Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, before I get
into my Special Order that deals with
foreign policy, in which I make the
case for defending America, I would
like to make a few comments about the
campaign finance reform and the discharge
petition that was just mentioned
by our previous colleagues.
2002 Ron Paul 1:2
I do not share the enthusiasm that
they do about bringing such a bill to
the floor. I certainly do not share the
enthusiasm of passing such legislation,
because it sets us backwards if our goal
here is to defend liberty and minimize
the size of government.
2002 Ron Paul 1:3
The one thing I agree with him entirely
on is that the problem exists.
There is no doubt there is a huge influence
of money here in Washington, and
even in my prepared statement I mention
how corporations influence our
foreign policy and that something
ought to be done about it; but campaign
finance reform goes in exactly
the wrong direction. It just means
more regulations, more controls, telling
the American people how they can
spend their money and how they can
lobby Congress and how they can campaign.
That is not the problem.
2002 Ron Paul 1:4
The problem is that we have Members
of Congress that yield to the
temptation and influence of money. If
we had enough Members around here
that did not yield to the temptation,
we would not have to have campaign finance
reform, we would not have to
regulate money, we would not have to
undermine the first amendment, and
we would not have to undermine the
Constitution in that effort.
2002 Ron Paul 1:5
I agree we have a problem, but I believe
the resistance could be here without
much change. The ultimate solution
to the need for campaign finance
reform comes only when we have a constitutional-
type government, where
government is not doing the things
they should be doing. There is a logical
incentive for corporations and many
individuals to come to Washington, because
they can buy influence and buy
benefits and buy contracts. The government
was never meant to do that.
2002 Ron Paul 1:6
The government was set up to protect
liberty, and yet we have devised a
system here where money talks and it
is important; but let me tell my colleagues
one thing, the Campaign Finance
Reform Act that is coming down
the pike will do nothing to solve the
problem and will do a lot to undermine
our freedoms, a lot to undermine the
first amendment and do nothing to preserve
the Constitution.
2002 Ron Paul 1:7
My Special Order, as I said, has to do
with foreign policy. It is entitled The
Case for Defending America. As we
begin this new legislative session, we
cannot avoid reflecting on this past
year. All Americans will remember the
moment and place when tragedy hit us
on September 11. We also know that a
good philosophy to follow is to turn adversity
into something positive, if at
all possible.
2002 Ron Paul 1:8
Although we have suffered for years
from a flawed foreign policy and we
were already in a recession before the
attacks, the severity of these events
has forced many of us to reassess our
foreign and domestic policies. Hopefully,
positive changes will come of
this.
2002 Ron Paul 1:9
It is just as well that the economy
was already in a recession for 6 months
prior to the September attacks. Otherwise
the temptation would have been
too great to blame the attacks for the
weak economy rather than look for the
government policies responsible for the
recession. Terrorist attacks alone, no
matter how disruptive, could never be
the source of a significant economic
downturn.
2002 Ron Paul 1:10
A major debate over foreign policy
has naturally resulted from this crisis.
Dealing with the shortcomings of our
policies of the past is essential. We
were spending $40 billion a year on intelligence
gathering. That, we must
admit, failed. This tells us a problem
exists. There are shortcomings with
our $320 billion DOD budget that did
not provide the protection Americans
expect. Obviously, a proper response to
the terrorists requires sound judgment
in order to prevent further suffering of
the innocent or foolishly bringing
about a worldwide conflict.
2002 Ron Paul 1:11
One of the key responsibilities of the
Federal Government in providing for
national defense is protection of liberty
here at home. Unwisely responding
to the attacks could undermine our
national defense while threatening our
liberties.
2002 Ron Paul 1:12
What we have done so far since last
September is not very reassuring. What
we do here in the Congress in the coming
months may well determine the
survival of our Republic. Fear and insecurity
must not drive our policy. Sacrificing
personal liberty should never be
an option. Involving ourselves in every
complex conflict around the globe
hardly enhances our national security.
2002 Ron Paul 1:13
The special interests that were already
lined up at the public trough
should not be permitted to use the ongoing
crisis as an opportunity to demand
even more benefits. Let us all remember
why the U.S. Congress was established,
what our responsibilities
are, and what our oath of office means.
2002 Ron Paul 1:14
It has been reported that since the 9–11 attacks, Big Government answers
have gained in popularity and people
fearful for their security have looked
to the Federal Government for help.
