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
Paris and What Should be Done
🔊 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
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The horrific attacks in Paris on Friday have, predictably, led to much over-reaction and demands that we do more of the exact things that radicalize people and make them want to attack us. The French military wasted no time bombing Syria in retaliation for the attacks, though it is not known where exactly the attackers were from. Thousands of ISIS fighters in Syria are not Syrian, but came to Syria to overthrow the Assad government from a number of foreign countries — including from France and the US.

Ironically, the overthrow of Assad has also been the goal of both the US and France since at least 2011.

Because the US and its allies are essentially on the same side as ISIS and other groups – seeking the overthrow of Assad – many of the weapons they have sent to the more “moderate” factions also seeking Assad’s ouster have ended up in the hands of radicals. Moderate groups have joined more radical factions over and over, taking their US-provided training and weapons with them. Other moderate groups have been captured or killed, their US-provided weapons also going to the radicals. Thus the more radical factions have become better equipped and better trained, while occasionally being attacked by US or allied planes.

Does anyone not believe this is a recipe for the kind of disaster we have now seen in Paris? The French in particular have been very active in arming even the more radical groups in Syria, as they push for more political influence in the region. Why do they still refuse to believe in the concept of blowback? Is it because the explanation that, “they hate us because we are free,” makes it easier to escalate abroad and crack down at home?

It may not be popular to say this as emotions run high and calls ring out for more bombing in the Middle East, but there is another way to address the problem. There is an alternative to using more military intervention to address a problem that was caused by military intervention in the first place.

That solution is to reject the militarists and isolationists. It is to finally reject the policy of using “regime change” to further perceived US and western foreign policy goals, whether in Iraq, Libya, Syria, or elsewhere. It is to reject the foolish idea that we can ship hundreds of millions of dollars worth of weapons to “moderates” in the Middle East and expect none of them to fall into the hands of radicals.

More bombs will not solve the problems in the Middle East. But a more promising approach to the Middle East is currently under fire from the isolationists in Washington. The nuclear deal with Iran ends UN sanctions and opens that country to international trade. Just last week the presidents of France and Iran met to discuss a number of trade deals. Other countries have followed. Trade and respect for national sovereignty trumps violence, but Washington still doesn’t seem to get it. Most presidential candidates compete to thump the table loudest against any deal with Iran. They will use this attack to propagandize against approving trade with Iran even though Iran has condemned the attack and is also in the crosshairs of ISIS.

Here is the alternative: Focus on trade and friendly relations, stop shipping weapons, abandon “regime change” and other manipulations, respect national sovereignty, and maintain a strong defense at home including protecting the borders from those who may seek to do us harm.

(Republished from The Ron Paul Institute by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Paris Attacks 
Hide 11 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Tom_R says:

    FINALLY, A VOICE OF REASON–THE PATH TO PEACE AND SAFETY.

    Thanks for the excellent article, Sir. You are so right in every way. I agree that we must stop interfering in other countries, such as the Middle East and stop all these wars.

    The problem is the Israel Lobby (or Jewish Lobby) which is using the gullible Christian goyim to “protect the Holy Land” while spitting on them in Israel and flooding our nations with aliens.

    As the Lobby owns and operates most of our politicians, with campaign contributions (and billions more under the table possibly) and its main goals are fighting for Israel and destroying goyim with the alien invasion, there are only 2 ways out–public financing of campaigns, and binding superseding national referenda. You will notice the Lobby is against both, as it wants to continue this racket.

    Most importantly, we must enforce our own borders. We must totally ban immigration and deport all illegal aliens (by encouraging self-deportation).

  2. @ http://ronaldthomaswest.com/2015/11/13/friday-the-13th-in-paris/

    “We’ve seen an outrageous attempt to terrorize innocent civilians, this is an attack not just on Paris, it is an attack not just on the people of France, but it is an attack on all of humanity and the universal values we share” -Barack Obama

    Better had Obama truthfully stated ‘our western powers clandestine agencies employing state terror has backfired”

    Speaking directly to the above intelligence report, the western powers enabling the rise of Islamic State, according to the former boss of the Defense Intelligence Agency, General Mike Flynn, “was willful” & “a policy decision”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SG3j8OYKgn4

    Why didn’t Obama, Hollande and company consider their clandestinely promoting the rise of Islamic State as a device to overthrow Assad was “an outrageous attempt to terrorize innocent civilians [and] an attack on all of humanity and the universal values we share” ??

  3. Mark Green says: • Website

    Ron Paul is a fountainhead of reason and common sense. Thank you, Dr. Paul!

