1 I too had issues with Ron's stance on pulling out of Iraq, but the more I dive into it the more I think he is right.

Just today CNN put out an article stating that the Iraq Government says they can handle the situation on their own.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/07/14/iraq.military.ap/index.html

We have been brainwashed to believe that the only way to influence world affairs is to go to War with everyone. What hogwash.

We are no safer for going out and policing the world.

Ron Paul was not against tracking down and killing the people we knew to be directly responsible for 9/11, He voted for going after the al-qaeda in Afganistan. He is against starting wars with countries who posed no immediate threat to us, on grounds of lies.

The other big thing is "How" we go to war. The President does not have the power to declare war. As Ron often states, if we are going to go to war, lets do it as it was intended, through the congress.

One last point. We are no safer in the world if we go bankrupt, which is exactly what is happening right now with the war on Iraq.

If we go broke millions of our own people will suffer, as they are suffering now because of the inflation tax on the poor. Should millions of our own people suffer over an unjust war that has no end in site, and which is not getting any better the longer we stay there?

btw.. Feel free to submit this article to www.bestofpaul.com. It's a social news site dedicated to Ron Paul, You can get some free links and traffic.

2 Jdog,

First - the President did not send troops into Iraq without Congressional authorization. The fact that the resolution passed does not say "Declaration of War" across the top in bold print does not change that reality. Nor do I think it in anyway violates the parameters for war established in the Constitution. The congress gave the authorization to use military force in Iraq and the president exorcised that authority. the President did not declare war.

Second - since we took action against the Taliban and Iraq we have eliminated two national sponsors of global terrorism. In addition we uncovered and shut down the AQ Khan nuclear weapons technology black market, Saudi Arabia has stepped up efforts against terrorism, Libya has surrendered its weapons of mass destruction, we have uncovered and prevented scores of terrorist plots from becoming terrorist attacks. All of this and more somehow ads nothing to our safety? I think you need to re-assess that evaluation a little.

3 Stephen,

First off, let me say that I respect your opinion, and I hope to learn much from these types of conversations. I'm doing everything I can to educate myself prior to the next election.

Yes, our actions in Afghanistan and Iraq have resulted in certain substantial goals being accomplished, but the thing that concerns me is not the problems we have solved, but how we solved them and the consequences thereof.

Did we really need to invade Iraq to solve these problems? Have we opened Pandora's box?

What are we going to do, go to war with the entire world? I do not believe that the longer we stay in Iraq the LESS likely we will have problems, but the MORE likely we will have problems.

If we continue to stay in Iraq a war with Iran seems inevitable. So what then, we attack Iran? Then what... Peace in the Middle East? How many fronts can we fight before we destabilize the region even further, before we go broke, and have no choice but to pull out? What happens when we can't start what we finished? World War 3? I sure hope not, but our economy cannot survive much longer with the way things are going.

Even if we don't attack Iran, Muslim and Arab backed fighters are growing in numbers everyday in Iraq. This would not be the case if we didn't destabilize Iraq by overthrowing their Government in the first place.

There is a very strong movement in Iran to get rid of Ahmadinejad. Yet because we are still there he has been able to scare his people into following him even though many hate him.

It's hard to blame the Iranians for being scared of us. Ahmadinejad makes sure his propaganda machine keeps the fear juices flowing.

The other problem I see is the lack of a clear debate within Congress about these issues. Instead Congress is bypassing it's obligations to the American people, by allowing the executive branch too much say as to how, and who, we will wage war with.

This is an interesting article published by Ron Paul a few days after the "Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq" was issued in October 2002.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul57.html

"The process by which we’ve entered wars over the past 57 years, and the inconclusive results of each war since that time, are obviously related to Congress’ abdication of its responsibility regarding war, given to it by Article I Section 8 of the Constitution.

Congress has either ignored its responsibility entirely over these years, or transferred the war power to the executive branch by a near majority vote of its Members, without consideration of it by the states as an amendment required by the Constitution."


Why is our Congress passing the buck on this issue? The intent of the Constitution giving power to the Congress and not the President was so that the people would be represented. One guy sitting in the White House, who may or may not have his own agenda, shouldn't have this much power. Yet that is what is happening. Our Congressmen are resorting to trying to limit funding rather then using their constitutionaly given right to to pass resolutions etc... BTW here is an interesting video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xADWkL7fgOs&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ejarrodhunt%2Ecom%2F

Of course none of this matters if you do not believe that "Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely".

One man can be easily influenced, an entire Congress is not as easy.

70% of Americans want us out of Iraq. If Congress truly had the power it was entitled to through the Constitution it would be listening to the people.

Are the American people just tired of war? and would getting out of the war now just cause more problems? Maybe.. but it should be the job of the Congress to educate us.

Of course I could be wrong about all or some of this, but as I continue to educate myself on the subject, I seem to fall farther and farther down the rabbit hole.

The questions I pose in this email are not necessarily directed to you Stephen. They are just questions that have been boggling my mind for a while.

Thanks for the debate!

