This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Ron Paul: "A War Based On Lies Cannot Be Fixed With Another War"
Submitted by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,
Twelve years ago last week, the US launched its invasion of Iraq, an act the late General William Odom predicted would turn out to be “the greatest strategic disaster in US history.”
Before the attack I was accused of exaggerating the potential costs of the war when I warned that it could end up costing as much as $100 billion. One trillion dollars later, with not one but two “mission accomplished” moments, we are still not done intervening in Iraq.
President Obama last year ordered the US military back into Iraq for the third time. It seems the Iraq “surge” and the Sunni “Awakening,” for which General David Petraeus had been given much credit, were not as successful as was claimed at the time. From the sectarian violence unleashed by the US invasion of Iraq emerged al-Qaeda and then its more radical spin-off, ISIS. So Obama sent the US military back.
We recently gained even more evidence that the initial war was sold on lies and fabrications. The CIA finally declassified much of its 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, which was the chief document used by the Bush Administration to justify the US attack. According to the Estimate, the US Intelligence Community concluded that:
'[W]e are unable to determine whether [biological weapons] agent research has resumed...' And: 'the information we have on Iraqi nuclear personnel does not appear consistent with a coherent effort to reconstitute a nuclear weapons program.'
But even as the US Intelligence Community had reached this conclusion, President Bush told the American people that Iraq, "possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons" and "the evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program."
Likewise, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s “bulletproof” evidence that Saddam Hussein had ties with al-Qaeda was contradicted by the National Intelligence Estimate, which concluded that there was no operational tie between Hussein’s government and al-Qaeda.
Even National Security Advisor Condolezza Rice’s famous statement that the aluminum tubes that Iraq was purchasing "are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs, centrifuge programs," and "we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud," was based on evidence she must have known at the time was false. According to the NIE, the Energy Department had already concluded that the tubes were "consistent with applications to rocket motors" and "this is the more likely end use."
It is hard to believe that in a society supposedly governed by the rule of law, US leaders can escape any penalty for using blatantly false information – that they had to know at the time was false – to launch a pre-emptive attack on a country that posed no threat to the United States. The fact that they got away with it simply makes it all the easier for Washington’s interventionists to try the same tricks again. They already did with Libya and Syria. It is likely they are also doing the same with claims of a Russian “invasion” of Ukraine.
Last week President Obama correctly blamed the current chaos in Iraq on the Bush Administration’s decision to invade. He said, “… ISIL is a direct outgrowth of al Qaeda in Iraq that grew out of our invasion. Which is an example of unintended consequences. Which is why we should generally aim before we shoot.”
However, if the US intervention in Iraq created the “unintended consequences” of ISIS and al-Qaeda, how is it that more US intervention can solve the problem?
A war based on lies cannot be fixed by launching another war. We must just march home. And stay home.
»
- 16362 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Empires are not good at that.
Ron Paul deserves the Nobel Peace Prize.
Obama is the Emporer who wears no clothes.
Ron Paul speaks truth to power, always has, and it causes a slander-filled backlash amongst the corrupt.
Rand Paul cups the balls & strokes the shaft of the corrupt.
* * *
Ron Paul: The ‘Thomas Paine’ of the 21st CenturyRon Paul is basing his commentary on his belief that the U.S. invasion of Iraq was an expensive failure. For the New World Order handlers of Bush and Obama, everything has gone according to plan. The purpose of these endless wars was to create a political environment that would allow the government to nullify the Bill of Rights. Mission accomplished. Just look at the Boston Bombing false flag operation. There is a Truth Seeker video on YouTube showing Tamerlan Tsarnaev being arrested by the Boston police, handcuffed and being put in a police car. Later, his family released pictures of Tsarnaev, looking as if he had been tortured before being shot multiple times. Nazi propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels pushed the Big Lie. Bush 43 (whose grandfather, Senator Preston Bush was in line to be charged with treason during WW2 for his pro-Nazi business transactions in Switzerland, but was saved by Roosevelt's sudden but expected death) followed Goebbels' Big Lie policy. Obummer is one Big Lie, his entire C.V. a creation of the New World Order. Life is now cheap in the USA, just as it was in Nazi Germany. Instead of a Nazi-type Night of the Long Knives to exterminate opponents, we have a series of bizarre deaths of people like Michael Hastings, who know too much. Next, don't be surprised if Obummer arranges for his IS mercenaries, hardened sadistic killers all, to get paroled into America to work as hitmen for the dark cores of the FBI and CIA.
Exactly. It is a failure based on measurements that assume the goal was to benefit the republic. Based on the ZWO goal of destroying the republic and eroding freedoms, it was a major success.
