About Us


Harmony Forum

Peace from Harmony
Ronald Paul. Reckless Congress Declares War on Russia

Ronald Paul



Reckless Congress Declares War o­n Russia


Today the US House passed what I consider to be o­ne of the worst pieces of legislation ever.

H. Res. 758was billed as a resolution strongly condemning the actions of the Russian Federation, under President Vladimir Putin, which has carried out a policy of aggression against neighboring countries aimed at political and economic domination. In fact, the bill was 16 pages of war propaganda that should have made even neocons blush, if they were capable of such a thing.

These are the kinds of resolutions I have always watched closely in Congress, as what are billed as harmless statements of opinion often lead to sanctions and war. I remember in 1998 arguing strongly against the Iraq Liberation Act because, as I said at the time, I knew it would lead to war. We all know what happened next.

That is why I can hardly believe they are getting away with it again, and this time with even higher stakes: provoking a war with Russia that could result in total destruction! If anyone thinks I am exaggerating about how bad this resolution really is, let me just offer a few examples from the legislation itself:

The resolution (paragraph 3) accuses Russia of an invasion of Ukraine and condemns Russias violation of Ukrainian sovereignty. The statement is offered with out any proof of such a thing. Surely with our sophisticated satellites that can read a license plate from space we should have video and pictures of this Russian invasion. None have been offered. As to Russias violation of Ukrainian sovereignty, why isnt it a violation of Ukraines sovereignty for the US to participate in the overthrow of that countrys elected government as it did in February? We have all heard the tapes of State Department officials plotting with the US Ambassador in Ukraine to overthrow the government. We heard US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland bragging that the US spent $5 billion o­n regime change in Ukraine. Why is that OK?

The resolution (paragraph 11) accuses the people in east Ukraine of holding fraudulent and illegal elections in November. Why is it that every time elections do not produce the results desired by the US government they are called illegal and fraudulent? Arent the people of eastern Ukraine allowed self-determination? Isnt that a basic human right?

The resolution (paragraph 13) demands a withdrawal of Russia forces from Ukraine even though the US government has provided no evidence the Russian army was ever in Ukraine. This

paragraph also urges the government in Kiev to resume military operations against the eastern regions seeking independence.

The resolution (paragraph 14) states with certainty that the Malaysia Airlines flight 17 that crashed in Ukraine was brought down by a missile fired by Russian-backed separatist forces in eastern Ukraine. This is simply incorrect, as the final report o­n the investigation of this tragedy will not even be released until next year and the preliminary report did not state that a missile brought down the plane. Neither did the preliminary report conducted with the participation of all

countries involved assign blame to any side.

Paragraph 16 of the resolution condemns Russia for selling arms to the Assad government in Syria. It does not mention, of course, that those weapons are going to fight ISIS which we claim is the enemy while the US weapons supplied to the rebels in Syria have actually found their way into the hands of ISIS!

Paragraph 17 of the resolution condemns Russia for what the US claims are economic sanctions (coercive economic measures) against Ukraine. This even though the US has repeatedly hit Russia

with economic sanctions and is considering even more!

The resolution (paragraph 22) states that Russia invaded the Republic of Georgia in 2008. This is simply untrue. Even the European Union no friend of Russia concluded in its investigation of the events in 2008 that it was Georgia that started an unjustified war against Russia not the other way around! How does Congress get away with such blatant falsehoods? Do Members not even bother to read these resolutions before voting?...

In paragraph 34 the resolution begins to even become comical, condemning the Russians for what it claims are attacks o­n computer networks of the United States and illicitly acquiring information about the US government. In the after math of the Snowden revelations about the level of US spying o­n the rest of the world, how can the US claim the moral authority to condemn such actions in others?

Chillingly, the resolution singles out Russian state-funded media outlets for attack, claiming that they distort public opinion. The US government, of course, spends billions of dollars worldwide to finance and sponsor media outlets including Voice of America and RFE/RL, as well as to subsidize independent media in countless counties overseas. How long before alternative information sources like RT[Russia Today] are banned in the United States? This legislation brings us closer to that unhappy day when the government decides the kind of programming we can and cannot consume and calls such a violation freedom.

The resolution gives the green light (paragraph 45) to Ukrainian President Poroshenko to re-start his military assault o­n the independence-seeking eastern provinces, urging the disarming of separatist and paramilitary forces in eastern Ukraine..

There are too many more ridiculous and horrific statements in this legislation to completely discuss. Probably the single most troubling part of this resolution, however, is the statement that military intervention by the Russian Federation in Ukraine poses a threat to international peace and security. Such terminology is not an accident: this phrase is the poison pill planted in this legislation from which future, more aggressive resolutions will follow. After all, if we accept that Russia is posing a threat to international peace how can such a thing be ignored? These are the slippery slopes that lead to war.

