printThe excerpt is from “Is Ron Paul Good For Israel?”, my latest WND.COM column:
“In 2007, the Ron Paul presidential campaign commissioned a short position piece from me concerning the congressman and Israel. In discussion with Dr. Paul’s then-campaign managers, I had ventured that to forge ahead as a viable candidate, Rep. Paul would need to convince the enormously powerful Christian Right that he was not hostile to Israel. For America’s Evangelicals—and not the puny AIPAC (American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee) often invoked derisively by libertarians—are Israel’s most powerful political lobbyists.
The truth is that libertarians consider Israel a bit of a vexation. As a principled libertarian and an unapologetic Zionist, I have strived to navigate these shoals without resorting to special pleading. … The time is ripe, then, to publish ‘Unshackling Israel,’ the piece I penned for Dr. Paul back in December of 2007…”
The complete column is “Is Ron Paul Good For Israel?”, now on WND.COM.
My new book, Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa, can be pre-ordered from the publisher. Shipping is currently free. Follow the “Buy” links on the page. The Amazon account will be activated shortly.
UPDATE (May 14): Actually, I am unsure what readers mean when they assert that I must have “investigated” Ron Paul and certified him as a friend of Israel, whatever that means. Nothing of the sort. I have no idea what Ron Paul feels or thinks about Israel. The good news is that Paul’s First Principles are all I need to know about. And I do know these; these are sound. With the kind of First Principles Paul holds, he will be good for America, first and foremost, which means he will not be meddling with other countries, which, inadvertently, means he will let Israel conduct its own affairs.
Here is another thing I know: Paul understands that an American president will have a tough time currying favor with Americans if he tilts wildly toward the crazy Palestinians. Americans are generally pro-Israel. Simple. If Paul starts exculpating suicide bombers in Israel, it’s over. That’s the way Americans roll.
A cogent, well thought-out article. Ignoring the irrational and emotional defenses usually put up by big-government types to justify dumping billions of dollars into the Israeli government apparatus, Dr. Paul instead rightly proposes that U.S. foreign aid shackles Israel to a fickle and shifting (and sometimes incoherent) U.S. foreign policy. This often results in Israel being forced to make (or not make) decisions that are inherently a weakening force on the security of the State of Israel. Likewise, denying much greater amounts of U.S. foreign aid to Israel’s enemies strengthens Israeli safety and security, in that it prevents the enrichment of dictators who use anti-Israeli policies to strengthen their own internal political apparatus. As long as Dr. Paul’s views are not properly and openly vetted in the media, all we will be able to debate are simplistic jingoistic propaganda that fails to analyse the issue rationally and fairly- to the detriment of U.S. security!
The STATIST is always ready to “help”: the poor, the sick, the elderly, the children, the immigrant, the workingman, the farmer, Israel, Taiwan, Korea, Vietnam, the student, the professor, the doctor, …. and the “help” generally appears to be of nominal expense or even “free”…. the price that comes from becoming dependent on the empowered Rumpelstiltskin Leviathan Loanshark Devil is almost always hidden …. and later it is often “They came for ‘A’ but I was not ‘A’ so I was silent, then they came for ‘B’… and when they came for me, there was no one left to speak up”
For those who take their Bible literally, “aid” to Israel is covered in Deuteronomy 15:6 and it is in favor of Ron Paul’s foreign policy:
http://net.bible.org/#!bible/Deuteronomy+15
A non-interventionist foreign policy not only removes the corrupting influence on Israel and the propping up of their own statists but also would remove the corrupting influence on the Moslems, the Palestinian Authority, and the farcical “peace process”. Something more realistic might emerge as opposed to either the farcical “peace process” or the alternative idiotic notion that pre-emptive attacks constitutes a viable general “solution” to Moslem demagogues in 57 countries.
I am, however, vastly less optimistic about Ron Paul’s chances of winning in 2012. The military-industrial-banking-academia-media-lobbying “establishment” will never permit him to come close. He will receive a thrashing an order of magnitude worse than Barry Goldwater got in 1964.
Goldwater: “I once said that if I believed all I heard on television and radio that was said about me, I would have voted against the S.O.B. myself”
http://books.google.com/books?id=a-MCAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA65&lpg=PA65&dq=Goldwater+%22if+I+believed+all+I+heard%22&source=bl&ots=MZwaTJRz1c&sig=9ABsfg-w8Vrb-Dn7XkdqFignuLQ&hl=en&ei=3QXNTY63Iujf0QHknYXuDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Goldwater%20%22if%20I%20believed%20all%20I%20heard%22&f=false
Thank you for publishing this column. I am a fan of Dr. Paul also and I have been uncomfortable with his position on foreign aid to Israel. I just assumed that he was really anti-Israel. I also know that foreign aid comes with heavy strings attached and that Israel would be much better off without those strings. I am glad that he does believe that Israel has a right to exist. I ordered your new book yesterday and I am looking forward to reading it.
