On the Elimination of Osama bin Laden
/ US Politics
May 09, 2011 - 08:51 AM GMT
Last week marked an important milestone in the war on terrorism for our country. Osama bin Laden applauded the 9/11 attacks. Such deliberate killing of innocent lives deserved retaliation. It is good that bin Laden is dead and justice is served. The way in which he was finally captured and killed shows that targeted retribution is far superior to wars of aggression and nation-building. In 2001 I supported giving the president the authority to pursue those responsible for the vicious 9/11 attacks. However, misusing that authority to pursue nation-building and remaking the Middle East was cynical and dangerous, as the past ten years have proven.
It is tragic that it took ten years, trillions of dollars, tens of thousands of American casualties and many thousands of innocent lives to achieve our mission of killing one evil person. A narrow, targeted mission under these circumstances was far superior to initiating wars against countries not involved in the 9/11 attacks, and that is all we should have done. This was the reason I emphasized at the time the principle of Marque and Reprisal, permitted to us by the US Constitution for difficult missions such as we faced. I am convinced that this approach would have achieved our goal much sooner and much cheaper.
The elimination of Osama bin Laden should now prompt us to declare victory and bring our troops home from Afghanistan and Iraq. Al Qaeda was never in Iraq and we were supposedly in Afghanistan to get Osama bin Laden. With bin Laden gone, there is no reason for our presence in the region - unless indeed it was all about oil, nation-building, and remaking the Middle East and Central Asia.
Hopefully bin Laden does not get the last laugh. He claimed the 9/11 attacks were designed to get the US to spread its military dangerously and excessively throughout the Middle East, bankrupting us through excessive military spending as he did the Soviets, and to cause political dissention within the United States. Some 70 percent of Americans now believe we should leave Afghanistan yet both parties seem determined to stay. The best thing we could do right now is prove bin Laden a false prophet by coming home and ending this madness on a high note.
Tragically, one result may be the acceptance of torture as a legitimate tool for pursuing our foreign policy. A free society, calling itself a republic, grounded in the rule of law, should never succumb to such evil.
At the very least we should all be able to agree that foreign aid to Pakistan needs to end immediately. The idea that bin Laden was safely protected for ten years in Pakistan, either willfully or through incompetence, should make us question the wisdom of robbing American citizens to support any government around the world with foreign aid. All foreign aid and intervention needs to end.
Our failed foreign policy is reflected in our bizarre relationship with Pakistan. We bomb them with drones, causing hundreds of civilian casualties, we give them billions of dollars in foreign aid for the privilege to do so, all while they protect America's enemy number one for a decade.
It is time to consider a sensible non-interventionist foreign policy as advised by our Founders and authorized by our Constitution. We would all be better off for it.
Dr. Ron Paul
Congressman Ron Paul of Texas enjoys a national reputation as the premier advocate for liberty in politics today. Dr. Paul is the leading spokesman in Washington for limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies based on commodity-backed currency. He is known among both his colleagues in Congress and his constituents for his consistent voting record in the House of Representatives: Dr. Paul never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution. In the words of former Treasury Secretary William Simon, Dr. Paul is the "one exception to the Gang of 535" on Capitol Hill.
© 2005-2016 http://www.MarketOracle.co.uk - The Market Oracle is a FREE Daily Financial Markets Analysis & Forecasting online publication.
10 May 11, 04:55
Come off it Ron. Enough of this BS.
Please, Ron. Enough of this garbage. Why don't you tell the truth. Bin Laden had nothing to do with 9-11. Mossad and the CIA were responsible for 9-11. This is a fact and can be demostrated here www.911missinglinks.com
Ron, when are you going to get some balls and stand up to the medical-industrial complex?
Ron, when are you going to get some balls and stand up to the Israeli Lobby?
Ron, stop pretending to be some hero when you are no different than those who you pretend to fight. It's all theartrics. It's all meant to make the sheep feel good about voting. America is a fascist nation and you are part of the problem, just like everyone else in Washington.
When are you going to declare the real enemies of America, the Jewish mafia? You know, the 2% ofthe population that runs Wall Street, the Federal Reserve, the media, Washington, the educational system, taxes us with Kosher costs for food, etc. etc.
When are you going to put the Wall Street crooks in prison for destroying the global economy via securities fraud and bribery?
I don't know whether to laugh or cry for you and your remedial tactics to manipulate the American sheeple. Don't think everyone is fooled, because the ones that count aren't.
11 May 11, 20:55
Osama's assassination is Obama'a Stupid Whammy
I thought that assassinating Osama bin Laden was a mistake as it was an international war crime and made a mockery of US justice. Now I release that it was also a stupid act from the practical point of view. China and Russia are now combining to take on the CIA's political bribery and murderous drone targeting activities in the middle east. Shortly after the assassination, Pakistani officials were on the airplane to attend a joint meeting with Chinese and Russian officials, and currently US forces are presently extremely unwelcome guests in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and throughout the middle east. So Obama got his badly needed political adrenaline shot and sweet revenge, but the long term vengeance will be that of the Muslim world!
12 May 11, 09:17
Osama Death Muslim Vengence?
I don't think so.
99% of muslims, same as those elsewhere strive for freedom, prosperity and democracy.
How did bin laden fit any of their aspirations ?
The facts are that he was a terrorist scum bag that killed 10 TIMES as many muslims as non muslims.
He will soon if not already be resigned to history in favour of far more important factors such as FOOD INFLATION.
12 May 11, 18:01
Why Do Most Muslims Hate Anglos?