4 Im voting for Ron Paul based on his dedication to the constitution, his oath of office and his consistant pricipled integity that just does not exist in Washington. We need a guy like that on the hill BADLY. We need to reward and value that behavior. He is the only candidate that understands even what the job description of the president is.

The fact is, even if i vehemently disagree with him on many of his views, it is completely irrelevant. Hes got to go through congress to get this stuff done and if America is not ready for it, or its not workable, then it wont be done. We've conditioned outselves to believe the president is some demigod who can do anything. If all thats accomplished by the Paul presidency is a pile of vetoes and a repealed Patriot Act it is still a win for us. It plants the seeds in the american consciousness that we need to pay attention, and have the serious debate about what government can realistically do, and what it should never be allowed to do.

5 "...but our economy cannot survive much longer with the way things are going."

That would be the same economy that's chugging right along at a strong pace and has been for what, six years now? Despite all the doom and gloom you hear about in the media, the economy is doing very, very well.

"Even if we don't attack Iran, Muslim and Arab backed fighters are growing in numbers everyday in Iraq."

Don't forget to finish that thought: Muslim and Arab backed fighters are dying in increasing numbers everyday in Iraq.

"This would not be the case if we didn't destabilize Iraq by overthrowing their Government in the first place."

True. They'd be fighting their own governments, or in the Philippines, or Indonesia, or the Sudan, or any of a dozen other countries.

And while we're ignoring that, let's also forget that the government of Iraq had been defying numerous UN resolutions, launching missiles at our aircraft, using chemical weapons on it's own population, filling mass graves, imprisoning children, running terrorist training camps, and the list goes on and on.

The US didn't topple Saddam in a vacuum. We didn't do it alone. We didn't suddenly decide to do it. The buildup to this took years, and could have been halted at any time by the government of Iraq, by cooperating and keeping the terms to the truce that they agreed to at the end of the first Gulf War. You remember that one, where Iraq decided to annex Kuwait?

Iraq wasn't puppies and rainbows before this war. It was a beligerent, heavily armed nation with a leader who believed in using force to achieve his expansionist goals. Saddam paid reward money to the families of suicide bombers and he granted asylum to terrorists on the run. Political enemies were asassinated.

I'm sorry, but I can't understand people like you who think that the world made a mistake in getting rid of a scumbag like Saddam.

6 Ted,

The economy we have is fake. Based on fake money and money borrowed from foreign countries.

If I was to max out all my credit cards, then start printing more money as I needed it to pay those loans back and maintain my standard of living, yes it would appear as things are going very well for me.

I'm all for helping the world be a better place, but not at the cost of people suffering in our own country. If you think the poor are doing that great I would suggest visiting a few slums.

I don't know how safe we are going to be if our economy collapses. And I don't know how we are going to finish what we've started throughout the world if we are broke.

I would much rather have a responsible foreign policy and a strong "real" economy. We can do much more for the world in the long term that way.

7 jdog,

Our "fake" economy is powerful enough to drive the world economy.

I'm not sure where you get this sky-is-falling attitude towards the economy. It's not a finite amount that can run dry, the US creates billions in new wealth each and every day. These billions are spent both here at home and overseas, which means people in other countries benefit from it as well. You've heard "a rising tide lifts all boats", and this is the perfect example.

The world economy is so interconnected now that very few countries can just be cut out of the market and not missed. Even the smallest (mostly) have *something* that is a necessity to modern technology. Even a modestly-sized economy cannot be completely isolated, nor is it desirable. Uncle Sam sneezes, China gets a cold. Germany burps, Brazil gets a tummy-ache. Japan went through a massive decade-long recession and do you remember what happened? The rest of the world picked up the slack and eventually Japan got their act together again. Without a crash, without much of a crisis, certainly without any panic.

As for the poor in the USA, yeah, go check out the slums. See all the cell phones, televisions and DVD players. They are poor only in relation to our middle class, because compared to the populations in other countries, they're not too badly off. And nothing is stopping them from improving their lot in life, if they're willing to work hard and live smart to do it. This is yet another case of the rising-tide effect.

If you're that worried about it, then I'd suggest not going into debt and investing in gold or other hard currency. That way, you're covered if the shit does hit the fan. Unless you're doing something about your personal situation, you're just going to give yourself an ulcer worrying about something you really can't control.

8 Ted,

Your right. Screw it. I'm going to go buy a new Hummer and head on down to the strip club.

All this worrying over nothing is just a waste of time. Things couldn't be better.

9 You are a man of extremes, Jdog.

I don't worry about getting hit by lightning, but I don't stand under trees in a thunderstorm. You can take precautions without obsessing and hollering that the sky is falling.

Enjoy the strippers. Say hi to my sister.

10 I'll never vote for Ron Paul, if only because he is one of the "Truthers" regarding the 9/11 "story" he feels is being fed to the general public. He's convinced it's an inside job.

I've made up my mind about these types of people, and I've ended a few long friendships over this very subject. I know what happened that day, and I have the education to back it up and when I hear these ignorant asses, spouting off about it, I just have to turn away. I have no room in my life for people like that.

It's a shame really, as Ron Paul has other things going for him that are spot on with my personal philosophies.

Onward then.