  4. “Here is the alternative: Focus on trade and friendly relations, stop shipping weapons, abandon “regime change” and other manipulations, respect national sovereignty, and maintain a strong defense at home including protecting the borders from those who may seek to do us harm.”

    And remove any non citizens who may cause us physical or economic harm.
    (taking our jobs and using entitlements designed for and paid by citizens.)

  5. Elena says:

    Thank you Ron Paul for your sane comments in an insane world.

  6. This sounds brilliant. Go Ron Paul!!!

  7. Tony says:

    Hey Paul, I can see why you dont stand a chance to get the republican nomination.

  8. ” The horrific attacks in Paris on Friday have, predictably, led to much over-reaction and demands that we do more of the exact things that radicalize people and make them want to attack us.”

    The Jihadis and ISIS types would try and conquer the world with or without the presense of the West. What did the Yazidis do to Sunnis that made ISIS genocide them.

    It wouldn’t make a difference if the US went totoally isolationist and stopped supporting MidEast thugs, the ISIS/Salafists will still attempt to conquer the West and will resort to the same sort of attacks to succeed .

    Islamic armies and empires have been conquering, enslaving and genociding non Muslims long before the America existed and before Christsendom started colonising.

    I agree with a lot of what Ron Paul says but I disagree with his opinion that if we just left them alone, they would play nice. They would not focus on us but eventually they would set their sights on us , to Islamisize the West.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  9. alexander says:

    Dear Mr Paul,

    Thanks for a wonderful observation.

    It seems that the Paris terror attack, just like 9-11, was the greatest boon for ” Neocons” ,”warmongers” and “interventionists” that they could possibly ask for.

    All the “totalitarian industries” thrive on terror…all the surveillance and repression “industries” thrive on terror too.

    Terrorism is their bread and butter, without it they would cease to exist….

    The ISIS attacks on Paris function to bankroll these industries, keep them flush with cash, and perpetuate the endless cycle of war that the Neocons crave and adore…

    One can make a very strong argument that the ISIS attacks are handmaiden to the Neocon war making machine and serves that industry’s entrenchment and perpetuation much more than it serves Muslims around the world..

    I don’t see the value of it to Muslims in France…except to exacerbate their alienation and repression…Does anyone ?

    I don’t see the value of it to Syrian refugees in their struggle to find safe haven from their worn torn country….only quarantines and detentions… more pain and suffering… .and big big dollars for the “Neocon detention industries”…

    ISIS seems to function to underwrite ” the Neocon perpetual war machine” more than it does anything else.

    How sad for us all.

  10. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @greysquirrell

    greysquirrell, I worked in the Middle East for some years in the 1970’s and at that time folks from the west could travel freely and were treated with respect in that region. The truth is our government has been messing in the affairs of these countries (and also others) since becoming a world power. Much has been written about this by retired CIA and other sources. It is called “blowback”. Our policies literally created the people that you call Jihadis. If you poke a stick at a hornet’s nest, sooner or later you will get stung. You can’t really blame the hornet.

    Using words like “isolationist” just shows that you have bought into the talking points of political propaganda. Free trade and setting a good example is the best way secure peace and prosperity. Ron Paul has always advocated these things.

    • Replies: @greysquirrell
  11. @Anonymous

    My dad was employed in the oil industry over there (the MidEast) , so I spent many years in the MidEast. The Gulf region is still generally safe for Western expats (excepting Yemen) but there was no doubt in my mind that the locals only refrained from militancy against Western expats purely out of economic necessity. From the point of view of the Western expat, Iraq and many other parts of the Arab MidEast were much safer when secular dictators ruled and Western support for anti-secular Jihadi elements and Saudi Arabia has contributed much to making the region bad for everyone.
    True that Western foreign policy has created much of the contemporary Jihadi problem and led to much anger at the West but Arab Muslims have an attitude that they must spread their culture by any means and dominate. This precedes any modern Western interference.
    I don’t disagree that Western foreign policy has led to much of the Islamist problem but I disagree in the sentiment that Islam and especially Muslim Arabs would just be content to not try and dominate .
    A big culprit to the Jihadi problem can be traced to the House of Saud and their support for Wahabism. The West enabled the Sauds so one could rightly argue that without Western support the Wahabi menance would not be soo severe but the menance wasn’t created by the West.

    “Isolationist” isn’t a bad term in my book but I do acknowledge the MSM and US establishment uses it as a pejorative. When I see “Isolationist” I think non-interventionist , and not someone who wants to totally cut off the country from all outside contact and influence.

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 have been licensed to 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