Polls indicate that acceptance of government
solutions to our problems is
at the highest level in decades. This
may be true to some degree, or it may
merely reflect the sentiments of the
moment or even the way the questions
were asked. Only time will tell. Since
the welfare state is no more viable in
the long run than a communist or fascist
state, most Americans will eventually
realize the fallacy of depending on
the government for economic security
and know that personal liberty should
not be sacrificed out of fear.
2002 Ron Paul 1:15
Even with this massive rush to embrace
all the bailouts offered up by
Washington, a growing number of
Americans are rightfully offended by
the enormity of it all and annoyed that
powerful and wealthy special interests
seem to be getting the bulk of the benefits.
2002 Ron Paul 1:16
In one area, though, a very healthy
reaction has occurred. Almost all
Americans, especially those still flying
commercial airlines, now know that
they have a personal responsibility to
react to any threat on any flight. Passengers
have responded magnificently.
Most people recognize that armed citizens
best protect our homes because it
is impossible for the police to be everywhere
and prevent crimes from happening.
A homeowners ability to defend
himself serves as a strong deterrent.
2002 Ron Paul 1:17
Our governments ridiculous policy
regarding airline safety and prohibiting
guns on airplanes has indoctrinated
us all, pilots, passengers and airline
owners, to believe we should never
resist hijackers. This sets up perfect
conditions for terrorists to take over
domestic flights just as they did on
September 11.
2002 Ron Paul 1:18
The people of this country now realize
more than ever their own responsibility
for personal self-defense, using
guns if necessary. The anti-gun fanatics
have been very quiet since 9–11, and
more Americans are ready to assume
responsibility for their own safety than
ever before. This is all good.
2002 Ron Paul 1:19
Sadly, the Congress went in the opposite
direction in providing safety on
commercial flights. Pilots are not carrying
guns, and security has been socialized
in spite of the fact that security
procedures authorized by the FAA
prior to 9–11 were not compromised.
The problem did not come from failure
to follow the FAA rules. The problem
resulted from precisely following FAA
rules. No wonder so many Americans
were wisely assuming they better be
ready to protect themselves when necessary.
2002 Ron Paul 1:20
This attitude is healthy, practical,
and legal under the Constitution. Unfortunately,
too many people who have
come to this conclusion still cling to
the notion that economic security is a
responsibility of the U.S. Government.
That, of course, is the reason we have
a $2 trillion annual budget and a growing
$6 trillion national debt.
2002 Ron Paul 1:21
Another positive result of last years
attack was the uniting of many Americans
in an effort to deal with many
problems this country faces. This applies
more to the people who reflect
true patriotism than it does to some of
the politicians and special interests
who took advantage of this situation.
If this renewed energy and sense of
unity could be channeled correctly,
much good could come of it, if misdirected,
actual harm would result.
2002 Ron Paul 1:22
Give less credit to the Washington
politicians who sing the songs of patriotism
but used the crisis to pursue
their endless personal goal to gain
more political power; but the greatest
combination should be directed toward
the special interests lobbyists who finance
the politicians in order to secure
their power by using patriotism as a
cover and a crisis as a golden opportunity.
Indeed, those who are using the
crisis to promote their own agenda are
many. There is no doubt, as many have
pointed out, our country changed dramatically
with the horror that hit us
on 9–11.
2002 Ron Paul 1:23
The changes obviously are a result of
something other than the tragic loss of
over 3,900 people. We kill that many
people every month on our government
highways. We lost 60,000 young people
in the Vietnam War; yet the sense of
fear in our country then was not the
same as it is today. The major difference
is that last years attacks made
us feel vulnerable because it was clear
that our Federal Government had
failed in its responsibility to provide
defense against such an assault, and
the anthrax scare certainly did not
help to diminish that fear.
2002 Ron Paul 1:24
Giving up our civil liberties has made
us feel even less safe from our own governments
intrusion in our lives. The
two seem to be in conflict. How can we
be safer from outside threats while
making ourselves more exposed to our
own governments threat to our liberty?
The most significant and dangerous
result of last years attacks has
been the bold expansion of the Federal
police state in our enhanced international
role as the worlds policeman.
Although most of the legislation pushing
the enhanced domestic and international
role for our government
passed by huge majorities, I am convinced
that the peoples support for
much of it is less enthusiastic than
Washington politicians believe.
2002 Ron Paul 1:25
As time progresses, the full impact of
homeland security and the unintended
consequences of our growing overseas
commitments will become apparent,
and a large majority of our Americans
will appropriately ask why did the Congress
do it. Unless we precisely understand
the proper role of government in
a free society, our problems will not be
solved without sacrificing liberty.
