By Stuart Webb | WeaponizedNews.Com | Feb 19, 2015
To have a basic understanding of the issue in the Middle East, you must understand our policy in the Middle East. For many decades now, the United States has been meddling in the affairs of this large and complicated region. This is explained very well in Ron Paul’s book “A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce and Honest Friendship”. The book consists of Ron Paul’s many addresses to the Congress before and after the attacks of 9/11, regarding our foreign policy.
The United States has not properly, or constitutionally, declared war since WWII. Since WWII, the United States has been at war; how does this make sense? It doesn’t make sense when you look at it from an unbiased, intellectual standpoint.
When the President asks Congress to rubber stamp his use of military force for years at a time against an enemy that has no nation, but runs rampant in nations we illegally occupy already, how can we expect to win? The stated goal is unclear. Do we declare war against the entire Middle East? That would at least be a little more specific than declaring a ‘War on Terror’. Terror is very broad. Dictionary.com defines it as:
1. intense, sharp, overmastering fear:to be frantic with terror.
2. an instance or cause of intense fear or anxiety; quality of causing terror:to be a terror to evildoers.
3. any period of frightful violence or bloodshed likened to the Reign of Terror in France.
4. violence or threats of violence used for intimidation or coercion; terrorism.
5. Informal. a person or thing that is especially annoying or unpleasant.
After reading the definition, it’s clear that a lot of things could be classified as “Terror”.
The people running the show want never ending conflict in which they control. War is a big money maker for the politically well connected multinational corporations. If there was peace, these special interests would have to compete in the free market, which they do not want. It’s known that David Rockefeller viewed competition as a sin.
These interests want a monopoly on everything, and if they start to lose that monopoly, they use fear based media to control the public. They want to keep the public submissive to their agenda. Being skeptical, questioning their motives, thinking critically, is not tolerated. If you are reading this article and your thoughts about the article immediately lean towards “this guy is just unpatriotic”, you are conditioned to support your country no matter what. You are the sheep, not me.
The average person doesn’t know that we actually funded Saddam Hussein in the 1980’s, gave him chemical weapons technology as well as satellite support to fight Iran, then used Saddam Hussein’s past possession of chemicals weapons (the ones our own government helped him create) as a pretense to invade Iraq, as well as the WMD narrative that also turned out to be false.
Creating the monster, then using what we created as the reason to invade and destroy the monster?
We (the US) even funded the supposed mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden, in the 1980’s against the Soviets, known as Operation Cyclone.
In the 1950’s our own CIA helped overthrow the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran, Mohammad Mosaddeg, because they wanted a regime change. How would you feel if Chinese intelligence agencies helped orchestrate a regime change here in the United States? If I was Iranian, I wouldn’t be fond of the United States overthrowing the Iranian government and implementing their puppets in my country.
These are just a few examples of our failed foreign policy in the Middle East alone. Remember the sanctions in Iraq that resulted in hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths in the 1990’s? This is why their is so much animosity towards the United States! We are involved in foreign entanglements that serve only a small elite group and political class, not the American people’s interests. Are there real Jihadists in the Middle East? Yes. Did we help create most of them? Yes. Is our presents in the Middle East for the last six decades popular? No. Weren’t fifteen of the supposed nineteen hijackers that took down the World Trade Centers Saudi Arabian? Yes. Did we invade Saudi Arabia? No.
Our National Security is being threatened because of our foreign policy. Our border security is now a run-on joke to most and our government spending is unsustainable.
President Obama recently sent a proposal to the US Congress to authorize his use of military force against the group ISIS (aka “al Qeada”; same flag, same objective), which we helped indirectly fund through the Syrian Rebels or FSA.
Here are a few sections of President Obama’s proposed Joint Resolution:
“Whereas the terrorist organization that has referred to itself as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant and various other names (in this resolution referred to as ‘‘ISIL’’) poses a grave threat to the people and territorial integrity of Iraq and Syria, regional stability, and the national security interests of the United States and its allies and partners;”
The United States is an unstable region because of our actions in the Middle East. We should be trying to fix our country’s problems like our imaginary border and border security. Our biggest National Security threat is our own government who views our returning veterans as their number one threat.
“Whereas the United States is working with regional and global allies and partners to degrade and defeat ISIL, to cut off its funding, to stop the flow of foreign fighters to its ranks, and to support local communities as they reject ISIL;”
Iraq was once stable before we began covert war for decades and eventual occupation. Funding both sides of conflicts, overthrowing regimes in foreign nations, double crossing puppet dictators, always have unintended consequences.
“SEC. 3. DURATION OF THIS AUTHORIZATION.
This authorization for the use of military force shall terminate three years after the date of the enactment of this joint resolution, unless reauthorized.”
Three more years of unconstitutional war will only degrade the National Security interests of the United States.
“SEC. 5. ASSOCIATED PERSONS OR FORCES DEFINED.
In this joint resolution, the term ‘‘associated persons or forces’’ means individuals and organizations fighting for, on behalf of, or alongside ISIL or any closely-related successor entity in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners.”
This basically means the President can wage war on anyone he deems to be associated with ISIL and hostile to the US.
“SEC. 6. REPEAL OF AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAQ.
The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107–243; 116 Stat. 1498; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) is hereby repealed.”
The original Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq was always illegal and an unconstitutional resolution. For war to be constitutional, it must be declared by Congress, not surrendered to the President, making him a dictator essentially. For a war to be winnable, you must have a clear enemy, clear goal, and clear exit. The United States has not had any of those things when using military force since WWII, and that is why we have never officially declared war for the last seventy years.
Only truly defensive wars are justified. Our preemptive actions in the Middle East are not. If you were an Iraqi citizen, wouldn’t you be fighting to protect your homeland? The ISIS, IS or ISIL (whatever Obama calls it) group is a result of our foreign policy.