Could Ron Paul’s Iowa Surge Finally Open Up Political Debate On Israel And Iran Attack? – OpEd


By Philip Weiss

Ron Paul is apparently coming on in Iowa, second in two Republican polls, a potential frontrunner. The media blackout may finally be ending. But the Wall Street Journal says Ron Paul’s Iowa race “faces hurdle”:

The problem: Mr. Paul’s anti-interventionist views on foreign policy. “‘That’s probably the hardest part,’ said Mr. Luethje [a volunteer for the Paul campaign], whose regular job is making eyeglasses. ‘A lot of Republicans are of this Christian mind-set that we need to defend Israel.'”

I finally caught up with the attack that mild Bob Schieffer of CBS launched on Ron Paul uncharacteristically on his Sunday morning political show last week, for violating the creed of the new establishment on terrorism and Iran. This is nuts.

Schieffer says angrily that Paul believes that 9/11 happened because of actions the United States took. And Schieffer tells Paul he’s wrong, that no report says that it is the case.

“That’s exactly what the 911 commission said…. our policies definitely had an influence,” Paul says. Then he states, beautifully, the case that they want to do us harm “because we’re free and prosperous” is a dangerous idea.

Schieffer scoffs at the idea that we should “be nicer to Iran’s leaders.”

Paul: “we have 12,000 diplomats. I’m suggesting we ought to use some of them…” The Cuban missile crisis was resolved diplomatically. “We didn’t say we’re going to attack [Soviet Union over Cuba]… the greatest danger for us now is to overreact… Iran doesn’t have a bomb, there’s no proof…”

Schieffer again contradicts Paul, says that no one in our gov’t is threatening military action. “May I correct you. The United States government is not going to attack Iran.”

Paul’s triumph: “But they say, Nothing is off the table.” That means military action.

Glenn Greenwald was on this a week ago, in typical steel-trap fashion:

In this 7-minute clip, Schieffer repeatedly mocks, scoffs at, and displays his obvious contempt for, two claims of Paul’s which virtually no prominent politician of either party would dare express: (1) American interference and aggression in the Muslim world fuels anti-American sentiment and was thus part of the motivation for the 9/11 attack; and (2) American hostility and aggression toward Iran (in the form of sanctions and covert attacks) are more likely to exacerbate problems and lead to war than lead to peaceful resolution, which only dialogue with the Iranians can bring about…


Mondoweiss is a news website devoted to covering American foreign policy in the Middle East, chiefly from a progressive Jewish perspective. Mondoweiss is maintained by Philip Weiss and Adam Horowitz. Weiss lives in New York state and Horowitz lives in New York City.

2 thoughts on “Could Ron Paul’s Iowa Surge Finally Open Up Political Debate On Israel And Iran Attack? – OpEd

  • December 1, 2011 at 4:50 am

    Except for Ron Paul, all the other candidates, including Obama, are offering is the prospect of war with Iran. For the last 20 years, all Iran has heard from the U.S. and other nuclear powers is threats of war. Why wouldn’t Iran want a nuclear weapon to protect itself or level the playing field? Maybe talking might get us farther than saber rattling; it helped us avoid war with nuclear powers like the Soviet Union and China.

    If Iran must be opposed militarily, let a nuclear power like Israel or a coalition of the Gulf states oppose Iran. Iran is oceans and continents away from the United States. Why is American blood and treasure required? We cannot afford it, and we have already lost thousands of young men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    A nation like Iran, that “cannot even provide gasoline” for its people is hardly poised to become an expansionist empire. Our war in Iraq gave Iran more influence in Iraq, and near sovereignty in southern Iraq. We continue to fight in Afghanistan and bomb Pakistan. By destabilizing Iran’s neighbors, U.S. policy is enabling Iranian expansionism. The U.S. policy makers are facilitating the very ends they claim to oppose.

    A re-evaluation of our policies in the Middle East, and toward Iran, is long overdue.

  • December 1, 2011 at 3:57 pm


    Your eloquent highlighting of another of Ron Paul’s humble triumphs with Schieffer against the blithering mainstream media is verbage all of us Ron Paul supporters can agree. But the title of your article is not answered. “Can Ron Paul’s Iowa Surge …”. So far, once I leave the internet I see Ron Paul’s surge fizzing out in less than a week and I see Ron Paul and more importantly his foreign policy views continue to be ignored. Sorry I don’t like it any more than the rest of you. But those are the facts. Even Herman Cain’s surge lasted a month. Sure he polls below Ron Paul now but is that where we set our standard?


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *