Hand in the Hornet's Nest

I found this analogy from the Borg Blog to be extremely humorous, yet an accurate reflection of history and present positions:

How Recent and Would-Be American Presidents Would Deal With A Hornet's Nest

Jimmy Carter - Pretend it’s not there, and run like hell if they sting.

Ronald Reagan - Work to undermine the foundation of the evil nest, support the efforts of good bees, and swat the hell out of the hornets if they do attack.

George H.W. Bush - Swat the hell out of the hornets when they cross into another’s yard, and then contain them. Poke at them from time to time for good measure.

Bill Clinton - Find a small hornet nest that doesn’t threaten us and try to build a bird’s nest in its place. Take away their aspirin but not their leader if they do attack.

George W. Bush - Compromise pursuit of attacking hornet and stick hand into a different hornet nest, and then insert another. Ask for more hands to stick in nest when it grows bigger.

Rudy Giuliani/John McCain - “We need ten more hands now! Four for the one we are already in and two each for the other three nests that are looking at us funny.”

Hillary Clinton/Mitt Romney - “What will play best with my base now?” When all else fails, give free aspirin to all hornets everywhere.

Ron Paul - Calmly pull hand out of hornet nest and keep it out. Cease aiding and abetting potential hornets. Encourage hornets to become constructive honey bees by eliminating restrictions on trade relations. If hornets still attack - and only if they attack - swat the hell out of them.

It is such a refreshingly logical position. As opposed to the tripe we hear from many politicians in regard to foreign policy. I see it in a rather golden light. If we treat others how we would like to be treated, they are more likely to treat us right, or at least leave us alone. Simple, right? Safety is more likely in the absence of aggression.

Yet we seem to be paranoid. I liken it to this situation - my own little analogy from my own little world :-).

Johnny lives down the street. Johnny is mean. Some people who remind me of him hurt me. I'm scared. So I'm going to go and take care of him right away. I've staked out a tent in his yard. As soon as he looks like he's doing something suspicious, I'll sling a rock at him. Some other friends have joined me. So far we've wounded him thrice and broken several windows in his house. Naturally he and his family are rather upset, and fighting back. Some more friends are trying to teach them how to change their ways, so they'll be nice. They also want to fix the windows and help Johnny's parents to raise better children who get along. Johnny and his family want us to leave, but we feel like we have to stay until they have better relationships, and things are all fixed up. Lots of other people want us to leave too. They say that we are violating his rights. I guess I thought only nice people had rights...

Surely the situation is more complicated, you say. And my analogy is not perfect. But our problem is that we are crowding out the simple truth by our "complications". We ourselves have no "right" to invade another country which has not attacked us (Iraq is not responsible for 911), just because they "might". Indeed, if we take away their reasons for doing so (our presence), we are more likely to live at peace with the Middle East and the world.

We certainly have more of a chance if we elect Ron Paul. And I haven't even scratched the surface of the reasons why.