Now it's hilarious.
Here's Mr. Larison again. (Scroll down to his update if you are still keeping tabs.) Let me bold his key phrases that repeatedly result in his chasing-his-tail posts.
"Monroe held that the U.S. would regard any attempt to extend a monarchical system into our hemisphere as an unfriendly act, because Monroe and Adams were aware that the Restoration monarchies were actively suppressing liberal and republican governments in Europe. The fear was…"
1. According to Ron Paul Doctrine…who was Monroe to hold anything about any country outside U.S. borders? Blowback, don't you know? So immediately Larison admits that Monroe was sticking the American nose in a place it didn't belong.
2. The U.S. would regard? Again, under the Paul Doctrine we are to stay within our own borders – period. It is not for the U.S. to "regard" anything going on in a foreign country.
3. "Our hemisphere"? Who died and gave the Western Hemisphere to James Monroe? Or the United States? Under the Ron Paul Doctrine the U.S. has no right whatsoever to think of the Western Hemisphere as "ours."
4. "Unfriendly act?" Did Canada invade the U.S.? Peru? Russia? Persia? Invasion, under the Paul Doctrine, would be an unfriendly act. Anything else is not our business – we don't intervene there, they don't intervene here.
5. Restoration monarchies were "actively suppressing" governments in Europe? The answer of the Paul Doctrine would be …. "So what?" Not our business. The "fear was"? What fear? That Restoration monarchies were going to invade the United States? If Iran can't attack America in 2011, how could "Restoration monarchies" invade America in the 1820s? Monroe and company were just neocon paranoids according to the Paul Doctrine.
The problem here is obvious.
Mr. Larison cannot apply his Ron Paul doctrines retroactively without looking foolish. And trying to apply them today is more than foolish -- it's dangerous.
Share this Article
Like this Article
Print this ArticlePrint Article