The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewRon Paul Archive
Troops Out of Syria and Afghanistan? That’s a Good Start!
🔊 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
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
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

We all had a big shock this week when, seemingly out of the blue, President Trump announced that he was removing US troops from Syria and would draw down half of the remaining US troops in Afghanistan. The president told us the troops were in Syria to fight ISIS and with ISIS nearly gone the Syrians and their allies could finish the job.

All of a sudden the Trump haters who for two years had been telling us that the president was dangerous because he might get us in a war, were telling us that the president is dangerous because he was getting us out of a war! These are the same people who have been complaining about the president’s historic efforts to help move toward peace with North Korea.

There was more than a little hypocrisy among the “never Trump” resistance over the president’s announcement. Many of the talking heads and politicians who attacked George W. Bush’s wars, then were silent for President Obama’s wars, are now attacking President Trump for actually taking steps to end some wars. It just goes to show that for many who make their living from politics and the military-industrial complex, there are seldom any real principles involved.

Among the neoconservatives, Sen. Lindsey Graham’s reaction was pretty typical. Though it seems Sen. Graham is never bothered when presidents violate the Constitution to take the US into another war without authorization, he cannot tolerate it when a president follows the Constitution and removes US troops from wars they have no business being involved in. Sen. Graham is now threatening to hold Congressional hearings in attempt to reverse the President’s decision to remove troops from Syria.

Neoconservatives are among the strongest proponents of the idea that as a “unitary executive,” the president should not be encumbered by things like the Constitution when it comes to war-making. Now all of a sudden when a president uses his actual Constitutional authority to remove troops from a war zone the neocons demand Congressional meddling to weaken the president. They get it wrong on both fronts! The president does have Constitutional authority to move US troops and to remove US troops; Congress has the power and the obligation to declare war and the power of the purse to end wars.

Most of the Washington establishment – especially the “resistance” liberals and the neocons – are complaining that by removing US troops from these two war zones President Trump has gone too far. I would disagree with them. I call President Trump’s announcement a good start. Americans are tired of being the world’s policemen. The United States does not “lose influence” by declining to get involved in disputes oceans away. We lose influence by spending more on the military than most of the rest of the world combined and meddling where we are not wanted. We will lose a whole lot more influence when their crazy spending makes us bankrupt. Is that what they want?

We should pay attention to Washington’s wild reaction to Trump’s announcement. The vested interests do not want us to have any kind of “peace dividend” because they have become so rich on the “war dividend.” Meanwhile the middle class is getting poorer and we’re all less safe. Let’s hope President Trump continues these moves to restore sanity in our foreign policy. That would really make America great again!

(Republished from The Ron Paul Institute by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 8 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Hail says: • Website

    I call President Trump’s announcement a good start. Americans are tired of being the world’s policemen.

    If it’s a good start, what commitment is next up for disengagement?

    I’d say a reduction in U.S. forces in Europe would be win-win. No more EU defense freeriding might cause a mild re-militarization over there (nowhere to go but up, with many spending <1% of GDP on defense and almost none above 1.5%). A move back up towards the non-EU world average (ca. 2.5%) could spill over into a toughened migrant policy.

    • Replies: @Realist
  2. Realist says:
    @Hail

    An intelligent action would be to remove all American troops from foreign land

  3. Christo says:

    This man should have(and IMV would have) been president. And he would have been a great president and possibly changed and saved this nation(abolishing the FED, AA, and all that). But his whole Presidential campaign was blacked-out and black-balled by the entire MSM and with the condolence of both parties. Not a peep about what a constitutional outrage and crime that was. They attempted to do the same to Donald Trump but he had the money to campaign a survive to become the republican presidential nominee and also the established “fame” where black-balling him would have been too noticeable to too many people to getaway with as they did to Ron Paul. It also helped that his republican party presidential opponents were such beta-male neocon hookers even the MSM could not subvert the public to think otherwise.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  4. @Christo

    This man should have(and IMV would have) been president. And he would have been a great president and possibly changed and saved this nation(abolishing the FED, AA, and all that).

    AGREED, Mr. Christo, but with something to add.

    I was around when Dr. Paul was still in the running for R-candidate in late winter of 2012. You are right that the Lyin’ Press was marginalizing him to their best abilities. However, how did Donald Trump not get marginalized 3-4 years later? I don’t think it was just his large fortune, as you wrote. Trump brought up the existential hot-button topic of the immigration invasion when nobody else would, that’s how. That’s what made him a candidate impossible to ignore.

    I told Ron Paul to his face in late winter of 2012 that if he wanted to win the ____ (my state) primary, he needed to talk about illegal immigration. He was a stand-up guy and made a reply about being all for law-and-order, etc. Imagine, though, if he had taken my advice to make this issue a large one in his campaign … shoulda’, woulda’ coulda’ …

    • Replies: @Johann
    , @Christo
  5. Thank you, Ron Paul, for laying out the Constitutional basis for how the US Feral Gov’t is supposed to operate wrt war. Congress must declare war and fund it. (Originally, without that standing army that is nowhere specified in the document, the states were to raise armies.) Only then, the President is to be involved as Commander-in-Chief to make decisions on HOW the war is run, note, NOT with WHICH COUNTRIES.

    Great short optimistic column for Christmas time. Thank you, and Merry Christmas.

    I gotta say that I never really got it straight what I think of this guy’s politics, but he did write and sing some great music.

  6. Johann says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Sorry Ron but the Muricans sure do love their NFL, perversions, and wars.

  7. Christo says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Ron Paul was/is of the old school libertarian background . One of the things about Libertarians was they tended toward more “open immigration” , so it would have been against his nature/political stance to make that a “leg” of his campaign platform.

    However do note, His mention of “law and order” , under such principles includes that of enforcing immigration laws , not ignoring or assisting aliens in breaking them.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  8. @Christo

    However do note, His mention of “law and order” , under such principles includes that of enforcing immigration laws , not ignoring or assisting aliens in breaking them.

    Absolutely, Christo. I knew he meant it that way. However, if he’d made this a big part of his campaign, in addition to the rightful talk on the FED, bailouts of banks, ending the police state and the warfare state, that first issue may have put him in the limelight enough to go far in that campaign.

Current Commenter
says:

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