I'm no expert on the subject matter, but I do feel I have a better grasp of it than the average voter and so I humbly submit this post to all my Ron Paul friends and those who indulge in a love/hate relationship as well. If anyone thinks this information will come in handy for them, please feel free to copy it and use it for themselves in any way. I simply hope that others who read this will see in it quality enough to be shared.
I have encountered a few major objections by conservatives to Ron Paul as a Presidential candidate, one of the strongest is the oft repeated claim that Paul wants to eliminate foreign aid to Israel, and therefore he is anti-Semitic. This notion is wrong on multiple levels. Besides the assumption that not giving money away in this instance is somehow racist, which is inherently illogical, those who argue racism is Paul’s motivation from the Republican camp alternately bristle at the idea of continuing to give money away to Mexican citizens for the very same reasons that Libertarians want to eliminate all foreign aid and welfare. Giving your money for a cause you believe in is admirable, noble and should be celebrated. Forcing others to give their money for any cause is none of those, but rather is theft, immoral and should land someone in jail. You are always free to give to those causes you deem important, no one is stopping you.
1. Reality: The US gives much more to Israel’s enemies than it does to Israel in aid.[1] For this reason, eliminating all foreign aid will hurt Israel’s enemies much more than it would harm Israel, but also because Israel’s economy is diversified whereas the economies of the rest of the region are not. When taken in conjunction with Paul’s energy policy a clearer picture of what this will mean for Israel and the region as a whole can be seen, because Paul wants to develop our own energy resources and quit purchasing oil from OPEC.[2] This will take several years before the transition would be completed, however once it has been done the nations surrounding Israel will have a significant decrease in their annual income and the price of oil itself will not be subject to the whims of OPEC if the biggest oil market in the world is able to supply oil for less money per barrel than other nations are willing to sell. This will effectively limit the military capabilities of Israel’s enemies as because of Ron Paul’s policies they will lose both their foreign aid and a very significant customer for their only viable industry, thus leaving Israel in a much better position comparatively speaking because of their diversified economy and their military superiority.
2. Another reason why Paul’s policy on Israel is the better policy than what we’ve pursued over the last 20 years through Bush Sr., Clinton and Bush Jr. is the fact that Paul wants to allow Israel to take care of it’s own internal affairs and it’s own diplomatic policies towards it’s neighbors. Paul has said many times that Israel is more than capable of taking care of itself and that during the last 20 years the United States, in his opinion, has not done a good job of being an ally to Israel. Through the numerous peace negotiations brokered by the US through several administrations, Israel has been directed by our State Department – under leadership by both Republicans and Democrats – to give up land, destroy it’s citizens housing, not retaliate to attacks and to work with terrorist organizations in search of compromise which was never an option in the eyes of its adversaries. No pro-Israel supporter would deny these truths and yet for some unfathomable reason, they still believe that Israel is better off under our guidance than directing her own defenses and making her own decisions on how to deal with the Palestinian demands and relentless hatred even while so many of them believe Israel’s own military is the world’s experts in anti-terrorism tactics and counter-insurgency/urban warfare. This all begs the question, just what is it exactly that Israel “needs” from the United States? [3]
3. To add further fuel on the fire, several prominent Israeli officials and academics have agreed with Paul in calling for an end to foreign aid money from the US to Israel for the very reasons that Paul has outlined, [4] however the calls of racism don’t really stick to them and so they are ignored by the anti-Paul crowd as if they never existed, because no matter how many times I post the following links to prove the point, I have yet to see a single anti-Paul person address them whatsoever.
4. One of the most prominent arguments made against discontinuing foreign aid to Israel is the religious one which basically says that because the Bible says God will curse any nation that curses Israel and bless any nation that blesses Israel we’d better be a staunch ally otherwise God will not bless America.
This ideology is flawed at many different points, but to name a few I’ll say that forcing Israel to cede land for peace and then not allowing Israel to defend itself when peace is once again abandoned by those we just pressured Israel to give land to is not blessing them. Giving them money and then holding them under our thumb in many different aspects of their own foreign policy and defense is not blessing them. The United States has been the single biggest factor in Israel’s lasting conflict with the Palestinians because we have not allowed them to take care of the problem in a way that would end the conflict. The United States preferred methods of manipulation and control are a curse to Israel, not a blessing whatsoever.
