Liberal Japan

japan.shadowofiris.com

  • Search Form

  • Subscribe

  • Meta




  • Ron Paul — no help if China attacks Taiwan!

    Posted by Matt Dioguardi on June 21st, 2007

    I think if Ron Paul is elected president, or even begins to pull some weight in the Republican primary, it will affect the Japanese-American relationship. Ron Paul would be expected to bring troops home from Japan and Korea as soon as it were possible.

    Ron Paul has specifically stated he has no interest in protecting South Korea or Taiwan if they were attacked.

    Specifically in regards to the Taiwanese issue Ron Paul has said:

      The Taiwan Relations Act essentially promises that we will defend Taiwan at all costs and should be reevaluated. Morally and constitutionally a treaty cannot be used to commit us to war at some future date. One generation cannot declare war for another. Making an open-ended commitment to go to war, promising troops, money and weapons, is not permitted by the Constitution.

    -and-

      Throughout all of China’s history she has never pursued military adventurism far from her own borders. That is something that we cannot say about our own policy. China traditionally has only fought for secure borders predominantly with India, Russia, Japan, and in Korea against the United States, and that was only when our troops approached the Yaloo River.

    This was an address to congress in 2001, but his position has not changed since then.

    In a 2006 speech Ron Paul did state he would like to end subsidies to China:

      Each year the people of the United States write a check to subsidize China, one of the most brutal, anti-American regimes in the world. Lately it has been in vogue for everyone in Washington to eagerly denounce the egregious abuses of the Chinese people at the hands of their communist dictators. Yet no one in our federal government has been willing to take China on in any meaningful way.

      Very few people realize that China is one of the biggest beneficiaries of American taxpayer subsidies.  Thanks to the largesse of Congress and the President, China enjoys subsidized trade and the flow of US tax dollars into Beijing’s coffers.

      I offered an amendment before the House of Representatives last month that would have ended the $4 billion subsidy our nation quietly gives China through the US government’s Export-Import Bank. The bank underwrites the purchases of goods and services by the Chinese government and others around the world. Unfortunately, only a minority of Democrats or Republicans supported my measure. Apparently, many members of Congress are happy to bash China, but don’t mind lending her U.S. taxpayer money at sweetheart interest rates.

    For more of Ron Paul’s views on China visit this page.

    Here is Ron Paul’s voting record as far as China:

      Ron Paul
      Rep. Paul (R-TX) has called China “one of the most brutal, anti-American regimes in the world.” Still, Paul was one of only five representatives to vote against the Political Freedom in China Act of 1997.

      Paul was also the only member of the House to vote against a 2006 resolution condemning religious persecution in China.

      Paul voted against the U.S.-China Trade Relations Act of 2000, as well as the Taiwan Security Enhancement Act in 2001.

    Here is Ron Paul speaking briefly about Korea:

      We went into Korea by direction of the United Nations, not a congressional declaration of war, to unify Korea. And yet that war ensured that Korea remains divided to this day; our troops are still there. South Korea today is much more willing to reconcile differences with North Korea, and yet we obstruct such efforts. It doesn’t make much sense.

    Here is a passage from an interview with Ron Paul By CNN’s John King:

      KING: Let me ask you more broadly about your views on foreign policy. Obviously, you believe the United States should have a limited role in the world, especially in terms of projecting military force. So, if Kim Jong Il rolled south into South Korea today, should the United States intervene?

      PAUL: Well, it depends on what the Congress says. We certainly shouldn’t do what we did in — under the Truman administration, go in under our U.N. resolution. You go to the Congress and find out if it’s a threat to our national security. I personally would think right now that it isn’t a threat to our national security.

      I want to make a point, though, that if we weren’t over there, I think Korea would be unified like South Vietnam or Vietnam is unified. They have railroads now opened up between the two. They want to share information.

      KING: Let me jump in. I don’t want to solve the problems of the Korean peninsula today. I do want to get your views on foreign policy. Let me give you another example. If China took back Taiwan today, you say go to the Congress, or does the president not have the authority as commander in chief?

      PAUL: Absolutely he does not have the authority. Where does he get it? You can’t go to war without Congressional approval. And that’s not a threat to our national security. That’s something internal affairs. Why should we send hundreds of thousands of Americans to die in a civil war?

      I mean, are we over in Russia right now over Chechnya? I mean, it wouldn’t make any sense. Did we go to war over Hong Kong?

      We should follow the Constitution and the advice of the founders. Don’t go looking for dragons to slay. I mean, why should we go and provoke and look for trouble? We should talk to people, negotiate, be diplomatic and trade with people.

      We do much better trading with Vietnam than we did with fighting with them, and we lost 60,000 men there. It makes so much common sense and is so appealing to the majority of Americans. Let me tell you, I really believe that.

    I wonder what the repercussions would be if Ron Paul could even start scoring in at 10% or so in the “official” media polls? I don’t necessarily agree with everything he says, but I’m so tired of the implicit assumption that America has to solve every problem in the world (especially when it’s in the interest of some well-financed interest group), that I think Ron Paul introduces a new level of humbleness that’s needed.

    Will Ron Paul be able to get his message out? He has been excluded from the next Republican debate sponsored by Iowans for Tax relief and the Iowa Christian Alliance. Ron Paul is a devout Christian and wants to repeal the 16th Amendment to the US constitution! What the deal?