Similar ro people calling the Federal Reserve a failure. It is only a failure based on its STATED goals, but is wildly successful in it's true mission which is to enrich the bankster cabal that owns and operates it.
Mr. Paul you are either with us, or you are with the terrorists.
You are either with us or against the terrorists....
FLASHBACK:
General Wesley Clark : “We’re going to take out 7 countries in 5 years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan & Iran..”
http://www.globalresearch.ca/we-re-going-to-take-out-7-countries-in-5-ye...
So it really depends on the definition of "fixed", because the Neocon ZWO agenda is to destroy the mideast based on the political consent manufactured by the 911 New Pearl Harbor false flag.
See Securing the Realm, PNAC or Netanyahu for details.
I'm making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do... www.globe-report.com
"...I suck donkey dicks for a living."
When do the US pay their trillions of reparations to the Iraqi people?
Ron Paul's financial ideas are interesting, but his foreign policy ideas are naive.
Yeah, we fukked up Iraq. But pulling out willy-nilly won't make things better.
IMO, we should've removed Saddam, but not de-Ba'athified the country.
"we should've removed Saddam"
He was what was keeping that shithole together and he was no threat.
Fuck you Dollarmedes
This country was formed with a chief complaint being intervention in foreign affairs; you fuck with Ron Paul you fuck with me.
that kind of logic always cracks me up. Calling for boots on the ground, not pulling out all "willy-nilly". We spent 10 years there, left the country in ruins. Now its not safe in the country, ISIS keeps taking ground, the Iraqi military is in shambles and ineffective, and there is sectarian violence all over the place. So exactly would troops on the ground again accomplish?
I did say we fukked it up.
We could take the opposite approach and ask, if we pulled out every last troop from the region now, what would that accomplish?
I don't think peace would spontaneously break out.
"I don't think peace would spontaneously break out"
That is not relevent, you are missing the point. The point is that it was none of our business in the first place. We went in there, killed hundreds of thousands of people, most of them non combatants, and displaced millions of people in a country that posed no threat to the US whatsoever. Oh, and wasted trillions of taxpayer dollars, which was either stolen through taxation, or borrowed, or printed into existance, making us all poorer in the process. That place has been a war torn mess for centuries, you are correct, but we have made it immeasurably worse by our constant meddling. If they want to lie like its the middle ages and tear each other to pieces, that is their business, not ours. It is not worth our money, and it is especially not worth the blood and lives of our young people
The time for moral arguments was before the war was waged. Sorry, but that ship sailed a while ago, and no amount of hand-wringing will reverse time. Now, the situation is what it is.
The relevant question is, what to do about the current situation? I'm not sure that Ron Paul's idea of pulling everyone out will make anything better. Or, if you think the moral arguments outweigh EVERY other concern, then be prepared to close your eyes tightly if the shit hits the fan. However bad it is now, I can imagine it quite a lot worse.
It is ALWAYS a good time to have a moral agruement, especially when you are on the wrong track and doing the wrong things.
The cultural separation between middle east rule of strength and western rule of law will not be resolved diplomatically, nor will it be solved by invasion. We would be much better off to keep our cultures separate and only have arms length dealings. American intervention overseas is doomed to fail every where that our cultural values are not shared. If the middle eastern peoples want to kill each other we should let them. they are not worth our money or our blood.
Yes, and we should stop all Muslim immigration immediately and spend the money otherwise spent on foreign wars on finally closing our borders
He had invaded both Iran and Kuwait, had gassed the Kurds and Shia in the South, and held onto chemical weapons in violation of the ceasefire to end the 1st Gulf War. He was corrupting the other members of the sanction nations with oil bribes, and the sanctions regime was about to fall.
Was he a threat? Impossible to say.
But his track record didn't inspire confidence. The purpose for NOT de-Ba'athifying Iraq would've been to remove only the figurehead but keep the power base in place. Another strongman could've risen to the top (or been picked by the US), and the country would've been stable...with the warning that they weren't beyond retribution.
Just shut the fuck up for a couple years, read and learn.
If you have a specific argument to make, then make it. Otherwise, you are an ankle-biting retard who can only resort to name-calling because of limited intellectual capacity.
AssFire.
Do you have any intellectual capacity? Impossible to say.
But your track record doesn't inspire confidence.
LOL Isn't that clever? The monkey can imitate.
Sorry monkey, I don't have a track record. It wasn't me who declared war, it wasn't me who pulled the troops out, and it's not me sending them back now. What is YOUR track record, monkey?
