Campaign Statements — Ron Paul

Wednesday February 22, 2012

“Why go to war so carelessly?”

“If you want to worry about nuclear weapons, worry about the nuclear weapons that were left over from the Soviet Union. They’re still floating around. They don’t have them all detailed. So we’re ready to go to war. I say going to war rapidly like this is risky and it’s reckless.

Now, if they are so determined to go to war, the only thing I plead with you for, if this is the case, is do it properly. Ask the people and ask the Congress for a declaration of war. This is war and people are going to die. And you have got to get a declaration of war.

And just to go and start fighting—but the sanctions are already backfiring. And all that we do is literally doing the opposite. When we’ve been attacked, we all came together. When we put them under attack, they get together and it neutralizes that. They rally around their leaders.

So what we’re doing is literally enhancing their power. Think of the sanctions we dealt with Castro. Fifty years and Castro is still there. It doesn’t work. So I would say a different approach. We talked to the Soviets during the Cuban crisis. We at least can talk to somebody who we do not have proof that he has a weapon. Why go to war so carelessly?”

CATEGORIES: Iran | Ron Paul |

Wednesday February 22, 2012

“The Iranians can’t possibly attack anybody.”

“I disagree because we don’t know if they have a weapon. As a matter of fact, there’s no evidence that they have it. There is no evidence. Israel claims they do not have it and our government doesn’t. I don’t want them to get a weapon. But I think what we’re doing is encouraging them to have a weapon because they feel threatened. If you look at a map of Iran, we have 45 bases around their country, plus our submarines.

The Iranians can’t possibly attack anybody. And we’re worrying about the possibility of one nuclear weapon. Now, just think about the Cold War. The Soviets had 30,000 of them. And we talked to them. The Soviets killed 100 million people and the Chinese, and we worked our way out of it.”

CATEGORIES: Iran | Ron Paul |

Wednesday February 22, 2012

“We call pre-emptive war ‘preventive war.’ Well, that’s an aggressive war.”

“But because now we have accepted now for 10 years that we’re allowed to start war, we call pre-emptive war, preventive war. Well, that’s an aggressive war. I believe in the Christian just war theory that you have to morally justify the wars in defense. Now, if we’re defending our country—and we need to defend, believe me—with men and women will be in combat and defending our country, and that’s the way it should be. But when it’s an offensive war, going where we shouldn’t be, that’s quite a bit different. So it’s the foreign policy that needs to be examined.”

CATEGORIES: American Exceptionalism | Ron Paul | War on Terror |

Wednesday February 22, 2012

“The program today endorses the illegal problems.”

“But the federal government does have a responsibility for these borders. And I just hate to see all these resources—I think that we should have much more immigration service on the border to make it easier—it’s hard to even get to visit this country. We’re losing a lot of visitors and workers that could come to this country because we have an inefficient immigration service.

And then that invites the illegal. We can’t endorse the illegal, but the program today endorses the illegal problems. And a weak economy is always detrimental, too, because of the welfare state. We have welfare at home and some jobs go begging, we have jobs going begging in this country in the midst of the recession, has to do with the economy.

You can’t ignore the economy. But also the welfare state, allowing immigrants to come over and then get the benefits—if you subsidize something, you get more of. So there’s a lot we can do and should do and certainly this president is not doing a very good job.”

CATEGORIES: Immigration | Ron Paul |

Wednesday February 22, 2012

“We reward illegal immigration. They get benefits.”

“...the best way to [deal the the US-Mexico border] is forget about the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan and deal with our borders, put our resources on this border. This is what we need. But we need to change the rules. We reward illegal immigration. They get benefits, Texas hospitals, and, you know, schools are going bankrupt.

The restraints on the states, and Obama’s restraints on the states to deal with it. Why is it if an illegal comes across the border and they go on private property, why isn’t that trespassing? And why don’t you have the right to stop it? So but there should be no mandates from the federal government about what you must do under the 9th and 10th. There would be essentially none.”

CATEGORIES: Immigration | Ron Paul |

Thursday January 26, 2012

“The way we’re handling our borders is actually hurting our economy.”

“You can’t deal with immigration without dealing with the economy. The weaker the economy, the more resentment there is when illegals come in. If you have a healthy, vibrant economy, it’s not a problem; we’re usually looking for workers.

Even under today’s circumstances, a lot of businesses are looking for workers and they don’t have them. They’re not as well-trained here.

But also, the way we’re handling our borders is actually hurting our economy because the businesspeople—you know, visitors have a hard time coming in. I mean, we don’t have a well-managed border. So I think we need more resources and I think most of the other candidates would agree we need more resources. But where are the resources going to come from?

I have a suggestion. I think we spend way too much time worrying about the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Use some of those resources on our own border. ”

CATEGORIES: Immigration | Ron Paul |

Monday January 23, 2012

“...our system really gives us a way to be more generous.”

“Yes, my answer is similar, but a little bit different, because at the national level, obviously we have to have one language. I mean, we can’t have multiple languages. So, for legal reasons, we would have one language.

But our system really gives us a way to be more generous, because if Florida wanted to have some ballots in Spanish, I certainly wouldn’t support a federal law that would prohibit Florida from accommodating a city election or a local election or a state election. I think that’s the magnificence of our system, where you can solve some of these problems without dictating one answer for all states. But nationally, we should have one language.”

CATEGORIES: Immigration | Ron Paul |

Monday January 23, 2012

“We don’t have the money. We have too many wars.”

“I think he’s wrong about World War II, I think the people were ready because we did it properly. We declared it and we won it quickly.

But, not the people are not ready. We don’t have any money. We have too many wars. We — the people want to come home and they certainly don’t want a hot war in Iran right now and I — I think that would be the most foolish thing in the world to do right now is take on Iran.”

CATEGORIES: Iran | Ron Paul |

Monday January 23, 2012

“We’re blockading them…so the act of war has already been committed.”

“Because the question was, you know, would you go to war? And Mitt said he would — he would go to war. But you have to think about the preliminary act that might cause them to want to close the Straits of Hormuz, and that’s the blockade. We’re blockading them. Can you imagine what we would do if somebody blockaded the Gulf of Mexico? That would be an act of war. So the act of war has already been committed and this is a retaliation.

But besides, there’s no interest whatsoever for Iran to close the Straits of Hormuz. I mean they need it as much as we do. I mean so you have to put that into perspective. But this whole idea that — that it’s — we — we have to go to war because we’ve already committed an act by blockading the country…”

CATEGORIES: Iran | Ron Paul |