Rep. Ron Paul calls Egypt a "mess" made by U.S. intervention

Rep. Ron Paul calls Egypt a "mess" made by U.S. intervention

trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com

Rep. Ron Paul, R-Lake Jackson, is blaming U.S. policy for the upheaval in Egypt.

"This is a typical example of what happens when we run on intervention-type foreign policies. We get in the middle of these fights. We've been in the middle of this for 30 years now. We've given Mubarak $60 billion. We're responsible for a lot of the mess that is over there,"

Both Mubarak and the deposed Shah of Iran became targets of popular revolt because they were "our puppet government," he said.

"There was

(visit the link for the full news article)

Also, Ron's Full Commentary on Egypt Today

Paul, a potential Senate candidate in Texas next year, is a longstanding critic of foreign entanglements, and probably Congress' leading isolationist.

Wow, being friendly to other nation is isolationism now?
I'm pretty sure it's the opposite!

Interesting question regarding this event and it's relation to the overthrow of Iran's Shah & by Radical muslims?

If radical muslims take over then Egypt is the next Iraq/Afghanistan!

trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by ModernAcademia


Ron Paul is one of the small number of American legislators talking about the brutally flawed US foreign policy. You cannot afford it, politically or financially. Americans will find their "friend" requests on F will grow exponentially and rationally if they withdraw from nation after nation. As Mr. Paul says (paraphrased): "They dont hate us because of our wealth or way of life, they hate us because we're an occupying force"

Jason

You sure we have nothing to do with the current uprising? Surely it looks CIA.

You cant intervene with these savages

reply to post by ModernAcademia


In all seriousness please look at this thread. IT took me a little work to do. BUt i think it explains what is going on behind the scenes in egypt and the coming possibloe war with Iran..
Decade Long Road TO Egyptian Revolutiion

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Wow, being friendly to other nation is isolationism now?

Before I post my response to this please elaborate a bit. I've watched the video 2x and have also read the news article a couple of times and I'm not making any connection to any information in either to see how it suggests that being friendly to another nation is considered isolationism??

edit on 31-1-2011 by MyMindIsMyOwn because: error in quoting

reply to post by MyMindIsMyOwn


The article, not videos, says Ron Paul is Congress's leading isolationist
that's what I responded to after doing the [ex] tag

I swear I think Ron Paul reads ATS.
Some of his intel used in that commentary piece
has been posted right here on ATS
in recent days.

And if Mr. Paul is reading:
thank you for dropping wikileaks like
a hot potato. You wised up to the
covert op. I'm impressed

and best wishes in your political
career.

boon

Originally posted by deltaboy
You sure we have nothing to do with the current uprising? Surely it looks CIA.

well I will agree with ya to a certain extent.
While the CIA is the operational and training
mechanism of the NWO, they take orders from
Soros. The CIA is only 1 aspect of the complex
NWO infrastructure.

reply to post by ModernAcademia


Gotcha. Well, here is my 2 cents for what it's worth....

I got the feeling that the author of the news article was tossing around the word "isolationist" as if it were a bad thing. I'm not sure that it is. According to the dictionary here is "isolationism" in it's raw form.

i·so·la·tion·ism –noun- the policy or doctrine of isolating one's country from the affairs of other nations by declining to enter into alliances, foreign economic commitments, international agreements, etc., seeking to devote the entire efforts of one's country to its own advancement and remain at peace by avoiding foreign entanglements and responsibilities.

But according to Ron Paul in an interview with CNN in 2007 he does not promote isolationism but a form of non-intervention where it concerns the internal affairs of other countries.

“Isolationism isn't what I advocate,’’ Paul told Blitzer. “I advocate non-intervention, not getting involved in the internal affairs of other nations, and not pretending a country like Iraq is equivalent to Nazi Germany. Iraq had no army, no navy, had no weapons of mass destruction, had nothing to do with 9/11, so the comparison makes no sense." LINK: www.swamppolitics.com...

And here is a little more on the topic of isolationist vs. non-intervention. LINK: www.lewrockwell.com...

What I think is this, the reporter needs to do a little more research into what he is talking about before tagging someone with a label.

What I also think is that Ron Paul is right, Egypt is a mess and one of our own making. And I really hope I am not right about this, but I don't see the unrest quelling just yet. I think this is the tip of the iceburg.

It's no secret the USA has been intervening heavily in Egypt, and for decades now. Most of their military is trained in the United States, their military spends a great deal of time with Pentagon officials, they have over 1,000 M1A1 tanks, that they build themselves in Egypt, needless to say, this is a country that has long been in the back-pocket of the US.The Egyptian government, i.e. Mubarak, does not represent the Egyptian citizen but the interests of the US and Israel governments. What's going on there now has a close parallel to what happened in the 70's in Iran, with the people in the streets finally getting fed up with the "foreign intervention".

He is right -

We rule the world because of these policies, but it also makes us complicit in our own misery.

Is it worth it?

Not in my opinion,,, we could save a triple ass load of money if we stopped this insanity.

If he's right then 60 billion worth aid means we've invested so much it's too late to pull back.

I mean sometimes a bad choice becomes its own reason to keep going.

"We've already invested this much, we can't pull out now!"

And then sometimes unintended consequences prevent us from pulling back.

And how is isolationism bad if you feed yourself, work, keep care of your own? I mean, that's not as bad as being utterly dependent on someone else, right? I don't know, it just seems this way to me; that it could be worse. I mean, we could be a country existing on welfare given by other nations. I think not getting involved is bad when you're not taking care of your own, but otherwise... :[

They are a bit confused. Ron Paul is not an isolationist. That is mis-branding. He merely takes the approach of non-interference except when directly and absolutely necessary. He doesn't advocate being isolated from the international community.

They use the word isolationist because it sounds like a dirty word. You can be a part of a community without controlling it, giving it unearned funds, staging revolutions and coups and assassinations and placing military installations throughout the world.

Originally posted by jonnywhite
"We've already invested this much, we can't pull out now!"

and sometimes that can cause an
unwanted pregnancy

Originally posted by jonnywhite
If he's right then 60 billion worth aid means we've invested so much it's too late to pull back.

I mean sometimes a bad choice becomes its own reason to keep going.

"We've already invested this much, we can't pull out now!"

You are speaking on behalf of elitist you know?

Even continuing it is not in YOUR favor, it's only in their favor
You will only give, they will get, but you, the giver, will receive nothing in return