In tonight’s Republican Presidential nomination debate Texas Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) stated quite clearly that he believed 9-11and the murders of thousands of innocent Americans were the fault of the United States of America’s foreign policy. Giuliani, clearly stunned by this opinion, gave Congressman Paul the opportunity to recant, which he refused to do.
Congressman Paul should apologize to the American people and drop out of the race. His opinions mirror those of the terrorists themselves, and justify their actions. He should face a primary from a Republican who does not believe we brought 9-11 on ourselves.
May 15th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Shocking. They really need to start thining the field out. This guy has no business being on that stage.
May 16th, 2007 at 12:00 am
So I guess we keep blindly following Bush’s Iraq/foreign policy until we lose more seats in Congress & the Presidency? Wasn’t it enough that we got our ass kicked in 2006? It’s posts like Duane’s that show the party leadership & hacks haven’t learnt the lesson of the last election. I thought we weren’t going to be nation builders & the world police…at least that’s what GWB told us in 2000. Ron Paul is a breath of fresh air in the GOP party. BTW, he was winning the Fox News poll all night until getting edged by Romney at the end.
May 16th, 2007 at 12:00 am
I’m curious what the deal was with that poll. It’s suspicious that the “vote by text message” poll defies the results of conventional polling.
Ron Paul was a shrill voice who got his moment in the spotlight and will soon be forgotten.
May 16th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Ryan: There’s nothing “curious” about that poll for anyone who watches “American Idol.” [Heh]
May 16th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Without meaning to, Rep. Paul did Mayor Giuliani a major favor
by drawing such a stark contrast, and highlighting Rudy’s leadership on 9-11.
May 16th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Mr. Bartlett:
There is a big difference between ‘blindly following Bush’s Iraq/foreign policy’ and dis-agreeing with Congressman Paul’s position that it was the fault of US foreign policy that some thousands of Americans were murdered. In fact, Congressman Paul – and I presume you from your comments – have taken a position staked out clearly by the lunatic fringe of the left and the terrorists themselves: that 9-11 was justifiable retaliation for American intervention in the Middle East, particularly Iraq the first time around.
Well Mr. Bartlett, I’m of the mind that the first President Bush was on the mark when we stopped Iraq from taking charge of much of the world’s oil supply, and dominating the distribution routes. I stand with his decision, and the right of the United States to use military force when our strategic interests as we define them are threatened.
And, Mr. Bartlett, speaking for myself, the world and our role in it changed on 9-11. I’m not asking that the US become the world police, but I am asking that we act to prevent another slaughter of our citizens by extremists. And if that means a more assertive world posture, preferably with our allies old and new, then as much as I don’t treasure the cost in blood and money, I’m for it.
Of course, Congressman Paul would argue that we should retreat to ‘Fortress America’. And that idea has a certain simplistic appeal from another time when the world was a larger place without nuclear weapons. For my part I believe it is a reasonable policy of the United States to fight terror overseas rather than wait and fight it here in our backyard. It’s like my grandfather used to say “if you are going to fight the Russians, make sure and do it in Germany, not Kansas”.
I believe that the rise of Islamic terrorism is both a physical and an existential challenge to “The West” in the larger sense – a challenge to determine whether or not we still have the will to defend our way of life and our culture, or whether we and other nations who arose out of The Enlightenment have grown decedent and are unable or unwilling to defend our interests. I for one, Mr. Bartlett, do not believe our nation or our civilization should go gently into the night. I believe we should rage against the darkness.
And frankly, Mr. Bartlett, I have no intention of changing my views on the future of Western Civilization for political expediency. If I have to plant my political banner somewhere, I’m planting it here. And if the Republican Party starts to reflect your views and those of Congressman Ron Paul, then the Party will have left me, not vice versa. And in those circumstances, good riddance.
May 17th, 2007 at 12:00 am
While I disagree with his thoughts on leaving Iraq, I appreciated Congressman Paul giving an honest answer to a question that offered plenty of easy outs.
There’s a big difference between justifying the despicable acts of radical Islam and explaining one reason why we were attacked on 9/11.
Congressman Paul wasn’t suggesting that those terrorists were acting in a just or a right way — he was simply stating that US presence in the Middle East was a contributing factor to their hatred for America. Those who would suggest that our sustained presence over there had no impact on 9/11 should pull their heads out of the sand.
Likewise, those who think that retreating into “Fortress America” would prevent further terrorist activity are equally off base. Our presence in the Middle East was one reason, but by no means was it the only reason.
I agree with Duane’s thoughts that George H. W. Bush acted in the best interests of the United States when he went into Iraq the first time. I also recognize, however, that we are not the only country looking out for our own best interests. Countries that are supportive of these terrorists, along with multi-national terror organizations are acting in what they believe to be their own best interests. Whether we believe their reasoning to be rational is irrelevant.
What it comes down to is whether we believe our best interests are worth the risks involved. Given the mindset of Al Qaeda and similar groups, I believe that we have no choice but to maintain a presence in the Middle East, and to continue taking the fight to them, on their own turf. That being said, I wouldn’t feign shock if these groups attempt another attack on America. Would I be angry? Absolutely. Would I expect our country to seek retribution? Of course. But I certainly wouldn’t turn a blind eye to the notion that our own foreign policy activities may have contributed to the actions of these groups.
Sidenote: Rudy’s suggestion that this is the “most absurd” reasoning for 9/11 is, itself, absurd.
May 18th, 2007 at 12:00 am
When I was national chairman of YAF and on the board in the late ’70s, during the Cold War (ugh!) Congressman Ron Paul called for removal of all U.S. troops from Europe and U.S withdrawal from NATO, at about the same time Breshnev was still sending Red Army tanks into central Europe and smashing the beginnings of the freedom movement. Do the research. That thinking, if implemented, probably would have resulted in the Soviet Union being the dominent power in the world today.