2002 Ron Paul 1:26
The wonderful thing is that our problems
can be easily solved when protecting
individual liberty becomes our
goal rather than the erroneous assumption
that solutions must always be in
conflict with liberty and that sacrificing
some liberty is to be expected
during trying times. This is not necessary.
2002 Ron Paul 1:27
Our Attorney General established a
standard for disloyalty to the United
States Government by claiming that
those who talk of lost liberty serve to
erode our national unity and give ammunition
to Americas enemies and
only aid terrorists. This dangerous assumption
is, in the eyes of our top law
enforcement officials, that perceived
disloyalty or even criticism of the government
is approximating an act of
terrorism.
2002 Ron Paul 1:28
The grand irony is that this criticism
is being directed towards those who,
Heaven forbid, are expressing concern
for losing our cherished liberties here
at home. This, of course, is what the
whole war on terrorism is supposed to
be about, protecting liberty, and that
includes the right of free expression.
2002 Ron Paul 1:29
Our government leaders have threatened
foreign countries by claiming that
if they are not with us, they are
against us, which leaves no room for
the neutrality that has been practiced
by some nations for centuries. This position
could easily result in perpetual
conflicts with dozens of nations around
the world.
2002 Ron Paul 1:30
Could it ever come to a point where
those who dissent at home against our
military operations overseas will be
considered too sympathetic to the
enemy? The Attorney Generals comments
suggest just that, and it has
happened here in our past. We indeed
live in dangerous times. We are unable
to guarantee protection for outside
threats and may be approaching a time
when our own government poses a
threat to our liberties.
2002 Ron Paul 1:31
No matter how sincere and well motivated
the effort to fight terrorism and
provide for homeland security, if ill-advised
it will result neither in vanquishing
terrorism nor in preserving
our liberties. I am fearful that here in
Washington there is little understanding
of the real cause of the terrorist
attacks on us, little remembrance
of the grand purpose of the
American experiment with liberty, or
even how our Constitution was written
to strictly limit government officials
and all that they do.
2002 Ron Paul 1:32
The military operation against the
Taliban has gone well. The Taliban has
been removed from power, and our government,
with the help of the U.N., is
well along the way toward establishing
a new Afghan government. We were not
supposed to be in the business of nation
building, but I guess 9–11 changed all
that. The one problem is that the actual
number of al-Qaeda members captured
or killed is uncertain. Also, the
number of Taliban officials that had
any direct contact or knowledge of the
attacks on us is purely speculative.
Since this war is carried out in secrecy,
we will probably not know the details
of what went on for years to come.
2002 Ron Paul 1:33
I wonder how many civilians have
been killed so far. I know a lot of Members
could care less, remembering innocent
American civilians who were
slaughtered in New York and Washington.
But a policy that shows no concern
for the innocent will magnify our
problems rather than lessen them. The
hard part to understand in all this is
that Saudi Arabia probably had more
to do with these attacks than did Afghanistan.
But then again, who wants
to offend our oil partners?
2002 Ron Paul 1:34
Our sterile approach to the bombing
with minimal loss of American life is
to be commended, but it may generate
outrage toward us by this lopsided killing
of persons totally unaware of
events of September 11. Our President
wisely has not been anxious to send in
large numbers of occupying forces into
Afghanistan. This also guarantees
chaos among the warring tribal factions.
The odds of a stable Afghan government
evolving out of this mess are
remote. The odds of our investing large
sums of money to buy support for years
to come are great.
2002 Ron Paul 1:35
Unfortunately, it has been seen only
as an opportunity for Pakistan and
India to resume their warring ways,
placing us in a very dangerous situation.
This could easily get out of control
since China will not allow a clearcut
Indian victory over Pakistan. The
danger of a nuclear confrontation is
real. Even the British have spoken
sympathetically about Pakistans interest
over India. The tragedy is that
we have helped both India and Pakistan
financially and, therefore, the
American taxpayer has indirectly contributed
funds for the weapons on both
sides. Our troops in this region are potential
targets of either or both countries.
2002 Ron Paul 1:36
Fortunately, due to the many probable
repercussions, a swift attack on
Iraq now seems unlikely. Our surrogate
army, organized by the Iraqi National
Congress, is now known to be a charade,
prompting our administration to
correctly stop all funding of this organization.
