Press:

"America Would Cede All Nuclear Warheads to Iran and All of Its Friends"


Ask your friend if his info

Ask your friend if his info on this comes from the same sources that said Iraq had WMD's.


According to our CIA, Iran isn't actively working to build a nuclear weapon, I trust them on that.

However, even if they were, Iran doesn't have a history of invading and attacking other countries really. They're generally loudmouths who talk a big game and do nothing. They can't even get enough gasoline for their country.

Paul's position is to stay out of their business. If they attack Israel, Israel should be fully free to counter attack, but it's not our concern. Israel would literally mop the floor with Iran, as they have 300 nuclear missiles currently. They could carpet nuke the entire country.

If Iran wanted to get a nuke, sanctions wouldn't stop them, in all honesty the only thing that would stop them is a full scale invasion and occupation, and that means another war for us to enter in to.

Spreading thin is what brings empires down, and that's exactly what we're doing now.

Eric Hoffer

Your friend is right.

IF elected, America would allow Iran to gain 10 ICBMs straight away, then in only 2 years, Iran would have as many nukes as Russia and would begin annihilating the Western World.


for the person who voted this comment down...

"/sarc" = Sarcastic Comment

The post points out the insanity of fretting over (or even starting another war) because some country MIGHT have ONE nuke in a number of years. Israel has 200+, Russia a hundred times that of Israel.

Iran is a third world basket case -your friend is mal-informed

We already spend how many lives and trillions bombing hard dirt, rocks, and desert in Iraq and Afganistan. Delta force could have taken out Osama ten years ago for a few million. Like Ron said Isreal can take care of Iran if they get out of line -tired of our tax dollars paying to police all these toolbags around the world. N Korea is another basket case -we could incinerate them at the touch of a button -why our state dept is building up to be some big bad boogee man is stupid but likely an absurd payoff to defense contractors. We're up against huge corporate interest and they will lie cheat steal and kill to protect that interest.

Government is supposed to protect our freedom, our property, our privacy, not invade it. Ron Paul 2007