Ron Paul: Real Conservatives Don't Start Wars, They End Them

The following piece was produced by HuffPost's OffTheBus.

Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) recently gained fame for breaking one-day online donation records, but he's still considered an underdog by many because of his single-digit polling and arguably radical views on a variety of issues. For one thing, he supports an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, a position that seems more at home with the Democrats these days. So why is he up there, debate after debate, standing out from the likes of Huckabee and Romney and McCain? Why isn't he trying to fit in if he wants to win the primary? Is he even a Republican?

He told me he is--just not the same kind as the rest of them.

"I think their definitions are different," he said. "Today, the Party has been taken over by a group called neoconservatives, and I don't believe they're really conservative. I think they're really liberal in the modern sense of the word--they're big spenders, they believe in entitlements, they believe in military adventurism."

Paul certainly doesn't believe in "military adventurism." He articulated an anti-preemption stance, geared toward avoiding another inextricable, Iraq-like conflict in the future. And unlike some politicians, he usually acts in accordance with his stated philosophy. For example, he was one of only six Republicans in the House to vote against the Iraq War Resolution.

"The traditional conservative--which the Republicans used to be--did not advocate aggressive war, usually got our country out of the wars such as after Korea and Vietnam..." he said. "We've done exactly the opposite. And because I'm a strict constitutionalist, this has separated me from the other candidates."

Some have called Ron Paul an isolationist, in part because of his views on foreign aid and the use of military force. He strongly disagreed with the association.

"I'm the last thing from an isolationist," he said. "An isolationist is a protectionist--they want to build walls around their country. They may want to bring troops home, but they also want to close the door for trade and travel and the spreading of ideas, and that's quite different. The Founders, I think, had it right when they said, 'Trade with people, be friends with people, but don't get involved in their internal affairs and don't get involved in entangling alliances,' and you'd be a lot less likely to fight people that you're trading with than if you have protectionist measures and sanctions on countries [like] we do today."

He added: "The same individuals who claim I might be an isolationist are the ones who are putting sanctions on countries like Iran and Iraq and Sudan, and yet the trade might stop us from fighting. I, for instance, think we should be trading with Castro, rather than putting sanctions on Castro, because it didn't do any good--after 40 or 50 years, it hasn't helped us a bit."

Finally, Paul believes that the United States should not be entirely dependent on other nations for its energy.

"I think the most important thing is to let the market set the price of energy and get out of the way of alternative energy," he said. "We've been interfering with the development of nuclear energy for 30 or 40 years. We don't develop any new nuclear power plants, but then at the same time we take money and we subsidize alternative fuels such as ethanol, which nobody's ever proven is an economically feasible alternative. So the most important thing is to recognize that the government bureaucrats and politicians have no idea what is the best alternative fuel, but if the market pushes the price of oil up, then people are going to say, 'Hey, they're running out of oil! And oil is now $200 a barrel, we better do something,' and the market's going to come up with the best alternative."

These goals may seem ambitious, but Paul is conservative about what he could accomplish unilaterally, stressing that he would need to rely on congressional support that a mandate, in the form of his successful election to the presidency, would grant him.

"You could [unilaterally] change the foreign policy and bring troops home and save a lot of money. And you could start repealing executive orders that have been so onerous. And you could refuse to enforce laws that are put on the books through regulations and by court orders or executive orders. So you could be discreet in what you enforce, but to really, really have the big changes, yes, you have to work and develop a consensus on what you're trying to do."

Comments

[Qbear]

Republicans ended the Viet Nam conflict, Kissinger surrendered completely to CHINA.
"Let us get our troops out and you can do whatever you want in Laos, Cambodia, and Viet Nam.

Republican's bravery

[exotic]

www.whowouldtheworldelect.com

[Pdubya]

if he doesn't run third party, most likely kucinich. all of the others are plutocrats and cfr members.

maybe some other 3rd party would rise....bu­t this rEVOLution will continue and can't be stopped now.

[blindhammer]

As can be seen in this thread, many liberals are just as unobjective and irrational as many conservatives are.

The issues may be different, but the thought process is the same.

[Talcott]

Yeah I though the debunked

Kos Hack smear

was kind amusing.

[NYCIC]

Won't it be great to see the likes of David Duke and Don Black invited to the White House for special functions? Oh, wait, President Paul will prefer to meet with them in hidden alleyways or dark basements.

[BaltoAman]

I see a couple of posts about Social Security here. Our ability to pay S.S. benefits to all the Boomers will be one of our greatest challenges over the next 10-20 years. There are trillions owed and we're already deep in debt, so this should be interesting.

I don't see a lot of the candidates spending much time on this issue, except Ron Paul. Please read:
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst100707.htm

If there is another candidate out there who is also hitting this problem head-on, I would like to know their plans, please forward any links. TIA

[Bushgirlsgonewild]

.


Ah, hey Ron, except for Lincoln, which conservative has ever ended a war?

And don't say Ronnie Reagan - if conservatives say that Soviet communism doesn't work, then they can't take credit for causing it's end - it caused it's own end.

If a conservative were in charge of WWII, we'd still be getting tauting videos from Hitler.


.

[emerywood]

Ron Paul's libertarian stance on free market capitalism failed to clarify his position with regard to the Congressional lobbyists. They have rigged the system in favor of the industrial complex, especially in healthcare and insurance. In fact, in terms of economics and foreign policies, the lobbyists have the upper hand versus the people. Politicians follow their orders if they want to keep their job or get a better one. Any change in America must begin there.

[Republicae]

The Statists view the political functions of war as a critical instrument of social stability and transformation. Trotsky’s Continual Revolution is a good example of The Statist Ideal. War is the great organizer, at least in their minds; it allows The State to regulate society by the inducement of fear. Fear is the great shackler of the people; it has always served the purposes of The State and will continue to do so if the People remain complacent to their methods of control.

[Republicae]

Peace and Prosperity can never accomplish the goals of servitude; only waste and destruction can make servitude possible on a scale that will suit the needs of the Statists. Peace and Prosperity are necessary to create a system that is anathema to that which The State seeks, Peace and Prosperity creates an atmosphere where the Individual can thrive in Liberty to fulfill the ultimate goal of the Natural Rights of Man.

[research]

Go read Ron pauls site and the wiki site on his values and plans. Ron paul would be a disaster. robber barons running riot will poor starve in the streets.

Get over it.

[dam1r]

Bless him but realistically he's not gonna get more than 3% vote.

HE knows that which is why he's so outspoken, consistent and most of the time reasonable.

THE GOP candidates know it too, which is why they don't take the bait.

Only press can help to focus more on what Ron Paul has to say...

[CommonSenseMan]

Ron Paul is the only candidate who talks about what the role of government is supposed to be. The government should exist only to protect our liberties.

The government is just made up of people like you and me. Give us our country back and there isn't anything we can't do better together.

It's no coincidence Ron Paul supporters are the most innovative grassroots organization the world has ever seen. We get it.

[strandwolf]

Note that dailyKos is currently running an absurd hatchetjob on Paul, branding him a White Racist. Then someone pointed out that a better case could be made for Hillary being racist. Quite a scene, as demos are not too enthused with the mealymouth triangulating batch of candidates­--Kucinitc­h, Gravel, Richardson, and Edwards maybe not so bad.