D
Darryl1958
Guest
This of course is the serious question.
Is it really Ron Paul’s position that America ought to let Islamist terrorists dictate American foreign policy?!!!
And if not, then how is he not doing just exactly that by saying that America is engaged in provocation, and this is why many or most Muslims legitimately hate America?
That is the message that I am receiving from an overall reading of the support Ron Paul has here in this forum.
I can fully understand how many Americans would be absolutely exasperated at America coming to the rescue of an obnoxious little country like Saudi Arabia and/or Kuwait in the first place. And whether or not America should enter into any given war is a matter open to serious debate.
But it is when the rhetoric goes over the top, and American policy is simplistically portrayed as war-mongering and unjustifiable interference and meddling that Ron Paul and his supporters take on the air of a Jeremiah Wright and his ilk.
Middle East oil is vital not just to an America which has not developed the foresight to follow a coherent energy policy on their own, but it is vital to the world. It is preposterous to state that American interests are in no way involved here, or to think that America can willy-nilly abandon the strategic alliances it has forged without their being consequences for America herself.
There is definitely a case to be made that America is over-extended in terms of what can be afforded now, and there is definitely room for rational debate as to what American policy ought to be. There is definitely room for a reassessment of the neocon/neoliberal policy of Bush as to whether pursuing a policy of democratization in a region where the majority of the people will vote Islamist is the right one, and to analyze and critique the results of that policy.
But the question remains, what is the difference between absolute non-inteventionism and isolationism, and how would remaining aloof to that volatile region that supplies the world’s energy in America’s or anybodies interests?
Ron Paul and his followers really need to be reminded that ,no, America has not followed the policy that it has thus far because Michele Bachmann and her ilk hate Muslims, or that American government is run by warmongers who wring their hands in glee with every opportunity that comes along where Muslims can be bombed.
America is not an island unto itself, but the main cog that drives the world economy. That is what at stake if and when the very real enemies of America get the upper hand.
Can we really expect China, or Russia, or Iran, to simply withdraw from the world stage, and follow policies in Americas interests if America decides to follow Ron Paul’s advise and cut all ties and entanglements with its allies, strategic or otherwise?
Would it be a good thing for Americans if Saudi exchanged the alliance it has with America and opts to develop the same one with fellow-oil producer Russia, and make China its main business partner?
American withdrawal will most certainly create a vacuum and who knows what will be the nature of the demons who rush in to provide former allies with the security that America is no longer willing to provide?
And that is something that I don’t see Ron Paul or his followers addressing much. Theirs is a fantasy world, from my point of view, where no threat is real, and the future will be rosy,if only America stops meddling and interfering in other people’s affairs.