Sorry monkey
and earlier
an ankle-biting retard who can only resort to name-calling
(Too bad I didn't save the line some poster had written here recently about "self-detonating arguments")
Yes, you were very careful not to name-call. You just implied it, without making any further arguments.
So here's another chance: what do you think will happen if all troops are removed? Are there good reasons to pursue this strategy? Do you have anything of substance to add?
Oh look, the low IQ shill is giving you another chance. How generous. lol
A good statist's arguing:
Ignore all the run-up to the current situation ("what difference does it make at this time?"),
jump straight into the middle of a complex circumstance,
do not state any opinion of how you would approach it, only imply things by asking quasi-rhetorical oversimplified questions,
do not define what the goals are or should be,
do not explicitly spell out any argument foundation ("I believe we all agree on 1. ...., 2. ...., n. ....")
and demand your opposition to explain how to quickly and cleanly untangle the mess!
So here's another chance:
Add enough of substance to my points mentioned here, and I will try to answer your questions as good as I can.
'Twelve years ago last week, the US launched its invasion of Iraq, an act the late General William Odom predicted would turn out to be “the greatest strategic disaster in US history.”'
.
Of course it was General Will, i am dOom...because when you got the fucking original unedited script in your hands and/or your puppet master(s) are writing it as we go - take your pick - you know its going to be the 'greastest strategic diasaster in US history' u cunt.
yes, and it was YOU, USA that was egging him on to invade Iran and you were selling him the same weapons to gas the Kurds and YOU(USA) had NO problem with him either gassing the Kurds and/or invading Iran so dont be the hypocrate you obviously are to drag out those facts.
and YOU(USA) were buddies with him so dont be the obvious hypocrate and cal him a threat while selling him weapons you PIECE OF HYPOCRATICAL SHIT.
If we had no problem with him gassing Kurds, then why did we deny him those weapons in the ceasefire, along with enforcing no-fly zones over the north and south of Iraq to stop attack helicopters?
As to pre-war, yes, we egged him on to attack Iran. That part is true.
It was the Kuwait business that was too much.
Dollarmedes, Good Lord, you are so naive. Saddam was practically invited to invade Kuwait by April Gillespie with her convoluted messages.
I remember her being a moron, but are you implying she was instructed to entice Saddam to invade? That's a bit far-fetched for me to believe, as I am not partial to conspiracy theories.
I suppose this is the point where the international Jewish conspiracy either wanted Saddam gone, or wanted Iraq's oil or both.
Now you're getting silly. I doubt she was instructed but she certainly wasn't instructed to deliver a clear message explaining consequences. As for the oil and Jewish interests I simply do not know. There were reports however, Saddam was rewarding the families of suicide bombers, (a frequent event then), some $25,000 for each incident. Not a good way to earn Jewish gratitude.
"...wasn't instructed to deliver a clear message explaining consequences."
Yes, but that's not proof (or indication, really) of ill intent. It can easily be explained as a mistake, or that she was incompetent. Maybe she had a bad day, or didn't have her morning coffee; who knows? There's a million reasons she might not have threatened Saddam, none of which require some devious motive. Your post seemed to imply some purpose behind her actions. Otherwise, how could my reading of it be naive? It's the simplest interpretation.
Dollarmede, I really admire the nuanced twists you follow to reach a simple interpretation of history. By all means let's examine the records of the time (they're all over the net). Saddam was either a very foolish man (despite his bringing order to a very difficult part of the world) or he was naively led into an invasion designed to crush his army and power. Look for images of Saddam and Rumsfeldt happily engaged and even your acceptance of him as a U.S. lapdog invading Iran. Look for Gillespies records and ask ourselves how such a man could be very foolish or easily led into such a destructive move. If foolish, why was he not warned? If led, why would he warned? A million or more died horrible deaths as a result of lusts for power and to what end? Clear lines should point to all of those responsible.
Let's not forget saddams syphoning or he Oil for Fooe program ran by the incompetent UN. Not to mention our "allies" France, Germany and China were giving weapons to saddam in violation of UN sanction.
If our allies would've joined us like they did in the first gulf war the insurgency would never have taken hold and Iraq would be a positive influence for Muslims to live in a Democracy and not a theocracy.
But I will agree that Ron Paul is correct in understanding the founders fears of foreign entanglements.
Avoiding foreign entanglements is a good general policy, but is difficult in practice especially in the modern world when rapid travel makes the world much smaller.
The US engaged in the 1st Barbary War from 1801-1805, only 25 years after the Declaration of Independence was signed. The marines attacked Tripoli because of Muslim pirate raids and their demands for either tribute from the US (bribes), or ransom of enslaved US sailors. 25 short years, and we were already entangled.