    According to the Ron Paul 2008, daily update:

      Iowans for Tax Relief and Iowa Christian Alliance will host a presidential candidates forum on Saturday, June 30th in Des Moines.  Republican presidential candidates Mitt Romney, Sam Brownback, Jim Gilmore, Mike Huckabee, Tommy Thompson, and Tom Tancredo will participate.

      Ron Paul, however, will not participate.  Why?  Because he wasn’t invited.
      We heard about this forum from numerous supporters in Iowa who asked why Dr. Paul was not going to participate.  Those supporters assumed that Dr. Paul was invited. 
      The campaign office had not received an invitation so we called this morning; thinking we might have misplaced the invitation or simply overlooked it.  Lew Moore, our campaign manager, called Mr. Edward Failor, an officer of Iowans for Tax Relief, to ask about it.  To our shock, Mr. Failor told us Dr. Paul was not invited; he was not going to be invited; and he would not be allowed to participate.  And when asked why, Mr. Failor refused to explain.  The call ended.

      Lew then called Mr. Steve Scheffler, president of the Iowa Christian Alliance, to talk with him.  Mr. Scheffler did not answer so Lew left a message.  He has yet to respond.

    If you are an American, you clearly have a vested interest in this. However, you also have a vested interest in this if you are one of the following:

    1. American soldiers are stationed in your country.
    2. Your country has a collective self-defense treaty with America.
    3. Your country’s foreign policy is heavily influenced by American interference.

    Let those who have excluded Ron Paul from the debate know what you think. Here is their contact information:

      Edward Failor
      Iowans for Tax Relief
      2610 Park Avenue
      Muscatine, Iowa 52761
      Phone: 563-288-3600 or 877-913-3600
      Fax: 563-264-2413
      E-mail: itr@taxrelief.org
      Web Site

      Steve Scheffler, President
      Iowa Christian Alliance
      939 Office Park Road, Suite 115
      West Des Moines, Iowa 50265
      Phone: 515-225-1515
      Fax: 515-225-1826
      E-mail: slscheffler@iowachristian.com
      Web Site

    In other news as Ron Paul can’t get much attention in the mainstream media, so he has taken to doing interviews in … uh … dorm rooms with those little camera things they put up on the monitors …

    Despite the setting it’s actually a really good interview:


    Part I


    Part II


    Part III


    Part IV

    Ron Paul 2008.

    5 Responses to “Ron Paul — no help if China attacks Taiwan!”

    1. Jon Says:

      There is little to no chance that Ron Paul will ever be elected President. I had never even heard of him and I pay attention to the news.

    2. Matt Dioguardi Says:

      I don’t think it’s a matter of whether he will be or not, but whether he should be or not.

      He’s huge on the internet, but so far that has not translated into very much media attention. It very well might. So perhaps it’s not what do you think will happen, but what do you think should happen. We can each make a difference.

      There’s perhaps one exception, Dennis Kunichi, but all other Democratic candidates for president will keep America in Iraq. So where’s the choice?

      Aside from Ron Paul, no Republican wants to fundamentally change the income tax system or social security, so where’s the choice?

      And the media constantly talks about who will be a strong president, a kind of tough guy who can stand up for America. But stand up for what?

      What do these candidates really stand for?

      I found it really interesting that when asked which candidate aside from himself he found appealing, Ron Paul chose his philosophical opposite in many ways, Dennis Kunichi. This was because despite the fact that Kunichi would increase the size of government exponentially, he’s genuinely principled. (And he’d actually bring troops home from Iraq.)

      People look at Ron Paul as a kind of radical, but I would say that invading Iraq was more radical than anything Ron Paul proposes. He’s very healthy for the system. Perhaps like dietary fibre if he can get enough support he can clean the bilge out of the Republican party.

    3. Chris Salzberg Says:

      Thanks Matt, I had never heard of Ron Paul but I have to say his message is a rare breath of fresh air coming out of U.S. politics. You get so used to people speaking to interests or to their “base” that it’s only when someone like Ron comes along and speaks their mind that the word “honesty” reclaims some of its true meaning…

      Ron Paul makes me realize that, in the end, honesty, consistency and an open mind may be fundamentally more important than a person’s actual political positions on specific issues of the day.

      I also find the point about Kucinich (not Kunichi, btw) very very interesting. I suppose they’re both branded as “radicals”, but really nothing could be further from the truth in my mind.

    4. Matt Dioguardi Says:

      Speaking of Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich here is an interesting story, US urges UN to charge Ahmadinejad.

      The US House of Representatives urged the UN Security Council Wednesday to charge Iran’s president under genocide conventions.
      The non-binding resolution, initiated by Reps. Mark Kirk (R-Illinois) and Steve Rothman (D-New Jersey), passed by 411-2. It cites an October 27 speech in which Mahmoud Ahmadinejad allegedly called for Israel to be “wiped off the map.” … Kucinich and Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), a long-shot contender for the Republican presidential nomination, were the only votes against.

      Both Paul and Kucinich feel that this is laying the groundwork for an attack on Iran. They are probably right.

      Paul talks about his affinity with Kucinich in the following video, this is the second time I’ve heard him talk about this:

      Sorry for missing the spelling on Kucinich’s name. At some point I’ll try to get some of his views on Asia posted into this blog.

    5. I like Ron Paul, but! « Bakunin, Marx, Friedman, Keynes, and Cartman walk into a bar… Says:

      […] Paul, but! Filed under: Taiwan, Politics, In the news — ginzu98 @ 4:39 pm I read this blog with some excerpts about his stance on Taiwan and […]

    Leave a Reply

    XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>