Sense





THE ISRAEL RESOLUTION

Friday, July 21, 2006



Before the U.S. House of Representatives, July 20, 2006

I rise in opposition to this resolution, which I sincerely believe will
do more harm than good.

I do agree with the resolution's condemnation of violence. But I am
convinced that when we get involved in foreign conflicts and send
strong messages, such as this resolution will, it ends up expanding the
war rather than diminishing the conflict, and that ultimately comes
back to haunt us.

Mr. Speaker, I follow a policy in foreign affairs called
non-interventionism. I do not believe we are making the United States
more secure when we involve ourselves in conflicts overseas. The
Constitution really doesn't authorize us to be the policemen of the
world, much less to favor one side over another in foreign conflicts.
It is very clear, reading this resolution objectively, that all the
terrorists are on one side and all the victims and the innocents are on
the other side. I find this unfair, particularly considering the
significantly higher number of civilian casualties among Lebanese
civilians. I would rather advocate neutrality rather than picking
sides, which is what this resolution does.

Some would say that there is no room to talk about neutrality, as if
neutrality were a crime. I would suggest there should be room for an
open mind to consider another type of policy that may save American
lives.

I was in Congress in the early 1980s when the US Marines were sent in
to Lebanon, and I came to the Floor before they went, when they went,
and before they were killed, arguing my case against getting involved
in that conflict.

Ronald Reagan, when he sent the troops in, said he would never turn
tail and run. Then, after the Marines were killed, he had a
reassessment of the policy. When he wrote his autobiography a few years
later after leaving the Presidency, he wrote this.

Perhaps we didn't appreciate fully enough the depth of the hatred and
the complexity of the problems that made the Middle East such a jungle.
Perhaps the idea of a suicide car bomber committing mass murder to gain
instant entry to Paradise was so foreign to our own values and
consciousness that it did not create in us the concern for the marines'
safety that it should have.


In the weeks immediately after the bombing, I believe the last thing
that we should do was turn tail and leave. Yet the irrationality of
Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there. If there
would be some rethinking of policy before our men die, we would be a
lot better off. If that policy had changed towards more of a neutral
position and neutrality, those 241 marines would be alive today.


It is very easy to criticize the Government of Lebanon for not doing
more about Hezbollah. I object to terrorism committed by Hezbollah
because I am a strong opponent to all violence on all sides. But I also
object to the unreasonable accusations that the Government of Lebanon
has not done enough, when we realize that Israel occupied southern
Lebanon for 18 years and was not able to neutralize Hezbollah.

Mr. Speaker, There is nothing wrong with considering the fact that we
don't have to be involved in every single fight. That was the
conclusion that Ronald Reagan came to, and he was not an enemy of
Israel. He was a friend of Israel. But he concluded that that is a mess
over there. Let me just repeat those words that he used. He said, he
came to the conclusion, "The irrationality of Middle Eastern politics
forced us to rethink our policy there.'' I believe these words are
probably more valid now even than when they were written.



Ron Paul
Republican Congressman from Texas
Member of the Banking and International Relations Committees
Former Libertarian candidate for President of the United States

.

Relevant Pages

  • What right does Israel have to exist?
    ... What right does Israel have to exist? ... since the passing of UN Resolution 273-which ... This is one more policy ... emigration of the Palestinian population living inside Israel. ...
    (soc.culture.canada)
  • What right does Israel have to exist?
    ... What right does Israel have to exist? ... since the passing of UN Resolution 273-which ... This is one more policy ... emigration of the Palestinian population living inside Israel. ...
    (soc.culture.europe)
  • What right does Israel have to exist?
    ... What right does Israel have to exist? ... since the passing of UN Resolution 273-which ... This is one more policy ... emigration of the Palestinian population living inside Israel. ...
    (soc.culture.palestine)
  • What right does Israel have to exist?
    ... What right does Israel have to exist? ... since the passing of UN Resolution 273-which ... This is one more policy ... emigration of the Palestinian population living inside Israel. ...
    (soc.culture.australian)
  • Bolton and La Sabliere
    ... The United States and France have produced a United Nations resolution of sorts aimed at ending the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict, but the negotiations between US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton and France's Jean-Marc de La Sabliere nearly ended in disaster. ... Bolton then took a leaf from Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's 2003 criticism of France and Germany as "old Europe" - calling the French ceasefire initiative "old thinking". ... While Bolton and La Sabliere eventually buried their differences, the US-French face-off reflected deep-rooted and long-lasting French resentments over America's apparent willingness to allow the conflict to run its course - under the belief that it is only a matter of time before Israel destroyed Hezbollah. ... The European anger boiled over, according to one UN diplomat, during an exchange between Israeli Ambassador Dan Gillerman and a French official during a meeting on the composition of a proposed international force. ...
    (soc.culture.lebanon)