A Nuclear Iran and Libertarian Thought...

The media thinks they run the country.

But I'm here to tell you that they don’t. How do I know? Because Ron Paul came very close to winning the Iowa Straw Poll despite the constant onslaught by media wags on the Left and the Right that he is “too radical” in his beliefs. That he is too “out there” what ever that means.

Yet Ron Paul came within 152 votes of winning the poll and turning the political establishment on its ear. Too bad for that but his views are worth noting.

A nuclear Iran: Yes, Iran with the bomb is an unpleasant thought. But what are we willing to do to prevent such a thing? Invade Iran? Bomb them into the “stone age?” It’s a nation of 73 Million people, something that seems to have been lost in the debate. It’s been talked about but it’s merely just saber rattling.  We aren’t going to do anything of the kind.

Sooner or later Iran will get the bomb. Every other nation in the region already has it. And only Iran is going to be responsible for the consequences if they ever attempt to use it. The bomb has a very sobering effect on a country. They have protection but they also raise their profile as a target. Witness Pakistan and India. Both have had the bomb for ages and have been in conflicts but neither has the stomach for what may happen if one side should use it.

It can not be disputed that it was the United States who shielded, armed and supported the brutal Shah of Iran in the oppression of his people. It therefore could not be called surprise when the Shah was overthrown and the radical Islamic movement that had fomented under his regime came to power and immediately denounced the U.S. This was the fruit of the seeds sewn by the foreign entanglements that has passed for foreign policy of the United States over the last 50 years. Libertarians see this. This isn’t a radical idea that this practice should end. This will save not only the United States but the world a lot of misery in the long run. 

So what is the answer to a nuclear Iran? Are we to engineer another change in the country and put in place another benevolent dictator? Hardly likely given that we've already have been fighting wars on three fronts, one for almost ten years now. In fact we've been involved in armed conflicts in that region of the world since 1979 and given our complicity with the Shah, much longer. And we wonder why would Iran want the bomb?

When Ron Paul says to the nation that he wants to close the more than 700 military bases around the world and bring our men and women home, he speaks to a nation weary of constant warfare.

Yes, this is why Ron Paul is considered a radical. The amount of money invested in such a world wide military structure is staggering yet would be viewed as obsolete in a Ron Paul Whitehouse. Make no mistake, we will still need a well armed and well trained cutting edge military but to protect us here at home and not to act like mercenaries for commercial interests abroad. To the military establishment and their Republican enablers, this is radical thinking. But my question to them would be this: " Has the last 50 years of warfare brought us any closer to peace and are we as a nation any safer?" I think you know the answer to that.

Libertarians know what Ron Paul is talking about because to them it’s clear. It’s only radical to the ones who want to stick with and double down on policies that have only proven to be failures and the longer this goes on, the worse it’s going to get. Our country is on shaky pins.

If the United States as a Republic is to endure, the change will need to come from how we think and how we look at the world as a whole, not what a panel or political party or focus group says is so. There is another way.