What woud Ron Paul do?

Ron Paul has been such an internet phenonemon, so much so the following makes me nervous. I believe it is important to elect leaders with moral values and constitutional principles, but the way many of Paul's supporters place their hope in one man and put him on a pedastal is quite disturbing. With some, it almost borders a type of worship. I do not believe he will ride in on a white horse and single handedly save America. Also, his position on the war and his blaming of America for 9-11 are quite disturbing.

He claims the war is against the founders' principles.

Today's war is not disregarding the founders' foreign policy. Fighting against the Japanese, Germans, and Italians was not a disregard to the founders' ideas. Just as landings on the beaches of Africa, Japanese islands, and Normandy during WWII were not a disregard, and the foreign entanglements against Islamic pirates under the founders' watch were not violations of the founders' intent, and neither is killing terrorists in Iraq. The reason being, I believe, is American interests were at stake. It wasn't as if we were getting involved in foreign entanglements on behalf of foreign countries, but rather to defend America's interest even though the use of force was abroad.

Security of shipping routes near Tripoli under the founders' watch was necessary for America's interests, preventing Hitler, Tojo, and Mussolini from global domination, especially since we were attacked and war was declared on us, was necessary for America's interests, and killing terrorists in the middle east, whether it is Iraq or any other front is necessary for America's interests.
Whether you believe there were WMD in Iraq or not, the fact remains our guys are fighting Al-Qaeda in Iraq right now. Killing Al-Qaeda is in the best interests of America and is necessary for our safety and security.

As evil as Japanese Imperialism, Nazism, and Communism were, even the Japanese who would fight to the death without surrender were able to be brought to surrender. Germans, when defeated, signed surrender treaties, and German commanders cooperated with American commanders at the end of the war. Communists were able to be negotiated with, although the threat of severe force was part of it, they were able to negotiate. Although evil, they were able to be firmly negotiated with and the Cold War was won without firing a shot.

However, this type of surrender or negotiating can never happen with Islamofascists. They, even moreso than the Japanese, will fight to the death. They will not give in, surrender, or compromise. Therefore, the only way to defeat them is to kill them. It is not to understand them and do what they want and hope they won't attack again. It is not to listen to OBL tapes and wonder what would not have happened if only we did something different within their wishes. It is not to listen to their demands and comply to avoid futher attacks. It is to kill them.

What would Ron Paul do? If he would get our guys out of Iraq without cutting and running, what is his plan? Has he given any idea? I haven't heard any. Nancy Pelosi shrieked her foreign policy on Iraq was to get out of Iraq. Nothing was elaborated. Similarly, Paul said we need to be out of Iraq, but I have not heard any elaboration as to what he would do if he were elected. Has anyone else?

Would he be able to reach an honorable withdraw like Nixon did with Vietnam and could he gaurantee his efforts wouldn't be undercut by Dems and lead to soldiers having died in vain? We keep hearing to learn from our past mistakes. We also keep hearing how Iraq is the new Vietnam. Nixon got our guys out of Vietnam honorable, but then Saigon fell due to the congressional Dems. Would this happen again with Iraq?

Does anyone know what Ron Paul would do?