28 votes

Ron Paul floor speech on Libya: "A no-fly zone is an act of war!"

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I emailed my Congressman...

... asking him not to vote for the Patriot Act. He responded by saying that the Patriot Act keeps us safe and this is necessary for good to triumph over evil. Here is an extract from my response:

"On September 11, 2001, a group of misguided Saudis committed an act of dastardly terrorism against America. In so doing, they followed the example of Nelson Mandela whose ANC organization used similar acts of terror to gain control of South Africa. The whole world lauded Nelson Mandela and terrorism went mainstream. Check with the CIA. They had the ANC classified as a terrorist organization. Even to this day, the ANC and their agents are responsible for the brutal killing of at least one farmer and his family, often including young children, per week. Yet, our political leaders revere Nelson Mandela, a great friend of the late Arafat and the current dictator in Libya. It is silly condemning terrorism in one part of the world, while awarding peace prizes to others.

"The reason the Saudis (note: Saudis not Iraqis) attacked us is because they took offense at US military bases in their country. As much as we condemn their actions and ridicule their medieval lifestyles they have good reason to be aggrieved at the US military presence in their country.

"The damage Al Qaeda did on that day is nothing compared to the damage that followed, not perpetrated by terrorists but by representatives of the people. The so-called wars against terror have cost the lives of thousands of our bravest men and women, maimed and wounded thousands more, and the price tag to date, of this irrational action, exceeds $1.1 trillion.

"Far from making us safer it has inflamed the hatred that these people already had for us. We will never know the correct number (unless Wikipedia discloses it one day), but anything from 150,000 to 650,000 innocent Iraq men, women and children have died, people who have done no harm to the American people.

"I happened to be in a church once in ... that you attended. Republicans who want to endear themselves to Christian voters happily parade their pro-life position. That is utter hypocrisy. War is not pro-life. The blood of innocent women and children in Iraq cries out against those who think they can gain a few votes with a pro-life stance, but support the illegal invasion of their country for which they paid with their lives. They deserved life just as much us the baby in the womb, but the Bush/Cheney oil wars, based on a pack of lies, robbed them of those precious lives that God gave them. They had an evil leader, but there was no justification for asking them to die in the cause of changing their country’s regime, so that a more pliable stooge could be placed in power – stooges like the Saudi royal family, Mubarak, the leaders of Yemen, Bahrain, etc., all “friends" of the US.

"George Bush knew that the invasion of Iraq (for the benefit of the US oil services corporations) would inflame more hatred and possible attacks. This called for a misnamed “Patriot Act” to ostensibly keep us safe. Congress voted on it without reading the bill. It violates our Constitution.

"There is a very simple way of keeping us safe. We need to engage the Muslim world – make friends, not enemies. We should leave Israel to deal with regional issues as it deems fit, without our meddling. We should close our military bases in the Middle East. Under such a scenario, we would be able to abolish the TSA and there would no war on terror. We would be free again. That is how freedom triumphs over evil.

"The stupidity in Washington continues, because now sanctions, an act of war, have been imposed on Iran. Iran, like Iraq, has done us no harm, but Iran, like Iraq has oil and our politicians will invent any fable to convince the world that Iran is our enemy. Iran’s only sin is that it has a cranky leader who won’t dance to Washington’s tunes. Sanctions are the last refuge of a rogue politician. They harden the attitude of leaders and peoples. It is an utterly counter-productive strategy.

"Iran’s leaders might be a little childish teasing the US with its so-called nuclear program (in their dreams; they can hardly refine their own oil), but anything that aggravates Washington makes them more popular among their own people. Besides, Pakistan, India and Israel have nuclear weapons. It understandable that Iran would want to develop their own, and more so if the US opposes it. If that poses a threat to Israel, then that’s Israel’s problem and they can and will deal with it. Israel was the first in the region to develop a nuclear capability, with the blessing of the US. The hypocrisy of Washington is baffling, other than fact that we have come to expect this from the warmongers who are firmly in the grip on the military-industrial complex.

"Now we are being told that Iran is our enemy because they are supplying arms to the Taliban. Well, when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan the Taliban took up arms to defend their country. The US provided arms to the Taliban.

"You can’t make this up, but today the invading army is the US. Again, the Taliban steps up to defend the homeland. Their logical ally is Iran. Can you blame the Iranians for wanting to help the Taliban? Iran has every right to supply arms to the Taliban. Iran is an independent state.

Just like the Iraqi people, the Taliban has done the US no harm. The Taliban merely exercised their right to defend their country against a foreign invasion. The US illegally invaded and occupied Afghanistan.