Being a blessing or a curse to Israel need not have anything to do with monetary support whatsoever. We can simply back them up in the UN Security council and in international diplomatic gatherings or during disputes. If we are truly to be counted as a blessing to Israel we should by all means stop all foreign aid to those nations that express animosity towards Israel, but as I pointed out above, we actually give more to those nations than we do to Israel.
Most of the people that hold to this doctrine see themselves as Christians, as I do also. Yet they fail to grasp the power and faith of the Biblical doctrines that surround the story of the Israelites. Righteousness was counted to Abraham because of his faith, and thus his descendants were chosen to be a nation of priests. However, as Christians should we rather trust in money, guns, international sanctions and diplomatic pressure rather than God’s immutable purposes that clearly teach the renewal of Israel and its protection by God? How is it that we are so arrogant as believers as to think our ways are higher than God’s ways and that God Himself can do no better job at protecting His people than our direct interventions can?
Being a blessing means that we allow Israel to defend herself without our interference, which has not happened in a very long time and will only happen if we take the power of money and the manipulative strings that go along with it out of the equation as some of Israel’s prominent leaders have already asked us to do.
5. Last but not least is the Iran question. Many anti-Paul people can’t grasp the idea that Paul would “allow” Iran to have a nuclear weapon. To those people that are fixated on this as some sort of Achilles heel of Paul’s campaign I would like to ask a few questions:
Since Moscow has publicly stated that Iran is an ally and attacking Tehran through NATO or unilaterally would be seen as an attack on Moscow, [5], [6] what would you do to keep Iran from developing a nuclear weapon without military action?
Since Moscow has vowed to complete Iran's nuclear reactor, war rhetoric from NATO and the US, what would attacking Iran accomplish in light of the circumstances outlined in question one?
Israel reportedly has 300 nuclear weapons and is capable of launching them and hitting Iran if they feel threatened, what do you think the US can do in this situation that Israel is not itself capable of doing?
Iran does not have a delivery system for the nuclear weapon it does not possess, however North Korea has both, has launched missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons several times and is lead by a mad-man with a God complex. North Korea has the capability to hit almost all of the continental US and yet because China would not allow us to attack North Korea with out starting a war, we have not threatened action against it. Why should we treat North Korea differently than Iran if Iran also is backed by a nation we cannot afford a war with?
Conclusion: Ron Paul’s foreign policy is grounded in reality. We cannot attack Iran without risking war with Russia and therefore that part of the argument against Paul is a moot point and if someone insists on pressing that point despite the above information, I would sincerely question their ability to be objective at all. We are giving more money in aid to Israel’s enemies than to Israel itself and so continuing that practice is counter-productive and anyone should be able to see it is irrational to believe it is helpful to Israel in the long run. This too is a moot point when it has been examined. In the not so distant past Ronald Reagan was in a heated contest with the USSR in which no open hostilities occurred and which we were seen as the victors in the end when Reagan’s most hostile moment towards the Communist regime is largely seen to be his speech in Berlin urging the dismantling of the wall. Reagan respected our enemies, not because he believed their ideals to be morally on par with ours, but because the best way to preserve the lives of Americans is not to risk them unnecessarily. Yet so many Republicans seem to think that what Reagan did, when applied to Paul is somehow giving respect and validity to tyrants and warmongers. This is wishful thinking on their part, and yes I use that term purposefully. They would rather believe that Paul is friendly towards Israel's and our enemies than admit that their support for continued wars and continuing to support a failed policy towards Israel is actually a problem and founded on false arguments.
Citations -
1. http://www.americansforisrael.com/archives/28
2. http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul284.html
3. http://www.hirhome.com/israel/hirally.htm
4. http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/6201-israeli-economists-agree-with-rand-paul-end-foreign-aid
5. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8251531.stm
6. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-uIaSRiWA4
No comments:
Post a Comment