Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ron Paul: Questions That Won't Be Asked About Iraq
House Floor ^ | 10 Sept 02 | Dr. Ron Paul

Posted on 09/10/2002 12:57:09 PM PDT by Zviadist

Congressman Ron Paul
U.S. House of Representatives
September 10, 2002

QUESTIONS THAT WON'T BE ASKED ABOUT IRAQ

Soon we hope to have hearings on the pending war with Iraq. I am concerned there are some questions that won’t be asked- and maybe will not even be allowed to be asked. Here are some questions I would like answered by those who are urging us to start this war.

1. Is it not true that the reason we did not bomb the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War was because we knew they could retaliate?

2. Is it not also true that we are willing to bomb Iraq now because we know it cannot retaliate- which just confirms that there is no real threat?

3. Is it not true that those who argue that even with inspections we cannot be sure that Hussein might be hiding weapons, at the same time imply that we can be more sure that weapons exist in the absence of inspections?

4. Is it not true that the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency was able to complete its yearly verification mission to Iraq just this year with Iraqi cooperation?

5. Is it not true that the intelligence community has been unable to develop a case tying Iraq to global terrorism at all, much less the attacks on the United States last year? Does anyone remember that 15 of the 19 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia and that none came from Iraq?

6. Was former CIA counter-terrorism chief Vincent Cannistraro wrong when he recently said there is no confirmed evidence of Iraq’s links to terrorism?

7. Is it not true that the CIA has concluded there is no evidence that a Prague meeting between 9/11 hijacker Atta and Iraqi intelligence took place?

8. Is it not true that northern Iraq, where the administration claimed al-Qaeda were hiding out, is in the control of our "allies," the Kurds?

9. Is it not true that the vast majority of al-Qaeda leaders who escaped appear to have safely made their way to Pakistan, another of our so-called allies?

10. Has anyone noticed that Afghanistan is rapidly sinking into total chaos, with bombings and assassinations becoming daily occurrences; and that according to a recent UN report the al-Qaeda "is, by all accounts, alive and well and poised to strike again, how, when, and where it chooses"

11. Why are we taking precious military and intelligence resources away from tracking down those who did attack the United States- and who may again attack the United States- and using them to invade countries that have not attacked the United States?

12. Would an attack on Iraq not just confirm the Arab world's worst suspicions about the US- and isn't this what bin Laden wanted?

13. How can Hussein be compared to Hitler when he has no navy or air force, and now has an army 1/5 the size of twelve years ago, which even then proved totally inept at defending the country?

14. Is it not true that the constitutional power to declare war is exclusively that of the Congress? Should presidents, contrary to the Constitution, allow Congress to concur only when pressured by public opinion? Are presidents permitted to rely on the UN for permission to go to war?

15. Are you aware of a Pentagon report studying charges that thousands of Kurds in one village were gassed by the Iraqis, which found no conclusive evidence that Iraq was responsible, that Iran occupied the very city involved, and that evidence indicated the type of gas used was more likely controlled by Iran not Iraq?

16. Is it not true that anywhere between 100,000 and 300,000 US soldiers have suffered from Persian Gulf War syndrome from the first Gulf War, and that thousands may have died?

17. Are we prepared for possibly thousands of American casualties in a war against a country that does not have the capacity to attack the United States?

18. Are we willing to bear the economic burden of a 100 billion dollar war against Iraq, with oil prices expected to skyrocket and further rattle an already shaky American economy? How about an estimated 30 years occupation of Iraq that some have deemed necessary to "build democracy" there?

19. Iraq’s alleged violations of UN resolutions are given as reason to initiate an attack, yet is it not true that hundreds of UN Resolutions have been ignored by various countries without penalty?

20. Did former President Bush not cite the UN Resolution of 1990 as the reason he could not march into Baghdad, while supporters of a new attack assert that it is the very reason we can march into Baghdad?

21. Is it not true that, contrary to current claims, the no-fly zones were set up by Britain and the United States without specific approval from the United Nations?