Sure, we can pull all US troops out of foreign lands. There's no reason to believe the world will leave us alone after that.
So what? Why the fuck should we care? Now if he he did any of that to Seattle or Cleveland, then we should nuke the whole of his country first into a smoking glass hole then any why whould he have done that?
He was what was keeping that shithole together and he was no threat.
He was selling his Oil in Euros and Unce Sam didn't like that!
Same shit with Gaddafi, he advertised his Oil for Gold-Dinar only. The gold hasn't been seen since!
Is that you John McCain?
Would somebody please tell that fck-Stick Obama to say ISIS like everyone else.
What if ISIL is not "unintended consequences"?
When the US invaded Iraq they destroyed all the Infrastructure with the exception of the Oil Ministry and the Oil Wells / Pipelines.
They wanted to destroy the Iraqi society and industrial capability so that Iraq would not burn the US oil.
It was nothing to do with Democracy or freedom.
If ISIL goes rampaging across the entire Middle East it just makes it more likley that domestic ME consumption will get hammered.
Unintended? Maybe. Maybe Not.
FWIW any comments about how the US "fucked up" in Iraq are a bit simple. If the US government doesn't give a rat's ass about it's own people, why would you expect the US to fly thousands of miles and spend Billions of dollars to help some poor scmucks on the other side of the planet. Seriously, can we drop this shit?!
Ron Paul, the only way to stop the insanity in Washington is to have a referendum removing all power from congress and POTUS and replacing it with a different system and new people.
If the majority of voters in the country vote for true change this may occur and a referendum can be done without DC's permission.
@ cherry picker
No disrespect sir/madam a democratic referendum would require violent revolution in the first instance AND,
the ROW can't hold their breath for another hundred years awaiting on the heavily sedated citizens of the USSA to ' get a grip '.
Let's see what's on the BOX tonight:-
Honey Boo Boo S15, Ep7, the alcohol years
Kimmy Kard does LA
Reality Sucks 1V
Titty Ops Gone Wrong and
Coma 9
think it'll have to be Coma 9 sweetheart as that guy lying motionless for 2 straight hours is mighty fine acting.
March home, stay home, and mind our own fucking business.
It has to be true I read it on a Blimp and an Overpass!
What glory or honor in a war based on lies? Do good intentions outweigh stupidity?
"The road to hell is paved with good intentions," needs be updated to the Road to Hell is paved with lies. Imagine dying for a lie. Imagine living and dying a lie. Now, know, not imagine. Who defines glory? Your master?
It would be great to end the proxy wars, stop nation building, and quit arming 7th century savages with 21st century weaponry...and the stop fake money that pays for it all
Correct. The real question is, who will do it?
the best president we never had. voted for him but some how the votes never showed up after the elections..diebold strikes again..
US Intelligence Community; Now there's an Oxymoron no matter how hard i try, find it difficult to wrap my head around.
A war based on lies cannot be fixed by launching another war
Ron, Ron, Ron......c'mon now you, know better than that - that is exactly the way all statists think. The problems our plan created can only be fixed by evem more and better plans.
"War is a racket."
Zion is the racketeer.
The banksters need to repay us.
Has there ever been a war not based on lies? "They're bad. Now go kill them and bring me their treasure."
I don't know about the "nobel peace prize", but the country would be in better hands/shape, than with the CRIMINALS, we have in place now!
all we can do is suffer to the grave now...Right?
The Frayed Angels
There no longer is a Rule of Law. Politicians do as they want. The Militarized Police do as they want. Everybody else pays (and maybe gets killed too).
NEVER forget these names friends: steven harper, peter mackay, john baird, and blaney somebody or other. These criminals have deliberately destroyed Canada, and transformed it into americas murderous bitch sidekick. Very soon we, as a nation, will be admired for hauling these traitors in front of a court truly representative of the Canadian people. They will pay dearly for their treason. Now THAT is hope and change.
Speaking of lies, our first, aha ha ha ha, "lady".
http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/236865-bald-first-lady-michelle-oba...