The hatred towards the US of many in the Muslim world is completely justified. Far from making us safer, the Bush and Obama Administration have heightened the risk of innocent people in American (and in allied countries) being attacked, not only in the US (Fort Hood – why no trial?), but also abroad.

We are no safer today than we were in 2001. We are less safe. We are less free too. We are more indebted… and far too many innocent people have paid and are paying with their lives as Washington pursues a foreign policy that makes no sense."

Plano TX

Shock Is Law

It is no secret that America’s lying tyrants, whether they are neocons or plain old-fashioned realpolitik imperialists, regard the American people as their adversary, as sheep to be molded and led to their version of paradise. They are the anti-democrats of our age. They don’t believe in democratic participation, freedom, or the consent of the governed, but they wisely disguise themselves as supporters of democracy and freedom. C. Bradley Thompson, co-author of the book ‘Neoconservatism: An Obituary for an Idea,’ writes in his article “Neoconservatism Unmasked”:
The neoconservatives are the advocates of a new managerial state–a state controlled and regulated by a mandarin class of conservative virtucrats who think the American people are incapable of governing themselves without the help of the neocons’ special, a priori wisdom.
Thompson says that neoconservatism “share some common features with fascism.” The most frightening one to me is that “they advocate keeping the American people in an agitated state of permanent fear and loathing against internal and external threats,” and, “support a foreign policy of perpetual war in order to restore America’s national destiny and sense of greatness.” Tyrants always have noble goals, and the neocons are no different. They believe they are the best human beings in the world, and everybody else is wrong, stupid, or evil and barbaric. But they have more in common with Saddam Hussein, and other evil dictators that they want to overthrow and kill than anybody else in the world.

.

.

SteveMT's picture

Ron Paul is Right on Libya; GOP is Dead Wrong

Ron Paul is Right on Libya; Rest of GOP Field Dead Wrong!
Posted by Dustin Krutsinger at 11:12 pm Add comments
Mar 102011

http://caffeinatedthoughts.com/2011/03/ron-paul-is-right-on-...

No Fly Zone

In order to institute a no fly zone, you must disable the target country's air defense. Bomb the airfields, etc. Then, no matter who ends up controlling Libya, the United States will pay to fix up the damage it has caused. Wouldn't it make more sense to save the money on bombs and subsequent repairs and invest it in our own highway/road system?

SteveMT's picture

This is Ron Paul doing what he does best,....

defending the Constitution against the hypocrisy of our own government.

Ron Paul essentially is the US President.

Even though he doesn't have the title, he's doing exactly what the president is required to do - defend our Constitution against the ignorance of Congress.

Obama certainly isn't doing that.

+ 1

my thoughts exactly.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Debbie's picture

My thoughts exactly too.

*

Debbie

You hit the nail on the head

He warned about other unconstitutional invasions and was ignored - will they listen this time?

Love how fired up he is here.

Love how fired up he is here. A little righteous indignation toward the murderous zombies of the U.S. Congress is sometimes called for.

SORT OF DISAGREE

If it were Libya fighting Egypt, or Israel fighting Iran, I would wholeheartedly agree. I also agree we should remove our troops from non-threatening places like Japan & Germany, too.

But, in this situation, you have a tyrant killing HIS OWN PEOPLE. That's homicide. It's the same as Hitler killing the Jews. And, if it were Israel's president, you can be sure the USA would come to their aid.

I do agree we don't want to put our soldiers in harm's way, and I wonder why we can't just do a no-fly zone, and call it good.

What do you think? That seems to be the crux of the issue. It's a moral one, too. How can you turn your back on the masses there asking, pleading for help?

That's the part I have trouble with.

Freedom fighters are asking for help

If Ron Paul is only opposed to a no-fly zone that's his decision.

If he opposes all aid - such as anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons - he's wrong.

A freedom movement needs help. No need to send Americans in harms way but we should not allow genocide. Paul is opposed to dictators, I assume, how about aiding freedom.

Does Paul oppose the help the American Revolution received from France?

Nothing good comes from foreign intervention.

The only way to lead internationally is set a good example. If you set a good example, then the people will fight to emulate you. You can't give freedom to people, it's never appreciated, nor understood unless fought for. Maybe that's why we are in the mess we are in, the last time we really fought for our freedom was a long time ago.

If you intervene you will ultimately be resented. Would we want another country to intervene in our country, even if they claimed to genuinely be interested in restoring our republic?

Besides that, if we intervene, how do we know we will even be supporting freedom? We might help the rebels win, only to result in an even worse dictatorship being established. Then, not only is our intervention resented, but our efforts are wasted.