22. If we claim membership in the international community and conform to its rules only when it pleases us, does this not serve to undermine our position, directing animosity toward us by both friend and foe?

23. How can our declared goal of bringing democracy to Iraq be believable when we prop up dictators throughout the Middle East and support military tyrants like Musharaf in Pakistan, who overthrew a democratically-elected president?

24. Are you familiar with the 1994 Senate Hearings that revealed the U.S. knowingly supplied chemical and biological materials to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war and as late as 1992- including after the alleged Iraqi gas attack on a Kurdish village?

25. Did we not assist Saddam Hussein’s rise to power by supporting and encouraging his invasion of Iran? Is it honest to criticize Saddam now for his invasion of Iran, which at the time we actively supported?

26. Is it not true that preventive war is synonymous with an act of aggression, and has never been considered a moral or legitimate US policy?

27. Why do the oil company executives strongly support this war if oil is not the real reason we plan to take over Iraq?

28. Why is it that those who never wore a uniform and are confident that they won’t have to personally fight this war are more anxious for this war than our generals?

29. What is the moral argument for attacking a nation that has not initiated aggression against us, and could not if it wanted?

30. Where does the Constitution grant us permission to wage war for any reason other than self-defense?

31. Is it not true that a war against Iraq rejects the sentiments of the time-honored Treaty of Westphalia, nearly 400 years ago, that countries should never go into another for the purpose of regime change?

32. Is it not true that the more civilized a society is, the less likely disagreements will be settled by war?

33. Is it not true that since World War II Congress has not declared war and- not coincidentally- we have not since then had a clear-cut victory?

34. Is it not true that Pakistan, especially through its intelligence services, was an active supporter and key organizer of the Taliban?

35. Why don't those who want war bring a formal declaration of war resolution to the floor of Congress?


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: ronpaullist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 541-560561-580581-600 ... 821-830 next last
To: Texasforever
Do you have any idea re: times for those speeches?
561 posted on 09/10/2002 9:34:37 PM PDT by justshe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 530 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
Is there anything in the Constitution limiting the Congress to ONLY authorize the use of US military in what would be described as a "declared war"?

Must not be, they used military force at Waco against American citizens, so I would guess that Iraqis are ok.

562 posted on 09/10/2002 9:35:58 PM PDT by takenoprisoner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 559 | View Replies]

To: FreedomFriend
If you had bothered to read the entire thread, you would have seen an intense and thorough discussion of the Constitution, The War Powers Act, the current Resolution.

563 posted on 09/10/2002 9:37:42 PM PDT by justshe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 542 | View Replies]

To: Isle of sanity in CA
What document/book/journal is this from?
564 posted on 09/10/2002 9:39:49 PM PDT by takenoprisoner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 560 | View Replies]

To: Isle of sanity in CA
Earlier you insinuated to Soccermom that unless she is going to the front line, she's a 'chickenhawk' and shouldn't be providing her opinion.

I did not insinuate that Soccermom should not be providing her opinion, but IMO the opinion of those who have more to lose or have lost family members has more weight in the discussion.

Everytime I have seen someone make that argument on FR it has turned out to be someone who didn't serve themself. From your description above, it looks as if you worked on 'classified weapons research' which I'm sure is very honorable, but doesn't quite meet the definition of military service.

I agree that 'classified weapons research' doesn't meet the definition of military service, which is why I don't claim to have served in the military. But that is by request of the military, not my own. I enlisted in the Navy for a six-year tour in Nuclear Engineering but during training due to my previous education and test scores I was asked to take a weapons research assignment with a National Lab. Since I never was on active duty I do not feel I was ever actually in the military nor do I claim to have been.

I find it disturbing that you are going around trying to shut other people out of the conversation that have no LESS military service than YOU do.

When the drums of war are being beaten we should all question who is beating them and why they are being beaten. That is what keeps this country free.

