Contrary to popular belief, Ron Paul is no pacifist. The fact that he opposes our currently belligerent and interventionist foreign policy, the fact the he opposes pre-emptive and unconstitutional wars, does not mean he favors hug fests as a means to peace. Ron Paul favors the use of force — and overwhelming and deadly force — when absolutely necessary.
Here are some facts and applications from history to illuminate this point:
- Ron Paul supported the authorization to go after Osama Bin Laden and his minions.
- Ron Paul introduced legislation to Declare War on Iraq — even though he opposed the action and the unconstitutional war we are currently embroiled in — because he reasoned if we are going to do it, let’s really get the American people behind it and do it the right way and win.
- Ron Paul says he would seek Pakistan’s permission to go after al-Qaeda within their borders, and if it was revealed that they posed a very real and eminent threat from their bases in Pakistan, he believes we have the right to attack them even without Pakistan’s permission.
- For an example from history, Ron Paul’s policy would be supportive of President Reagan’s decision to bomb Libya in retaliation for their terrorist attack on a civilian airliner in the 1980s.
- Though we are not permitted under the Constitution to engage in an offensive and sustained war against another sovereign nation without a congressional Declaration of War, Ron Paul understands that our forces have the right to defend themselves and our nation, including the use of immediate counter-strikes, if they or we come under attack.
And here he is in his own words, answering MSNBC’s Tucker Carlson’s questions to this effect in clear and principled fashion. Republicans and other Americans who think that Ron Paul’s humble foreign policy means that he would be a pushover dove who would fail to do what it takes to protect this nation from attack need to see this short interview below. Please watch it now:
(Video is just 4:35 long. Click video to play)