The same Washington DC zionists and neoconservatives who worked the Iraq war, the Libyan war, and the attempted Syrian war, are the exact group who are out selling the Russian threat as hard as possible. Using the same tactic of false flags and serious lies, they seek to turn Russia into a major threat to America. When in reality, Russia has sat back and allowed the USA to expand NATO right to within a few hours drive of major Russian cities, and in return Russia has done nothing. Only when ethnic Russians are attacked, like Ossetia did Moscow react, just as any nation would. The carefully crafted coup in Kiev was all worked from Washington, long planned and well funded, the US took power in Kiev, and now when Russia dares to defend it's ethnic populations in the east, the USA uses it as if Hitler was on the lose with raging fury in Donbass. MH-17 was the dreadful false flag, so badly carried out that Washington now tries to burry it. The lies are all the same, the liars are all the same. Only this time they hope to bring down the second biggest nuclear power on earth. A nation of 140 million white people, with advanced military technology, and a proven track record of willingness to battle to the last man in defense of Russia.
The Neocons are still in Iraq mode, they believe the old tricks will work, and Americans will buy into the lies. And Russia will cave in and surrender. US corporate interests will fly into Moscow and start to divide up the spoils with Washingtons Russian Zionists who act as a 5th column, many as part of western NGO.
Fact is, Obama is out of his depth. Putin knows how to play defense, and when it comes to defense of Russia, and ethnic Russians in Donbass, Putin has many cards to play. HE is NOT Saddam, and the Russian people are not Sunni and Shia Arabs who hate eachother more than external enemies.
In the end, it is all our fault. We Americans let the Neoconservative media whores lie to us, we let zionists bully us into handing over all power to them. An unholy alliance of nutty Christian Zionists back all the Washington War plans. For some bizzare reason found only in their Bible, they support a war on Christian Russia, as if they didn't even know Russia was a white and Christian nation, something the sothern bible belt floks claim to like. They are just dupes, the zionists have turned them into dupes who support the Banks, Israel and Zionist war mongering.
This will end with a nuclear nightmare.
Very well stated.
The only question really left for honorabel Constitutional Americans is whether to fight this Zio cancer here or from a more secure location..
For some bizzare reason found only in their Bible...
Amen! I'm so tired of the "Left Behind" biblical "scholarship" eschatological malfeasance being foisted on otherwise decent bible believing Christians I could scream.
For nearly 2000 years biblical scholars accepted John’s recounting of the second coming of Christ in Revelation as a sevenfold description of the same event. This is similar to having seven different descriptions of a football game by 7 different people due to their being at 7 different locations / perspectives. It was intended to relate the certainty, intensity and completeness of not just our individual, personal accountability but the destiny of our Creator’s entire Creation.
This whole “millennial” eschatology is a whole cloth fabrication of delusionary persons enamored with some kind of self-purported prophetic utterance, which no 2 of them can even agree on. It’s hogwash!
jmo.
Yes, JB, matters are spiraling out of control and through my observations ( ear to the ground in a dozen countries ) the NeoConZionists do not possess the RESOURCES to MANAGE THIS PONZI much longer.
It is NO longer the usual suspects Russia, China Iran ( who deserve most of the credit ) that are fighting back but many western european countries who will kick-out the treasonous puppets who have allowed Vichy DC to run riot.
Out with the Old and in with the New Accountable political Parties.
If the Filthy UK establishment insist on licking USSA ass especially against Russia then Cameron will have to recall those advisers from the Ukraine to PROTECT strategic installations in the Shitty City of London.
Heavy sigh .... Ronny Ronny Ronny those weren't lies. They was spin.
Those in possession of absolute power can not only prophesy and make their prophecies come true, but they can also lie and make their lies come true.
~Eric Hoffer
Ron Paul is right, of course. He just speaks TOO much truth, which is why he is where he is. A very sad state of affairs.
Ron Paul has to be naive if he thinks the war mongers in the White House, DC, New York, Florida & Texas are going to listen to him.
His audience is the citizens. He was there and knows the game. Hopefully, right or left, people will continue to digest info like this.
He was speaking to The Institute for Peace and Prosperity and I think the people. He knows the WH wont listen.
Or more to the point.
GOVERNMENT CANNOT BE FIXED.
Therefore, the only solution is ELIMINATE ALL GOVERNMENT.
Which, when you realize "government" is a fiction, simply means "stop letting human predators run your life, steal your income and savings, and dominate and enslave you".
Paul's thoughts make too much sense to have any chance at Washington comprehension.
NOW can we hang Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and all their other war hawk buddies? On live TV? As far as national security goes, I can't think of a better way to deter future attacks against this country.
Thems fighting words!
And so Mr Paul would say for all US foreign involvment ... stay away! Its tempting to agree especially under the Obama fuck-up regime. But then an ostrich with its head in the sand usually gets kicked up the arse.
But then an ostrich with its head in the sand usually gets kicked up the arse.
Are you the Ostrich?
This is from a speech to US Senate in December 2014.
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2014/4150lpac_dec_12_wbcst.html
It's a bit long, but very insightful.