In answer to your question, yes I have served but am now a happy civilian. I was on Desron 33 deployed staff, USS Callaghan, and with the fleet deployable medical unit (navy's version of MASH.) I have spent alot of time in the Persian Gulf (Desert Storm, Southern Watch) during 3 separate deployments. Unlike you, I DON'T think that civilians should have a less than equal voice when it comes to deciding WHO to fight, but I do think the military should be in control of HOW to fight.

I think you owe soccermom an apology...

Soccermom has my apology if she thinks she needs it, but we must think about all of the ramifications before we act. We can't un-ring the bell later.

565 posted on 09/10/2002 9:40:58 PM PDT by FreeLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 508 | View Replies]

To: takenoprisoner
Waco, IMO, was a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act that has (thus far) gone unchallenged.

TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 67 >Sec. 1385. - Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus

Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both


566 posted on 09/10/2002 9:48:41 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 562 | View Replies]

To: takenoprisoner; FreedomFriend
It used to be that we took them out then rebuilt them. ie Germany and Japan.
Today we build them first and then take them out. ie Iraq

Or Osama and his men we trained.



I forgot the sarcasm tag, FreedomFriend ...

Frankly, despite the narodnaya volya (or "Will of the People") our Executive Branch has flung in our democratized faces with abandon for 9 years now, I'm a little weak on the whole notion our actual representatives ever again will "declare" a war.

It was not my understanding Congress had declared jack with regard to any of the Globokop assignments we've taken to calling "wars" since World War II. They just cut checks and -- thanks to Viet Nam -- always remember to make a big show of "supporting the troops".

(Which inviolate rule -- and a good one, I'm an army brat and extremely pro-military -- came in handy for the Pubbies as they refused to criticize Clinton's great "Moral War" in Serbia and waffled on their promises to pull out what with all the contracts for our continued presence having already been inked with the likes of Halliburton.)

If you ask me, another useful function of the "War on a Noun Series" has been to deconstruct the notion of "war" into a perpetual, abstract, state-of-mind sort of thing.

Else how to explain a "War on Poverty" when the likes of Christ said the poor would always be with us (despite our best attempts to eradicate Them).

Absurd theatre.

567 posted on 09/10/2002 9:51:04 PM PDT by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 552 | View Replies]

To: Isle of sanity in CA
Wow ... you make Jefferson out to sound like the prescient Progressive he was. He'd be right at home today among the panoply of utopians for whom it is axiomatic that Time+Change=Progress and evolution allows only for ascent ... never mind all the extinct bodies -- like fallen civilizations -- strewn along the way.

I believe as long as Constitutions are interpreted and amended by the lights of the enduring truths and "inalienable" liberties (as enumerated in part by our Declaration, lucky us), all goes well.

Do you think Jefferson likewise believed the "self-evident" truths of the Declaration would evolve somehow?

568 posted on 09/10/2002 9:58:04 PM PDT by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 560 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
Waco, IMO, was a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act that has (thus far) gone unchallenged.

We agree. And by the same standard of the rule of law formed by our Constitution, only Congress can declare war. Now, agreed congress has acquiesced by decree to presidential authority in these matters. Is it Constitutional for them to do so? I don't think so without a formal declaration of war. Now could our forefathers have envisioned terrorists like these creatures? Again, I don't think so. Yet still, I believe the rule applies regardless of circumstance. Identify the enemy. Identify their homeland and destroy it. Now the last time I checked, no Iraqis were onboard any flight involving 911. Regardless, if Saddam funded these Saudi citizens in this venture, and our President is convinced he did and can show reasonable proof, then let's go to Baghdad tonight!

569 posted on 09/10/2002 10:01:23 PM PDT by takenoprisoner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 566 | View Replies]

To: takenoprisoner; Askel5
I'm trying to find the original source. It was in an old thread. I found it Here
570 posted on 09/10/2002 10:05:54 PM PDT by Isle of sanity in CA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 564 | View Replies]

To: Zviadist
Is this guy for real??
571 posted on 09/10/2002 10:06:34 PM PDT by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
Is this guy for real??

No, the Congress is filled with
papier mache constructs.

