The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewRon Paul Archive
President Trump: Toss Your Generals’ War Escalation Plans In the Trash
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

By the end of this month, Defense Secretary James Mattis and National Security Advisor HR McMaster will deliver to President Trump their plans for military escalations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. President Trump would be wise to rip the plans up and send his national security team back to the drawing board – or replace them. There is no way another “surge” in Afghanistan and Iraq (plus a new one in Syria) puts America first. There is no way doing the same thing over again will succeed any better than it did the last time.

Near the tenth anniversary of the US war on Afghanistan – seven years ago – I went to the Floor of Congress to point out that the war makes no sense. The original authorization had little to do with eliminating the Taliban. It was a resolution to retaliate against those who attacked the United States on September 11, 2001. From what we know now, the government of Saudi Arabia had far more to do with the financing and planning of 9/11 than did the Taliban. But we’re still pumping money into that lost cause. We are still killing Afghanis and in so doing creating the next generation of terrorists.

The war against ISIS will not end with its defeat in Mosul and Raqqa. We will not pack up and go home. Instead, the Pentagon and State Department have both said that US troops would remain in Iraq after ISIS is defeated. The continued presence of US troops in Iraq will provide all the recruiting needed for more ISIS or ISIS-like resistance groups to arise, which will in turn lead to a permanent US occupation of Iraq. The US “experts” have completely misdiagnosed the problem so it no surprise that their solutions will not work. They have claimed that al-Qaeda and ISIS arose in Iraq because we left, when actually they arose because we invaded in the first place.

General David Petraeus is said to have a lot of influence over HR McMaster, and in Syria he is pushing for the kind of US troop “surge” that he still believes was successful in Iraq. The two are said to favor thousands of US troops to fight ISIS in eastern Syria instead of relying on the US-sponsored and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces to do the job. This “surge” into Syria would also lead to a lengthy US occupation of a large part of that country, as it is unlikely that the US would return the territory to the Syrian government. Would it remain an outpost of armed rebels that could be unleashed on Assad at the US President’s will? It’s hard to know from week to week whether “regime change” in Syria is a US priority or not. But we do know that a long-term US occupation of half of Syria would be illegal, dangerous, and enormously expensive.

President Trump’s Generals all seem to be pushing for a major US military escalation in the Middle East and south Asia. The President goes back and forth, one minute saying “we’re not going into Syria,” while the next seeming to favor another surge. He has given the military much decision-making latitude and may be persuaded by his Generals that the only solution is to go in big. If he follows such advice, it is likely his presidency itself will be buried in that graveyard of empires.

(Republished from The Ron Paul Institute by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Donald Trump, ISIS 
Hide 6 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Dr. Paul: I have the utmost respect for you. I have deep respect also for both your integrity and your intellect, particularly the former.

    That said, you failed to mention the elephant in the room of Afghanistan: the Big “O”. (No, not that Big “O”!). The Big “O” here is opium. That’s the reason for the war, and that’s why the CIA/Pentagon occupation of Afghanistan actually does make sense: economic sense.

    You are not a naive dude and must know this.

    • Replies: @Joe Franklin
    , @Sal
  2. Dr. Paul is undoubtly the most honest patriot who dealt in politics in the U.S.A. However, it is odd to see Dr. Paul accept some of the stories that the masters of disinformation on the payroll of the empire sell to the gullible public. One such fallacy is that the American government was fighting or intends to fight ISIS. ISIS is the very creation of the CIA and the proof of that is that the Russian Air Force was able to devastate ISIS in a matter of days whereas American bombing failed to inflict any damages on ISIS in more of a year of bombing. The fight against ISIS has been a cover up for the U.S. policy of regime change in Syria for the sole benefit of Isreal. McMaster and Pitraeus are both the product of the CFR and their agenda has nothing to do with fighting Islamic terrorism as this has been their utmost tool of imperialistic domination of the Middle East.

    • Replies: @Sal
  3. @Eustace Tilley (not)

    The American-Israeli war in Iraq and Afghanistan was conducted primarily to surround Iran with puppet regimes.

    Look at a map.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  4. @Joe Franklin

    The American-Israeli war in Iraq and Afghanistan was conducted primarily to surround Iran with puppet regimes.

    Okay, but the Empire of Iran itself was created primarily to surround the Persians with puppet buffer states statelets provinces.

  5. Sal says:
    @Eustace Tilley (not)

    Dude, the growth in opium production to record highs occurred AFTER the intervention. The Taliban actually CURBED it before oct 01.

  6. Sal says:
    @Joe Levantine

    True to the core that. NATO (terrorists) destroyed infrastructure and in fact they GREW before Russia came in. Hopefully the new de-facto no-fly zone the latter put in grows because NATO will keep bombing Syrian soldiers (the ONLY ones who have ever f***ed up al Qaeda so effectively that the newer and worse version were made…after the false flag chemical attack leading to bombing failed you will realise it was only in the ensuing year that scary head-chopping pictures came to allow an illegal bombing campaign (and a UK PR company also faked videos for Iraq in the mid-2000s))

    Further, the UK and then the CIA have long since flirted with radical political Islam. A divide and conquer tool from the Muslim Brotherhood’s early days (who Hafez Assad again wiped out in Syria) to the Mujahadeen and Bin Laden (the patsy who died long before Obomba claimed it without evidence) and even today.

    Also, its flagrantly obvious that 9/11/01 was an inside job. Several thousand experienced architects and engineers said so. Just like Oklahoma and San Bernandino, where the narrative of the local media changed when the feds took over. (Also the irony on 9/11/01 of what happened 28 years earlier…)

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ron Paul Comments via RSS