Ron Paul's Foreign Policy

I will be debating against the three wars and his general non-interventionalist foreign policy (it's not really isolationalist). The first round is for acceptance

I do have problems with some of Ron Paul's foreign policy such as how far he takes his non interventionism personally and how far he takes blowback as the main explanation of why the US and other Western countries like the UK are attacked. I do agree that we need to scale back our Empire because of its huge cost. I am generally against nation building as well as some of the wars we have been involved in. If that is not con enough let me know. My main arguments will be against pure non interventionism and blowback as the primary cause of terrorism in the US and other countries as well as some pro points about the war in Afghanistan and POSSIBLE benefits of naval as well as airforce use against Iran IF they really are developing nuclear weapons.

My opponent's arguments and propositions are not what this debate was supposed to be about.

VOTERS: Please do not vote on this debate so it can run into a tie. Again, my resolution was misinterpreted by my opponent and was not the kind of debate he was looking for. Next time, I won't make this an open debate without more resolution.

OVERMIND25: Sorry for my vague resolution and miscommunication.

Ok np

Please do not vote on this voters.

sorry for the mistake I guess no debate no vote

It's alright. It's my fault for not making a clear resolution.

Ron Paul 2012!

Ron Paul 2012! I have a good idea. Do not post your post to Round 5, so that you forfeit, then voters will never see it. Can you do that?