That's why the best we can do is set a good example. And, intervening certainly is not a good example.

FOR aiding freedom fighters

These rationalizations are getting stranger and stranger. The US, through taxpayer dollars, has supported untold
dictators throughout the world. That's the problem – not freedom movements.

So along comes a mass Middle East movement to throw out the dictators and some get real cautious.

Clearer: Supporting dictators is BAD. Supporting freedom is GOOD.

Either stop ALL foreign aid, or help freedom fighters as much as dictators have been assisted (bought).

You call them freedom fighters?


How do you know what sort of government these "freedom fighters" will establish when they win? How do you know they really are freedom fighters? Just because they are fighting one dictator does not mean they don't prefer their own dictator.

Are they "freedom fighters" as our government referred to Osama Bin Laden when he was fighting the Soviets? Or "terrorists" as our government refers to Osama Bin Laden now?

How could "freedom fighters" suddenly become "terrorists" and our supposedly worst enemy?

Because, maybe they were never freedom fighters to begin with. That was a false term our government fed to us for the rebels they were giving our money away to.

Please, no more blood on my hands

On many occasions, U.S. citizens went off to foreign wars and volunteered to perform combat roles. For example, 2,800 volunteers (including Ernest Hemingway) from the USA traveled to Spain to join the International Brigades to defend the Second Spanish Republic in the Spanish Civil War between 1936 and 1939.

There are many ways that you can support a side struggling in an international conflict without trashing the Constitution.

No-fly zones will kill innocent women and children. Every U.S. citizen will have that blood 'on our hands.'

Please, just don't sit in front of your computer typing support for another unconstitutional no-fly zone in Libya and "call it good."

If you feel like you are turning your back on the people there, no one is stopping you from personally taking whatever you consider to be effective moral action. That is your constitutional right.

But, don't do it in my name. That's the part I have trouble with.

Article 1 Section 8 of US Constitution

"The Congress shall have power to...provide for the common defence and the general welfare of the United States."

The Section goes on further to allow Congress to raise armies, navies, etc. However, the reason for doing so is given in the initial statement in that Section. It is for the common defence of the US. The Constitution doesn't grant Congress the right to raise armies for the benefit of other nations or their people.

________________________________________

There are injustices in the world

What if a country picked a side in our civil war? Maybe the US would be a much different place.

We didn't really have a civil

We didn't really have a civil war, but I have to admit that my feelings are mixed on this one.

If the bastard really does have substantial popular support in some areas, the rebels should be trying to secede and create a new "East Libya." Libya doesn't "belong" to any one group, it would seem, just like the Soviet Union or China never should have.

Twice They Did Pick Sides

During the first civil war 1775 the French picked sides, well sort of. The French King owed Fealty to King George III so it may have all been a ruse.
The next civil war was stirred up by the British and then they financed the North and replaced the Independent United States Government after the war with a direct puppet regime.

So America's affairs are largely dictated from London, Paris, and The Vatican even today.

The Oracle

Who Funded The Nazis?

If American bankers and corporations didn't fund the Nazis would they still have had this much power?

If America didn't fund the Egyptian army with foreign aid would Mubarak still be in power?

You HAVE to ask yourself these questions!

Libya

Why not just encourage free commerce with the rebels. A gun manufacturing could trade guns for oil which the rebels do have control over some of the fields then give it to gas stations for a share of the profit for example.

Josh20sand

100% i truly believe that

100% i truly believe that opening up free trade with the rebels could show capitalism to be a much stronger force than establishing a no fly zone.

My voice in Congress!

As an American citizen and taxpayer, I fully endorse these comments by Congressman Paul and am proud to do so.

Thank you Dr. Paul for a most excellent speech on the House floor on behalf of liberty-loving Americans.

"We have allowed our nation to be over-taxed, over-regulated, and overrun by bureaucrats. The founders would be ashamed of us for what we are putting up with."
-Ron Paul

Excellent

short speech! I passed it on...

O.P.O.G.G. - Fighting the attempted devolution of the rEVOLution
Ron Paul 2012...and beyond
BAN ELECTRONIC VOTING!!

Yes, that dolt Donald

thought we should be in there helping the rebels. What an idiot!

A No Fly Zone Is a Really Good Idea

...in a restaurant.

FUNNY comment "Rlcmcallen!"

That made me laugh!

"A no fly zone is a really good idea...in a restaurant."

"We have allowed our nation to be over-taxed, over-regulated, and overrun by bureaucrats. The founders would be ashamed of us for what we are putting up with."
-Ron Paul

LOL