Rand Paul is low-hanging fruit for the neocon interventionist rabble. The goal is to “shut down his views on foreign policy.”
Just who are the neocons and what do they have in mind for America? A good place to start is a letter the cabal penned off to George W. Bush on 3 April 2002. The top name on the list of signatories was William Kristol and included such fellow interventionists as Eliot Cohen, Frank Gaffney, Donald Kagan, Robert Kagan, Richard Perle, Norman Podhoretz, Randy Scheunemann and R. James Woolsey.
The letter said, “We urge you to accelerate plans for removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. As you have said, every day that Saddam remains in power brings closer the day when terrorists will have not just airplanes with which to attack us but chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons, as well. It is common knowledge that Saddam, along with Iran, is a funder and supporter of terrorism against Israel.”
See any holes in the game plan here? First of all Iraq, in 2002, presented zero national security risk to the U.S. as exemplified by how fast its miserable forces folded up when the U.S. invaded. Rogue terrorists were certainly a threat back then and remain so today, but not the people and the country of Shia-majority Iraq.
And Sunni Ba’athist Saddam Hussein had spent years holding Shia stalwart Iran in check. With Saddam out of the loop, Iran instantly became more of a potential annoyance for the U.S.
The vast percentage of the world’s Muslims are Sunni, led by Saudi Arabia, arguably the world’s number one promoter, financial supporter, and exporter of terrorism. Sunni terrorists attacked the twin towers, not an Iraqi in the group. bin Laden was a Saudi Sunni.
As for Iraq’s chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons well… Turns out the neocon-driven Bush administration had rotten intelligence from the start.
So the whole Iraq war effort was a loser for America from the start, and today it’s back on the front pages with Sunnis battling Shia. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya have all been proven by history to be disasters for America. Today, Syria, in yet another Muslim civil war dispute, is back on the front pages. And neocons are back at it promoting American intervention while attacking Rand Paul, who has read his history books and wants no part of civil war meddling. Already America’s early aid to these Syrian rebels has empowered the most radical elements, enabling them to bring their insurgency to bear on the Shiite government supported by the U.S. in nearby Iraq. The U.S. has found no success by taking part in the ongoing internecine, inter-religious warfare of the Middle East or any other locale.
Pat Buchanan summed things up well: “But sucking America into Syria’s civil war is only a near-term goal for the War Party, which is after larger game—greasing the skids for a U.S. war on Iran.”
Latest posts by Richard C. Young (see all)
- Does a Massive Military Need a New Spending Increase? - February 23, 2017
- The Three Greatest Presidents are Easy, Then It’s a Battle - February 22, 2017
- Is a Trump/Putin Partnership Over before it Started? - February 21, 2017