Well, it all started with the Crusades, which was a little before my time, so I don't say much about it. But was a Christian Catholic war waged mainly against Muslims and lasted 200 years. Wikipedia has a nice writeup on this should anyone be interested.
When Sir Winston Churchill converted the British navy from coal to oil, the whole British fleet was run on middle east petroleum, for all of which nothing was ever paid.
The US was one of the first countries to recognize the state of Israel, and according to Wikipedia, "The United States has provided total economic and military funding to Israel of over $100bn since 1962 under the Foreign Assistance Act, more than any other country." The US has long considered Israel as its strongest middle east ally.
The story goes on and on--the US murdering with remotely controlled drones of innocent women, children, and babies in Afghanistan and Pakistan, etc.. (For example, a bridal party of about about 50 Pakistani women moving down the road as a group was hit by a US drone. Thirty women including the bride were killed). As an aside, according to international law, the bombardment of undefended towns and villages is a war crime, as is the hunting down and killing of named individuals.
In 1962, George Bush invaded Iran.
The US via the CIA has a long record interference in the politics, government, and elections of middle east Arab countries. A random quote from Wikipedia: "The 1953 Iranian coup d'état, on August 19, 1953 (known as the 28 Mordad coup in Iran), was the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh orchestrated by the intelligence agencies of the United Kingdom and the United States as operation TPAJAX".
Etc., etc., etc..
13 May 11, 09:22
I still think 99% of muslims are more interested in earning a living and feeding themselves, educating their children, affording medical care and economically advancing themselves such as getting a house, fridge, car, tele, computer mobile phone then stuff written in history books.
Pretty much along the same lines as what 99% of non muslims are focused on.
"In 1962, George Bush invaded Iran"
Thats a new one ! :)
13 May 11, 20:34
Obama's Osama Pigeons Coming Home To Roost
From your above comment "In 1962, George Bush invaded Iran. That's a new one!"
I quote from Wikipedia: "US President George Bush has told the UN General Assembly that the US-led invasion of Iraq was the right thing to do." (9/23/2003). Some historians mark this invasion as the the beginning of the decline and fall of the US empire.
I also quote from today's Reuters: "(Reuters) - Suicide bombers killed 80 people at a Pakistani paramilitary academy on Friday in revenge for the death of Osama bin Laden in a U.S. raid and militants in Pakistan vowed to carry out more attacks."
And they're just warming up! You may be right about the "99%' of Pakistanis having the same aspirations as Americans , but the remaining 1% are and will be really raising hell.
14 May 11, 20:50
On Ron Paul’s attitude to 9/11
@ Mike Stathis
Well, I don’t know, Mike. I think that you might be being a tad too hard on the man. Ron Paul is an active mainstream politician - at least, he’s trying to be. He is not a retired or marginal one who can afford himself the luxury of saying whatever he pleases. Why do you want him to commit a political suicide?
Of course, any sane person realises that there is a possibility that the 9/11 events were an inside job. In fact, if we consider them in the overall politico-economic context there are hardly any other ones. If the above-mentioned sane person asks themselves: which version seems to be more plausible - that the crumbling empire which had everything to lose and was desperate not to lose it; the country with its more than a quarter trillion military budget and explicitly unambiguous attributes of a parasite, the state which persistently manifested profound indifference towards people’s lives, their own citizens included, has managed to stage somehow this whole thing in this or that way, while being in possession of opportunities, means and a clear motive? or that 19 bearded clowns, representing some semi-phantom entity, which used to materialize itself at that time mostly in CNN reports only, armed with box cutters, have accomplished it with obscure means and for a vague motive, while acting absolutely independently? - than the answer indeed seems to be quite obvious.
But I do not think that any compromise is evil by definition. And there is a difference between consciously telling lies and not telling everything you know at some particular moment in time. As far as my knowledge goes several years ago some Canadian politician’s only rumoured advocating an enhanced investigation into those events on the grounds of a suspicion that some “inner circles” might be involved terminated her career. Are you sure that the American people are ready to accept the truth even now? Take James Quinn, for instance - I‘m sure you have read his articles here. He is beating the shit out of the US ruling elite as his full-time job but still seems to believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that the 9/11 events were arranged by 19 bearded clowns.
And is it really so important after all? The 9/11 events were turned into the second most significant occurrence in the history of mankind after the birth of Christ by American propaganda. But even if it was a staged thing - which seems very likely - we know for sure that the US committed much worse crimes - the Iraq invasion based on deliberately fabricated WMD “evidences” which led to hundreds of thousands innocent deaths for one. Has it changed anything? Does it really matter if we can add this particular crime to a long list of their other ones? And unfortunately it’s not only “the CIA, Mossad, medical-industrial complex and Israeli Lobby” who are to blame. Who took cheap credit instead of standing up for well-paid jobs being outsourced abroad in the 90s? “Everyone else in Washington“? Who voted for W. and Cheney in the 00's? Twice? The “Jewish mafia”? Yes, America is indeed a fascist state, and, yes, the elite does control the media and educational system. But we are not living in the Medieval Ages. Anyone who bothered to apply some minimal exertion and did their homework could figure out the true state of things. All one needs to accomplish that is the Internet connection and a library card.
If a critical number of people did that Ron Paul wouldn’t have to be so diplomatic. And in any case, one man cannot change the system. Even if he is a prominent politician. Even if he is a President. Every one of us should make a contribution being where we are. And Ron Paul is already out there and, I believe, can be of some help. At least, I do not seem to see even the second best thing on the horizon. Do you?