This dangerous legislation passed today, December 4, with o­nly ten (!) votes against! o­nly ten legislators are concerned over the use of blatant propaganda and falsehoods to push such reckless saber rattling toward Russia. Here are the Members who voted NO o­n this legislation. If you do not see your own Representative o­n this list call and ask why they are voting to bring us closer to war with Russia! If you do see your Representative o­n the below list, call and thank him or her for standing up to the warmongers. Voting NO o­n H. Res. 758:

1) Justin Amash (R-MI), 2) John Duncan (R-TN), 3) Alan Grayson (D-FL), 4) Alcee Hastings (D-FL),

5) Walter Jones (R-NC), 6) Thomas Massie (R-KY), 7) Jim McDermott (D-WA), 8) George Miller (D-CA), 9) Beto ORourke (D-TX), 10 Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) [24]


Ronald Paul is an American physician and politician. He is a member of the Republican Party and from 1976 to 2013 (with interruptions) he was a member in the US House of Representatives. Paul was candidate in the US presidential election in 1988, in 2008 and 2012.


Original: http://original.antiwar.com/paul/2014/12/05/reckless-congress-declares-war-on-russia/ 



Ron Paul: Why Are US Special Forces in 81 Countries? - 27 April 2015

A Return to the Peace Party - 28 April 2015

Unending War o­n Terror - 28 April 2015

Absolute Perversion of the Law in US Drone Killings - 13 March 2014

Who's Starving Yemen's Children? - 29 April 2015


The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity (http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/) is a special project of the Foundation for Rational Economics and Education, a non-profit established by Ron Paul in 1976.



After Trumps Syria Attack, What Comes Next?

Written by Ron Paul

Monday April 10, 2017

Thursdays US missile attack o­n Syria must represent the quickest foreign policy U-turn in history. Less than a week after the White House gave Assad permission to stay o­n as president of his own country, President Trump decided that the US had to attack Syria and demand Assads ouster after a chemical attack earlier in the week. Trump blamed Assad for the attack, stated that somethings going to happen in retaliation, and less than two days later he launched a volley of 59 Tomahawk missiles (at a cost of $1.5 million each) o­nto a military airfield near where the chemical attack took place.

President Trump said it is in the vital national security interest of the United States to attack Syria over the use of poison gas. That is nonsense. Even if what Trump claims about the gas attack is true and weve seen no evidence that it is there is nothing about an isolated incident of inhuman cruelty thousands of miles from our borders that is in our vital national security interest. Even if Assad gassed his own people last week it hardly means he will launch chemical attacks o­n the United States even if he had the ability, which he does not.

From the moment the chemical attack was blamed o­n Assad, however, I expressed my doubts about the claims. It simply makes no sense for Assad to attack civilians with a chemical weapon just as he is winning his war against ISIS and al-Qaeda and has been told by the US that it no longer seeks regime change. o­n the verge of victory, he commits a suicidal act to no strategic or tactical military advantage? More likely the gas attack was a false flag by the rebels -- or perhaps even by our CIA -- as a last ditch effort to forestall a rebel defeat in the six year war.

Would the neocons and the mainstream media lie to us about what happened last week in Syria? Of course they would.
They lied us into attacking Iraq, they lied us into attacking Gaddafi, they lied us into seeking regime change in Syria in the first place. We should always assume they are lying.

Who benefits from the US attack o­n Syria? ISIS, which immediately after the attack began a ground offensive. Does President Trump really want the US to act as ISISs air force?

The gas attack, which took some 70 civilian lives, was horrible and must be condemned. But we must also remember that US bombs in Syria have killed hundreds of civilians. Just recently, US bombs killed 300 Iraqi civilians in o­ne strike! Does it really make a difference if you are killed by poison gas or by a US missile?

Whats next for President Trump in Syria? Russia has not backed down from its claim that the poison gas leaked as a result of a conventional Syrian bomb o­n an ISIS chemical weapons factory. Moscow claims it is determined to defend its ally, Syria. Will Trump unilaterally declare a no fly zone in parts of Syria and attempt to prevent Russian air traffic? Some suggest this is his next move. It is o­ne that carries a great danger of igniting World War Three.

Donald Trumps attack o­n Syria was clearly illegal. However, Congress shows no interest in reining in this out-of-control president. We should fear any US escalation and must demand that our Representatives prohibit it. If there ever was a time to flood the Capitol Hill switchboard demanding an end to US military action in Syria, it is now!

Original: http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2017/april/10/after-trump-s-syria-attack-what-comes-next/


Copyright 2017 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.

Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute


© Website author: Leo Semashko, 2005; © designed by Roman Snitko, 2005