Q: Wouldn't leaving Iraq be a propaganda victory for bin Laden?
Paul: Everything is much worse if we stay. Right now they're very content to bleed us in Iraq. Bleed us financially and by killing Americans. We lose lives, we spend money we don't have, it furthers our financial crisis. The longer we're there, the stronger Al Qaeda gets. Our being there is the greatest incentive conceivable to help Osama bin Laden. The evidence is very clear. There's more Al Qaeda now than before. Which means we're in greater danger of being hit by terrorists than before.
Besides, who are the people telling us there'll be problems if we leave? The same ones who said it would be a cakewalk. What kind of credibility do they have?
Q: You talk about limiting the size of government. How much of the Pentagon's budget would you ax?
Paul: We are now spending close to a trillion dollars a year, when you add up every single thing we do overseas. You could start off easily cutting $100 billion. Bring the troops home, you could save $200 billion the next year. And maybe $250 billion the year after that.
Quit paying to blow up bridges in Iraq and then paying to rebuild them. Bring that money home. Our bridges are falling down. Our levees are falling down. The only way we can get enough money is by stopping this insane foreign policy of running this empire that we can't afford. Policing the world? It's impossible.
~ Congressman Ron Paul, "Ron Paul: A Republican Takes the Lead Against the War," Rolling Stone, November 14, 2007, by Tim Dickinson