Your article is well written. As an evangelical I appreciate the strong bond between the US and Israel. As one who may have a Jewish heritage the bond is even stronger.
I know that the term foreign get used quite a bit but am not clear on exactly what it means. For example would the money supplied by the US to help Israel develop the Arrow II interceptor be considered foreign aid?
I believe you are right that Israel would be the ultimately be ahead of the game if we stopped giving foreign aid to all of its hostile neighbors as well. In general private donations are more effective and in this case worth more dollars and sheckels.
As a member of the Christian religious right I strongly concur that we are some of Israel’s staunchest supporters. I’m not quite sure about Mr Paul yet, as a candidate, but I do believe he is a supporter of Israel. I especially like his position on ending foreign aid. Of course such an onslaught of radical logic will be more than “Doofus Americanis” ,the American voter, will be able to digest. I don’t think he will get the nomination or get elected if he does but it will be interesting to see how it goes.
I doubt that you will publish this on your blog as I dare criticize you. I am usually in agreement with you on most issues, but like a typical “exilic” Jew, you support a con like Paul who compares Gaza to a “concentration camp.” Anyone who compares Israel to the Nazis is a Jew-hater. Simple. End of argument. And your shameless support of him, shows your delusional imagination that Paul is a “friend” of Israel. No, he is not a friend. He is a fiend for Israel. That is why Paul attracts so many anti-Israeli “folks.”
http://www.rjchq.org/Newsroom/newsdetail.aspx?id=4591a632-529b-4dc7-bce6-ae848eb7a064
I am not in support of American aid to Israel as it is like a pusher selling dope to a junkie. Israel will survive on its own or it will dissolve into the Mediterranean Sea. But you shame yourself as a Jew with your blathering support of Paul vis-a-vis Israel. Like all candidates who seek the Jewish vote, he will moderate himself. If he ever became president, Israel would be target number one on his list – not Egypt, not Pakistan, not any Muslim nation. You forget one thing – Israel is a Nation that stands alone. And nothing that you say or write about will change that.
@ Steven,
So you agree that foreign aid to Israel is detrimental to their ability to act as a sovereign nation, but the fact that Ron Paul advocates elimination of aid for all countries makes him a “fiend” to Israel? Huh?
Israel would be “target number one” in a Paul administration? A rather harsh accusation. Care to provide some sort of evidence to back up your assertion? Please cite quotations from the man. He’s been giving speeches and writing articles and books for 30 plus years. If he’s an enemy of Israel, I’m sure you can enlighten us.
As for the “concentration camp” characterization, a bunch of Palestinians were forced out of their homes, are packed in like sardines, and have no freedom of travel or trade with the outside world. Sounds like a concentration camp to me. Am I missing something?
Steven:
You best take a couple of relaxants. The Liberals and the Conservatives both hate Ron Paul and lie about him all the time. I just read an article in my local newspaper by a Liberal (Richard Reeves) who dismissed Ron Paul because; “Saw no reason that prostitution or heroin should not be legal playthings” A far cry from, “The Constitution doesn’t give the government the authority to create laws against… A refugee camp is a concentration camp, it’s where you concentrate refugees. It’s not like they have all of Jordan to wander in is it. Now, the question comes up, of how many of the people in Gaza and the West Bank are really refugees and who is doing the concentrating. But, if you haven’t figured out that Ron Paul is the most lied about person in Congress by now. You probably won’t. Ilana doesn’t need me to defend her and I won’t [why not? Everyone needs defenders]; but, I would point out to you that she stated at the beginning of the article at WND that she had personally investigated Ron Paul before she wrote the article, because she did not want to say something that was untrue. [Did I say In investigated Paul?]
The “Republican Jewish Coalition” (RJC) are “friends of Israel” the same way that those who advocate for welfare are “friends of poor people” and those who lobby for student loans to send marginal students to get drunk taking useless courses at overpriced colleges are “friends of education” ….
I don’t see how those “friends” are helping Israel unless turning it into a corrupt dependent of the whims of the State Department constitute “help”. Maybe Ron Paul made some comments that are exaggerated but then the RJC and people like David Horowitz have done far worse.
“In discussion with Dr. Paul’s then-campaign managers, I had ventured that to forge ahead as a viable candidate” would imply that you checked him out before you wrote the piece. Not only that but, the managers would not allow or pay you to write something that would make him look like a hypocrite.
Amen and Bravo. The clearest, most Biblical and cogent solution out there.