Ron Paul is the Real Warmonger

In the last few weeks I’ve been called a neo-con, a Zionist, and a warmonger in various online forums. All by “liberty” supporting Ron Paul fans who insist that history is calling Ron Paul to step forward and rescue America from itself. While I’ve always been on the right I was at one time a Libertarian so I’ll accept the term neo-Con, and since I believe in the historical claim of the Jewish people to Israel I’m fine with being called a Zionist. But it is Ron Paul and his followers who are leading us down the path to world war, not people like me.

The philosophy of Ron Paul and his supporters is simple, straightforward, and ultimately anti-American. They say if we allow evil and depravity to flourish at home and abroad then evil and depraved men will respect us and leave us alone. During the cold war this philosophy was put forward by the left and called accommodation; now it’s been re-branded as “Constitutionalism” but it is no less destructive then it was when voices in our own country called for total surrender to the forces of communism.

Ron Paul believes if we abandoned Israel and let Islamists worldwide take over country after country that Jihadists would never again target America or its citizens. But why would this be? Does Muslim culture respect weakness? Do the mullahs of Iran look favorably on those that kneel before them? Did the Taliban treat women and children with respect? Are the cities of Europe that bowed to Islamist pressures free of Islamist violence?

Paul and his supporters tell us that we should be willing to accommodate Occupy Wall Street, that we can find common ground with the rank and file Occupiers. But what common ground is there between freedom and socialism? Where has accommodating this communist-led attempted coup gotten the cities that tried? How many businesses must be closed down before we stop accommodating them? How many people have to die at these encampments in the name of accommodation?

And when does our accommodation of violent radicals end? After their first murder? After the first riot? Or do we wait for a city to fall to them before drawing a line in the sand?

They say if only we legalized drugs gangs would lay down their arms, put on suits and ties, and become productive members of society. If we legalize prostitution pimps would throw up their hands and go work at K-Marts as women were “empowered” by the legal sex trade. After all, the Mafia all but disappeared after Prohibition, they will argue, ignoring the almost 100 years of murder and extortion the Mafia partook in after the repeal of Prohibition. During their still ongoing reign of terror the Mafia’s activities are partly funded by legal business interests they maintain. Why would today’s gangs do any differently?

Read more