572 posted on 09/10/2002 10:10:31 PM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 571 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
Well that explains alot .. LOL
573 posted on 09/10/2002 10:12:33 PM PDT by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 572 | View Replies]

To: Askel5
Wow ... you make Jefferson out to sound like the prescient Progressive he was. He'd be right at home today among the panoply of utopians for whom it is axiomatic that Time+Change=Progress and evolution allows only for ascent ... never mind all the extinct bodies -- like fallen civilizations -- strewn along the way.

I have always thought that Jefferson has been regarded as the most 'progressive' of the founding fathers. Isn't he the founder most often referenced by the left?

But optimist or not, that particular quote hits on something. Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, the Constitution is outdated. It is barely followed. It's 'clear meaning' changes from decade to decade. Personally, I'd like to see a constitutional convention in my lifetime, but I don't see it happening. The amendment process makes the constitution a living document, but it's getting rusty from lack of use. In reality, the Constitution means whatever the party in power, current judges, and current public opinion wants it to mean. Call me a pessimist...

How about you? Do you really think that we will go back to a government similar in size to what it was even 75 years ago? I don't.

It's late and I'm emoting... Almost bed time.

574 posted on 09/10/2002 10:24:08 PM PDT by Isle of sanity in CA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 568 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
What does that have to do with my question of WHERE has the administration said Iraq has serious links to terrorist attacks against the US, more specifically 9/11.
575 posted on 09/10/2002 10:30:39 PM PDT by rb22982
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: Askel5
Absurd theatre.

Understatement of massive proportion. Well said Askel5 and goodnight all.

576 posted on 09/10/2002 10:31:09 PM PDT by takenoprisoner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 567 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
By the ACU. Which of course just tows the (R) party line. Like for example if he votes against a Bush spending bill, because it increases too much, it's voted as a 'not conservative'. However, the other people who voted against it (D), voted against it because 'it wasn't enough money.' Therein lies the difference.
577 posted on 09/10/2002 10:34:20 PM PDT by rb22982
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: rb22982
What does that have to do with my question of WHERE has the administration said Iraq has serious links to terrorist attacks against the US, more specifically 9/11.

Sort of like Saddam’s son UBAY(ph) calling for terrorist attacks on the United States in the Arab press today. Sort of like Saddam's attempt to assassinate an ex-president. Sort of like Saddam violating the cease fire agreements a total of 228 times since hostilities ended in the Gulf War. Sort of like the Iraqi defectors testifying that Saddam has provided a terrorist training camp to Al Qaeda in the guise of an "anti-hijacking" training facility. Sort of like the head of Iraqi intelligence meeting with Atta in Prague. The fact is that there is NOTHING that will convince anyone that is not convinced by now because it would mean that this administration is actually right and that cannot be allowed.

578 posted on 09/10/2002 10:41:51 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 575 | View Replies]

To: rb22982
Bs.
579 posted on 09/10/2002 10:43:13 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 577 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
Your attack on SPete is beyond the pale. You swine. You vulgar little maggot. You worthless bag of filth. As we say in Texas, I'll bet you couldn't pour piss out of a boot with instructions on the heel.

You are a canker. A sore that won't go away. I would rather kiss a lawyer than be seen with you. You're a putrescent mass, a walking vomit. You are a spineless little worm deserving nothing but the profoundest contempt. You are a jerk, a cad, a weasel. Your life is a monument to stupidity. You are a stench, a revulsion, a big suck on a sour lemon.

You are a bleating foal, a curdled staggering mutant dwarf smeared richly with the effluvia and offal accompanying your alleged birth into this world. An insensate, blinking calf, meaningful to nobody, abandoned by the puke-drooling, giggling beasts who sired you and then killed themselves in recognition of what they had done. I will never get over the embarrassment of belonging to the same species as you. You are a monster, an ogre, a malformity. I barf at the very thought of you.

