Ron Paul did not say the U.S. invited the 9/11 attacks
I see this pop up on blogs (and even in some newspapers, which one would assume know better), and it's kind of irritating to see a lie repeated over an over, as if it will become the truth.
He said (and I quote):
"Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there; we've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East -- I think Reagan was right. We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics."
Let me give an analogy. Let's say a little girl is visiting Yellowstone, and she is mauled by a bear. One park ranger insists that bears are inherently evil, and should be hunted down and exterminated.
Another ranger disagrees, saying:
"Have you ever read the reasons bears attack humans? They attack us because people feed them, and they associate humans with food and seek them out. We don't understand that wild animals are not pets."
Is this blaming the child for being attacked? Is this blaming the majority of park visitors, who heed the warning signs to not feed the bears? I would say it does not. Instead, it is giving helpful information about how to avoid future attacks. Much like the warning signs in parks, Paul believes the U.S. would be better off if we follow the Constitution rather than ignoring it.
Of course, not feeding bears and not occupying foreign countries only helps most of the time. Sometimes you have to hunt down a vicious bear and shoot it, and sometimes you have to invade a foreign country to protect your own. It's interesting that Paul actually voted for the invasion of Afghanistan, which indicates that he knows the difference between non-intervention and pacifism.