To be honest, I can't help but think that Ron Paul's economic policies would actually cause more war, or at least heighten an incentive to go to war. The reason being is, he would initially be giving big business the right-of-way to do whatever (and wars can be very profitable for certain companies). Lest we forget that the US was imperialist while on the gold standard, and I highly doubt a gold standard would prevent future war. And if it did, then the companies with the incentives to go to war would probably go after the parts of the world where most of the remaining gold is located (they'd probably uproot a couple hundred thousand indigenous peoples in western and southern Africa to get at the lands they live on) or they'd just pour in all this campaign money on a candidate who would end the gold standard.The root of the problem is the fact that we live in a profit-driven system. If markets were based on reciprocity as opposed to snagging as much of the pie as you can, then maybe the incentive wouldn't be there.
If the post you are commenting on is more than 30 days old, your comment will have to await approval before being published. Rest assured, however, that as long as it is not spam, it will be published in due time.