You have all the appeal of a paper cut. Lepers avoid you. You are vile, worthless, less than nothing. You are a weed, a fungus, the dregs of this earth. And did I mention you smell? Try to edit your responses of unnecessary material before attempting to impress us with your insight. The evidence that you are a nincompoop will still be available to readers, but they will be able to access it more rapidly.

You snail-skulled little rabbit. Would that a hawk pick you up, drive its beak into your brain, and upon finding it rancid set you loose to fly briefly before spattering the ocean rocks with the frothy pink shame of your ignoble blood.

May you choke on the queasy, convulsing nausea of your own trite, foolish beliefs. You are weary, stale, flat and unprofitable. You are grimy, squalid, nasty and profane. You are foul and disgusting. You're a fool, an ignoramus. Monkeys look down on you. Even sheep won't have sex with you.

You are unreservedly pathetic, starved for attention, and lost in a land that reality forgot. And what meaning do you expect your delusionally self-important statements of unknowing, inexperienced opinion to have with us? What fantasy do you hold that you would believe that your tiny-fisted tantrums would have more weight than that of a leprous desert rat, spinning rabidly in a circle, waiting for the bite of the snake?

You are a waste of flesh. You have no rhythm. You are ridiculous and obnoxious. You are the moral equivalent of a leech. You are a living emptiness, a meaningless void. You are sour and senile. You are a disease, you puerile, one-handed, slack-jawed, drooling, meatslapper. On a good day you're a half-wit. You remind me of drool.

You are deficient in all that lends character. You have the personality of wallpaper. You are dank and filthy. You are asinine and benighted. You are the source of all unpleasantness. You spread misery and sorrow wherever you go. You smarmy lagerlout git. You bloody woofter sod. Bugger off, pillock. You grotty wanking oik artless base-court apple-john. You clouted boggish foot-licking twit. You dankish clack-dish plonker. You gormless crook-pated tosser. You churlish boil-brained clotpole ponce. You cockered bum-bailey poofter. You craven dewberry pisshead cockup pratting naff. You gob-kissing gleeking flap-mouthed coxcomb. You dread-bolted fobbing beef-witted clapper-clawed flirt-gill.

You are a fiend and a coward, and you have bad breath. You are degenerate, noxious and depraved. I feel debased just for knowing you exist. I despise everything about you, and I wish you would go away.

I cannot believe how incredibly stupid you are. I mean rock-hard stupid. Dehydrated-rock-hard stupid. Stupid, so stupid it goes way beyond the stupid we know into a whole different dimension of stupid. You are trans-stupid stupid. Meta-stupid. Stupid collapsed on itself so far that even the neutrons have collapsed. Stupid gotten so dense that no intellect can escape. Singularity stupid. Blazing hot mid-day sun on Mercury stupid. You emit more stupid in one second than our entire galaxy emits in a year. Quasar stupid. Your writing has to be a troll. Nothing in our universe can really be this stupid. Perhaps this is some primordial fragment from the original big bang of stupid. Some pure essence of a stupid so uncontaminated by anything else as to be beyond the laws of physics that we know. I'm sorry. I can't go on. This is an epiphany of stupid for me.

After this, you may not hear from me again for a while. I don't have enough strength left to deride your ignorant questions and half baked comments about unimportant trivia, or any of the rest of this drivel. Duh. The only thing worse than your logic is your manners. I have snipped away most of what you wrote, because, well... it didn't really say anything.

Your attempt at constructing a creative post was pitiful. I mean, really, stringing together a bunch of insults among a load of babbling was hardly effective... Maybe later in life, after you have learned to read, write, spell, and count, you will have more success. True, these are rudimentary skills that many of us "normal" people take for granted that everyone has an easy time of mastering. But we sometimes forget that there are "challenged" persons in this world who find these things more difficult. If I had known, that this was your case then I would have never read your post. It just wouldn't have been "right". Sort of like parking in a handicap space. I wish you the best of luck in the emotional, and social struggles that seem to be placing such a demand on you.


580 posted on 09/10/2002 10:50:39 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 553 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 541-560561-580581-600 ... 821-830 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson