PDA

View Full Version : Ron Paul Fighting Possible War Against Iran - Speech




woowoowoo22
06-21-2007, 10:14 AM
http://www.freecentury.com/2007/06/20/ron-paul-fighting-possible-war-against-iran-speech-on-h-con-res-21/

Tsoman
06-21-2007, 10:21 AM
I cannot even believe that officials in our government are even talking about using nuclear weapons in a preemptive strike:confused: :confused:

Have they gone mad? Thank you Dr. Paul for using reason and saying what needs to be said.

Shmuel Spade
06-21-2007, 10:28 AM
From the link:


Paul has always confronted the hypocritical, warmongering neo-cons head on.

How can our Congress lay claim to a moral high ground when Iran is threatening to blow people off the face of the Earth, while saying the very same thing against them - that we will use nuclear weapons?


HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS

Statement on H Con Res 21

June 20, 2007

Madam Speaker: I rise in strong opposition to this resolution. This resolution is an exercise in propaganda that serves one purpose: to move us closer to initiating a war against Iran. Citing various controversial statements by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, this legislation demands that the United Nations Security Council charge Ahmadinejad with violating the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

Having already initiated a disastrous war against Iraq citing UN resolutions as justification, this resolution is like déja-vu. Have we forgotten 2003 already? Do we really want to go to war again for UN resolutions? That is where this resolution, and the many others we have passed over the last several years on Iran, is leading us. I hope my colleagues understand that a vote for this bill is a vote to move us closer to war with Iran.

Clearly, language threatening to wipe a nation or a group of people off the map is to be condemned by all civilized people. And I do condemn any such language. But why does threatening Iran with a pre-emptive nuclear strike, as many here have done, not also deserve the same kind of condemnation? Does anyone believe that dropping nuclear weapons on Iran will not wipe a people off the map? When it is said that nothing, including a nuclear strike, is off the table on Iran, are those who say it not also threatening genocide? And we wonder why the rest of the world accuses us of behaving hypocritically, of telling the rest of the world “do as we say, not as we do.”

I strongly urge my colleagues to consider a different approach to Iran, and to foreign policy in general. General William Odom, President Reagan’s director of the National Security Agency, outlined a much more sensible approach in a recent article titled “Exit From Iraq Should Be Through Iran.” General Odom wrote: “Increasingly bogged down in the sands of Iraq, the US thrashes about looking for an honorable exit. Restoring cooperation between Washington and Tehran is the single most important step that could be taken to rescue the US from its predicament in Iraq.” General Odom makes good sense. We need to engage the rest of the world, including Iran and Syria, through diplomacy, trade, and travel rather than pass threatening legislation like this that paves the way to war. We have seen the limitations of force as a tool of US foreign policy. It is time to try a more traditional and conservative approach. I urge a “no” vote on this resolution.
Ron Paul

Brewskie

Duckman
06-21-2007, 11:15 AM
I cannot even believe that officials in our government are even talking about using nuclear weapons in a preemptive strike:confused: :confused:

Have they gone mad? Thank you Dr. Paul for using reason and saying what needs to be said.

...but everyone is so brainwashed by 9/11, and by their blind support for Israel, that options like this seem to make sense to some people. :eek:

Now, for what it's worth, as far as I can tell we are not planning to nuke Tehran or any other large population center. We are planning to use nuclear weapons to destroy the remote facilities where Iran is supposedly working on nuclear weapons.

But make no mistake, that is an act of war akin to bombing Pearl Harbor. Once we do that, we are at WAR with Iran, and as far as I can tell *NOBODY* seems to care or have a plan as to what will happen after we nuke these facilities. The idea seems to simply be that "well, we nuked the nukes, end of thread, go home." But that is NOT how this will play out.