The thought of relying on the
Kurds to help remove Hussein defies
logic, as the U.S.-funded Turkish army
continues its war on the Kurds. There
is just no coalition in the Persian Gulf
to take on Iraq and, fortunately, our
Secretary of State knows it.
2002 Ron Paul 1:37
Our terrorist enemy is vague and elusive.
Our plans to expand our current
military operations into many other
countries are fraught with great risk,
risk of making our problems worse.
Not dealing with the people actually
responsible for the attacks and ignoring
the root causes of terrorism will
needlessly perpetuate and expand a war
that will do nothing to enhance the security
and the safety of the American
people.
2002 Ron Paul 1:38
Since Iraq is now less likely to be
hit, it looks like another poverty-ridden
rudderless nation, possibly Somalia,
will be the next target. No good
can come of this process. It will provide
more fodder for the radicals claim
that the war is about America against
Islam. Somalia poses no threat to the
United States, but bombing Somalia,
as we have Afghanistan and Iraq for 12
years, will only incite more hatred towards
the United States and increase
the odds of our someday getting hit
again by some frustrated, vengeful,
radicalized Muslim.
2002 Ron Paul 1:39
Our presence in the Persian Gulf is
not necessary to provide for Americas
defense. Our presence in the region
makes all Americans more vulnerable
to attacks and defending America
much more difficult. The real reason
for our presence in the Persian Gulf, as
well as our eagerness to assist in building
a new Afghan government under
U.N. authority, should be apparent to
us all. Stuart Eizenstat, Under Secretary
of Economics, Business and Agricultural
Affairs for the previous administration,
succinctly stated U.S.
policy for Afghanistan testifying before
the Senate Foreign Relations Trade
Committee October 13, 1997. He said,
One of five main foreign policy interests
in the Caspian region is to continue
support for U.S. companies and
the least progress has been made in Afghanistan,
where gas and oil pipeline
proposals designed to carry Central
Asian energy to world markets have
been delayed indefinitely pending establishment
of a broad-based, multiethnic
government.
2002 Ron Paul 1:40
This was a rather blunt acknowledgment
of our intentions. It is apparent
that our policy has not changed with
this administration. Our new Special
Envoy to Afghanistan, Zalmay
Khalilzad, was at one time a lobbyist
for the Taliban and worked for Unocal,
the American oil company seeking
rights to build oil and gas pipelines
through northern Afghanistan. During
his stint as a lobbyist, he urged approval
of the Taliban and defended
them in the U.S. press. He now, of
course, sings a different tune with respect
to the Taliban, but I am sure his
views on the pipeline by U.S. companies
has not changed.
2002 Ron Paul 1:41
Born in Afghanistan, Khalilzad is a
controversial figure, to say the least,
due to his close relationship with the
oil industry and previously with the
Taliban. His appointment to the National
Security Council, very conveniently,
did not require confirmation by
the Senate. Khalilzad also is a close
ally of the Secretary of Defense Paul
Wolfowitz in promoting early and swift
military action against Iraq.
2002 Ron Paul 1:42
The point being, of course, that it
may be good to have a new Afghan government,
but the question is whether
that is our responsibility and whether
we should be doing it under the constraints
of our Constitution. There is a
real question of whether it will serve
our best interests in the long term.
2002 Ron Paul 1:43
CIA support for the Shah of Iran for
25 years led to the long-term serious
problems with that nation that persists
even today. Could oil be the reason we
have concentrated on bombing Afghanistan
while ignoring Saudi Arabia, even
though we have never found Osama bin
Laden? Obviously, Saudi Arabia is culpable
in these terrorist attacks on the
United States, and yet little is done
about it.
2002 Ron Paul 1:44
There are quite a few unintended
consequences that might occur if our
worldwide commitment to fighting terrorism
is unrestrained. Russias interest
in the Afghan region are much
more intense than Putin would have us
believe, and Russias active involvement
in a spreading regional conflict
should be expected.
2002 Ron Paul 1:45
An alliance between Iraq and Iran
against the United States is a more
likely possibility now than ever before.
Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri is optimistically
working on bringing those
two nations together in a military alliance.
His hope is that this would be activated
if we attacked Iraq. The two
nations have already exchanged prisoners
of war as a step in that direction.
2002 Ron Paul 1:46
U.S. military planners are making
preparations for our troops to stay in
Central Asia for a long time. A long
time could mean 50 years. We have
been in Korea for that long and we
have been in Japan and Europe even
longer. But the time will come when
we will wear out our welcome and have
to leave these areas. The Vietnam War
met with more resistance, and we left
relatively quickly in a humiliating defeat.
