View Full Version : Yes, Letís Allow The Syrian People To Decide For Themselves

04-03-2017, 03:16 PM
Written by Ron Paul
Monday April 3, 2017

Is common sense beginning to creep into US policy in the Middle East? Last week Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said that the longer-term status of Syrian President Assad would be ďdecided by the Syrian people.Ē The media reported this as a radical shift in US foreign policy, but isnít this just stating what should be obvious? What gives any country the right to determine who rules someone else? Washington is currently paralyzed by evidence-free rumors that the Russians somehow influenced our elections, but no one blinks an eye when Washington declares that one or another foreign leader ďmust go.Ē

Itís only too bad that President Obama hadnít followed this back in 2011 instead of declaring that Assad had to go and then arming rebel groups who ended up being allies with al-Qaeda. Imagine how many thousands of lives and billions of dollars would have been saved by following this policy in the first place. Imagine the millions of refugees who could still be in their homes, running their businesses, living their lives.

Will the Trump Administration actually follow through on Tillersonís Syria policy statement? It is too early to tell. The President has illegally sent hundreds of US troops to fight on the ground in Syria. Current US positions in eastern Syria suggest that Washington may be looking to carve out parts of oil-rich areas of the country for some kind of future federation.

The White House followed up on Tillersonís comments by stating that getting rid of Assad was no longer a top priority for the US. This also sounds good. But does this mean that once the current top priority, destroying ISIS, is completed, Washington may return to its active measures to unseat the Syrian president? Neocons in Washington still insist that the rise of ISIS in Syria was due to President Assad, but in fact ISIS did not appear in Syria until the US began trying to overthrow Assad. They havenít given up on their desire to overthrow the Syrian government and they do have influence in this Administration.

If the Trump Administration is serious about letting the people of Syria decide their fate he needs to take concrete steps. Rather than sending in more troops to fight an ISIS already on its last legs, he must bring US troops home and prohibit the CIA from further destabilizing the country.

It would also be nice if Congress would wake up from its long slumber and start following the Constitution. The President (and his predecessors) have taken this country to war repeatedly without proper Constitutionally-required authority to do so. The president has reportedly decided not to even bother announcing where next he plans to send the troops. Congress can rein him in with very little effort by saying no money can be spent to deploy US troops to areas where they may encounter hostilities unless a state of war is declared.

By all means, we should let the Syrian people decide who will be their president, even if they choose someone we donít like. Syria was never a threat to the United States and the 2011 US intervention has destroyed the country. Interventionism has horrible consequences and no victories to show for itself. It is time for all the US troops to just march back home.


Copyright © 2017 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

04-03-2017, 03:20 PM
March them home!

04-03-2017, 03:31 PM

04-03-2017, 04:03 PM
It's not so much of a change, unfortunately


the Trump administration statements are not new at all. The "announced" positions were established under Obama:

President Barack Obama spent a significant portion of his final State of the Union speech discussing the fight against the terrorist group ISIS.
Obama said that fighting ISIS (also known as the Islamic State, ISIL, or Daesh) and other terrorists is the top priority of his administration.

Also in January 2016 then Secretary of State Kerry used a similar wording as Tillerson used now:

"It's up to the Syrians to decide what happens to Assad," Kerry said. "They are the negotiators and they will decide the future.""It's up to the Syrians to decide what happens to Assad," Kerry said. "They are the negotiators and they will decide the future."

There is no change of policy. The top priority has been and will be for a while the fight against ISIS. The U.S. will use this to occupy the eastern parts of Syria. When ISIS is suppressed enough to no longer be an immediate issue the removal of Assad will again become a top priority.

That Assad's position will be "decided by the Syrian people" is just obfuscating as long as it is not said WHICH Syrian people are HOW to decide over it.

The War On Syria will go on until the U.S. really changes its positions and until the Wahhabi oil sheiks stop their financing of their various Takfiri mercenaries - be they ISIS, al-Qaeda or whatever name they want to apply.

Occam's Banana
04-03-2017, 06:59 PM
Yes, Let’s Allow The Syrian People To Decide For Themselves

Sorry, Ron, but obviously, you just don't understand.

Syrians won't be able to "decide for themselves" until we "export some democracy" to them ...

04-03-2017, 07:27 PM
Nikki Haley to the rescue


U.S. envoy to U.N: Syrian people do not want Assad as leader

The United States does not believe that the Syrian people want President Bashar al-Assad as their leader any longer, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, claimed on Monday that the Syrian people do not want President Bashar al-Assad as their leader any longer.

This comes as only days earlier the White House Press Secretary, Sean Spicer, said that the USA needs to accept the reality that removing Assad is no longer the priority in Syria, and rather the defeat of ISIS is.

In support of Spicer, Haley told a small group of reporters on Thursday: ďYou pick and choose your battles and when weíre looking at this, itís about changing up priorities and our priority is no longer to sit there and focus on getting Assad out.Ē

She then contradicted herself and told ABC News on Sunday that ďAssad is always a priorityĒ and the United States wants to bring him to justice.

However, in her latest ramblings she stated that the Syrian people no longer want Assad.

ďItís that we donít think the people want Assad anymore; we donít think that he is going to be someone that the people want to have,Ē Haley told a news conference to mark the U.S. presidency of the U.N. Security Council for April.

ďWe have no love for Assad. Weíve made that very clear. We think that he has been a hindrance to peace for a long time. Heís a war criminal. What heís done to his people is nothing more than disgusting,Ē she said.

04-03-2017, 08:37 PM
Nikki Haley to the rescue


More 25 D chess.