Ron Paul is een rechtse hufter van formaat, maar zo nu en dan kan deze zakkenwasser met uiterst steekhoudende argumenten, smerige zaken aan de kaak stellen, zaken die op z’n zachtst gezegd niet veel steun van zijn Republikeinse partij krijgen.
Lees wat Paul schrijft over de oorlog in Syrië. Oké, e.e.a. was al bekend, echter het is meegenomen, als zelfs een rechtse houwdegen, als Paul, die NB aan de wieg van de Tea Party stond, zaken bevestigt. Al moet gezegd worden dat hij een verkeerde kijk heeft op een aantal zaken, zoals de reden waarom de VS illegaal in Syrië aanwezig is: het afzetten van Assad en zijn regering………..
Verder maakt Paul geen woorden vuil aan hoe en wie ‘de opstand’ in Syrië heeft gecreëerd (met hulp van vooral veel buitenlandse agitators, zoals die uit Saoedi–Arabië en door de VS aangevoerde terroristen uit o.a. Libië) in Syrië heeft gecreëerd. De VS is daarvoor aan te merken als hoofdverantwoordelijke, al in 2006 was deze terreurentiteit bezig met voorbereidingen van een opstand, die moest uitmonden in een staatsgreep tegen Assad…… Assad weigerde pijpleidingen voor gas en olie over zijn grondgebied richting Europa toe te staan, tja dan ga je op heel veel tenen staan….
Bovendien was en is Syrië al decennialang een bondgenoot van de Russen en de Iraniërs, daarmee haal je je de woede van de VS op de hals, de VS dat denkt de wereld te regeren ……
Hier een pleidooi van Paul tegen VS bemoeienis in Syrië, gisteren o.a. gepubliceerd op Anti-Media:
Why
Are We Attacking the Syrians Who Are Fighting ISIS?
June
12, 2017 at 6:55 am
Written
by Ron
Paul
The
Ron Paul Institute
(RPI) Just
when you thought our Syria policy could not get any worse, last week
it did. The US military twice attacked Syrian government forces from
a military base it illegally occupies inside Syria. According to the
Pentagon, the attacks on Syrian government-backed forces were
“defensive” because the Syrian fighters were approaching a US
self-declared “de-confliction” zone inside Syria. The Syrian
forces were pursuing ISIS in the area, but the US attacked anyway.
The
US is training yet another rebel group fighting from that base,
located near the border of Iraq at al-Tanf, and it claims that Syrian
government forces pose a threat to the US military presence there.
But the Pentagon has forgotten one thing: it has no authority to be
in Syria in the first place! Neither the US Congress nor the UN
Security Council has authorized a US military presence inside Syria.
So
what gives the Trump Administration the right to set up military
bases on foreign soil without the permission of that government? Why
are we violating the sovereignty of Syria and attacking its military
as they are fighting ISIS? Why does Washington claim that its primary
mission in Syria is to defeat ISIS while taking military actions that
benefit ISIS?
The
Pentagon issued a statement saying its presence in Syria is necessary
because the Syrian government is not strong enough to defeat ISIS on
its own. But the “de-escalation zones” agreed upon by the
Syrians, Russians, Iranians, and Turks have led to a reduction in
fighting and a possible end to the six-year war. Even if true that
the Syrian military is weakened, its weakness is due to six years of
US-sponsored rebels fighting to overthrow it!
What
is this really all about? Why does the US military occupy this base
inside Syria? It’s partly about preventing the Syrians and Iraqis
from working together to fight ISIS, but I think it’s mostly about
Iran. If the Syrians and Iraqis join up to fight ISIS with the help
of Iranian-allied Shia militia, the US believes it will strengthen
Iran’s hand in the region. President Trump has recently returned
from a trip to Saudi Arabia where he swore he would not allow that to
happen.
But
is this policy really in our interest, or are we just doing the
bidding of our Middle East “allies,” who seem desperate for war
with Iran? Saudi Arabia exports its radical form of Islam worldwide,
including recently into moderate Asian Muslim countries like
Indonesia. Iran does not. That is not to say that Iran is perfect,
but does it make any sense to jump into the Sunni/Shia conflict on
either side? The Syrians, along with their Russian and Iranian
allies, are defeating ISIS and al-Qaeda. As candidate Trump said,
what’s so bad about that?
We
were told that if the Syrian government was allowed to liberate
Aleppo from al-Qaeda, Assad would kill thousands who were trapped
there. But the opposite has happened: life is returning to normal in
Aleppo. The Christian minority there celebrated Easter for the first
time in several years. They are rebuilding. Can’t we finally just
leave the Syrians alone?
When
you get to the point where your actions are actually helping ISIS,
whether intended or not, perhaps it’s time to stop. It’s past
time for the US to abandon its dangerous and counterproductive Syria
policy and just bring the troops home.
By Ron
Paul /
Republished with permission / RPI / Report
a typo
================================
Klik voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, op één van de labels, die u hieronder terug kan vinden, dit geldt (nog) niet voor het label ‘R. Paul’.
