Saturday, May 31, 2008
4:15 AM - March to War in Lebannon - Ron Paul Speech/Statement RE: HR 1194 made May 20 2008
Category: News and Politics
Statement on H Res 1194, Reaffirming the support of the House of Representatives for the legitimate, democratically-elected Government of Lebanon under Prime Minister Fouad Siniora.
May 20, 2008
March to War in Lebanon
Madam Speaker I rise in opposition to H. Res. 1194 because it is dangerously interventionist and will likely lead to more rather than less violence in the Middle East.
I have noticed that this legislation reads eerily similar to a key clause in the 2002 Iraq war bill, H J Res 114, which authorized the use of force.
The key resolved clause in H. Res. 1194 before us today reads:
Resolved, That the House of Representatives
(6) urges--
(A) the United States Government and the international community to immediately take all appropriate actions to support and strengthen the legitimate Government of Lebanon under Prime Minister Fouad Siniora;
The Iraq war authorization language from 2002 is strikingly similar, as you can see here:
(a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--
(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq ;
I am concerned that this kind of similarity is intentional and will inevitably result in US military action in Lebanon , or against Syria or Iran .
I am also concerned over the process of bringing this resolution to the Floor for a vote. I find it outrageous that H. Res. 1194, which calls for more risky US interventionism in the Middle East , is judged sufficiently �non-controversial� to be placed on the suspension calendar for consideration on the House Floor outside of normal order. Have we reached the point where it is no longer controversial to urge the president to use all appropriate actions� -- with the unmistakable implication that force may be used -- to intervene in the domestic affairs of a foreign country?
Mr. Speaker, the Arab League has been mediating the conflict between rival political factions in Lebanon and has had some success in halting the recent violence. Currently, negotiations are taking place in Qatar between the Lebanese factions and some slow but encouraging progress is being made. Regional actors who do have an interest in the conflict have stepped up in attempt to diffuse the crisis and reach a peaceful solution, and press reports today suggest that a deal between the rival factions may have been reached. Yet at this delicate stage of negotiations the US House is preparing to pass a very confrontational resolution pledging strong support for one side and condemning competing factions. US threats in this resolution to use all appropriate actions� to support one faction are in fact a strong disincentive for factions to continue peaceful negotiations and could undermine the successes thus far under Arab League moderation.
This legislation strongly condemns Iranian and Syrian support to one faction in Lebanon while pledging to involve the United States on the other side. Wouldn�t it be better to be involved on neither side and instead encourage the negotiations that have already begun to resolve the conflict?
Afghanistan continues to sink toward chaos with no end in sight. The war in Iraq , launched on lies and deceptions, has cost nearly a trillion dollars and more than 4,000 lives with no end in sight. Saber rattling toward Iran and Syria increases daily, including in this very legislation. Yet we are committing ourselves to intervene in a domestic political dispute that has nothing to do with the United States.
This resolution leads us closer to a wider war in the Middle East . It involves the United States unnecessarily in an internal conflict between competing Lebanese political factions and will increase rather than decrease the chance for an increase in violence. The Lebanese should work out political disputes on their own or with the assistance of regional organizations like the Arab League. I urge my colleagues to reject this march to war and to reject H. Res. 1194.
- Flag as offensive
- Login or register to post comments
- 138 reads

Subscribe to this thread






America should never be a conduit for zionism agenda-
Not as long as Iran and Syria interfere by supplying weapons and support to one side.
Tom's right, that sounds like a problem for the Lebanese and other people in that region. Wasn't this almost the same justification to "Liberate" Iraq and Vietnam? Last I checked those didn't work out so well
We shold just sit back and wait for them to finish killing each other, driving their economy to dust and then we can spend your money feeding them.
chrisberel,
Where in our Constitution does it outline our position as the world police or world humanitarian? In fact, this type of foreign inerventionism is precisely what the founding fathers warned us to never allow our government to become involved in. That's why private charities exst.
What good does it do for us to drive our economy to dust right alongside them? By doing so, you remove even the prospects of private charitable donations in humanitarian efforts.
When you take sides and ally yourself to one known faction, you make enemies of an immeasurable amount of other known and unknown factions.
I would assume that those provisions allowing the preident and the congress to conduct foreign affars would allow for such.
Regardless, I don't know that we should do anything about the Lebanon situation. I merely remarked that with Syrian and Iranian interference, the Lebanese had no ability to decide the action to be taken by themselves.
One group of citizens appropriating the money of another in order to fund charity or non-defensive war is in itself AN ACT OF WAR by those citizens against those who are taxed without their consent. Something to think about.
Tom Mullen
www.tommullen.net
www.myspace.com/skepticsongs
No, you don't get to feed them with my money either. If you want to donate to a charity to feed people in other countries, I applaud you. However, you don't have a right to take mine by force for aggressive wars or humanitarian projects.
See how easy that is?
Tom Mullen
www.tommullen.net
www.myspace.com/skepticsongs
And this gives you the right to appropriate my property to go and help them how? Another brilliant departure from logic.
Tom Mullen
www.tommullen.net
www.myspace.com/skepticsongs
But it is so much easier to use your money rather than his!