Quote:
|
Originally Posted by alexamenos
On isolationism...there's no more isolationist of a country than Switzerland (it stayed out of WWI and WWII), and there's no country on earth that is more free or has a higher quality of life. IOW, there's nothing at all naive about an non-interventionist policy.
In Regards to Dr. Paul's One Commitment, that commitment is to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution." That is the President's job description per the Constitution, that is the Oath the President will swear upon taking office, and any candidate who doesn't make this Oath the centerpiece of his campaign promises is not fit to President of a government subject to the Rule of Law, IMHO.
|
Fine, but unless you think that the constitution is completely immalleable (in other words, cannont be subjected to today's world) then it's naivity.
Iraq taking kuwait is a fine example. So we let it go, then saddam takes saudia arabia.
Is it okay? You have to answer the question. Is it okay to have one madman own most of the oil reserves in the world?
Do you think averting a global recession is part of "preserving, protecting and defending" the constitution? I do as it directly affects my family's welfare.