Similarly, episodes of a more
minor nature occurred in Somalia and
Lebanon.
2002 Ron Paul 1:47
Why look for more of these kinds of
problems when it does not serve our interests?
Jeopardizing our security violates
the spirit of the Constitution and
inevitably costs us more than we can
afford. Our permanent air bases built
in Saudi Arabia are totally unessential
to our security, contributed to the turmoil
in the Middle East, and they continue
to do so. We are building a giant
new air base in Kyrgyzstan, a country
once part of the Soviet Union and close
to Russia. China, also a neighbor with
whom we eagerly seek a close relationship
as a trading partner, will not ignore
our military buildup in that region.
2002 Ron Paul 1:48
Islamic fundamentalists may overthrow
the current government of Saudi
Arabia, a fear that drives her to cooperate
openly with the terrorists
while flaunting her relationship with
the United States. The Wall Street
Journal has editorialized that the solution
to this ought to be our forcibly
seizing the Saudi Arabian oil fields and
replacing the current government with
an even more pro-Western government.
All along I thought we condemned regimes
that took over their neighbors
oil fields.
2002 Ron Paul 1:49
The editorial, unbelievably explicit,
concluded by saying, Finally, we must
be prepared to seize the Saudi oil fields
and administer them for the greater
good. The greater good? I just wonder
who they are referring to when they
talk about the greater good.
2002 Ron Paul 1:50
If the jingoism of the Wall Street
Journal prevails and the warmongers
in the Congress and the administration
carry the day, we can assume with certainty
that these efforts being made
will precipitate an uncontrollable
breakout of hostilities in the region
that could lead to World War III. How
a major publication can actually print
an article that openly supports such
aggression as a serious proposal is difficult
to comprehend.
2002 Ron Paul 1:51
Two countries armed with nuclear
weapons on the verge of war in the region,
and we are being urged to dig a
deeper hole for ourselves by seizing the
Saudi oil fields? Already the presence
of our troops in the Muslim holy land
of Saudi Arabia has inflamed the hatred
that drove the terrorists to carry
out their tragic act of 9–11. Pursuing
such an aggressive policy would only
further undermine our ability to defend
the American people and will compound
the economic problems we face
here at home.
2002 Ron Paul 1:52
Something, anything, regardless of
its effectiveness, had to be done, since
the American people expected it and
Congress and the administration willed
it. An effort to get the terrorists and
their supporters is obviously in order
and, hopefully, that has been achieved.
But a never-ending commitment to end
all terrorism throughout the world,
whether it is related to September 11
or not, is neither a legitimate nor a
wise policy. H.J. Res. 64 gives the
President authority to pursue only
those guilty of the attack on us, not
every terrorist in the entire world.
2002 Ron Paul 1:53
Let there be no doubt, for every terrorist
identified, others will see only a
freedom fighter. That was the case
when we aided Osama bin Laden in the
1980s. He was a member of the
Mujahidien, and they were the freedom
fighters waging a just war against the
Soviet army. Of course, now he is our
avowed enemy. A broad definition of
terrorism outside the understanding of
those who attacked the United States
opens a Pandoras box in our foreign
policy commitments.
2002 Ron Paul 1:54
If we concentrate on searching for all
terrorists throughout the world and
bombing dozens of countries, but forget
to deal with the important contributing
factors that drove those who
killed our fellow citizens, we will only
make ourselves more vulnerable to new
attacks.
2002 Ron Paul 1:55
How can we forever fail to address
the provocative nature of U.S. taxpayers
money being used to suppress
and kill Palestinians and ignore the affront
to the Islamic people that our
military presence on their holy land of
Saudi Arabia causes, not to mention
the persistent 12 years of bombing
Iraq?
2002 Ron Paul 1:56
I am fearful that an unlimited worldwide
war against all terrorism will distract
from the serious consideration
that must be given to our policy of foreign
interventionism, driven by the
powerful commercial interests and a
desire to promote world government.
This is done while ignoring our principal
responsibility of protecting national
security and liberty here at
home.
2002 Ron Paul 1:57
There is a serious problem with a policy
that has allowed a successful attack
of our homeland. It cannot be
written off as a result of irrational, yet
efficient, evildoers who are merely
jealous of our success and despise our
freedoms.
2002 Ron Paul 1:58
We have had enemies throughout our
history, but never before have we suffered
such an attack that has made us
feel so vulnerable. The cause of this
crisis is much more profound and requires
looking inwardly as well as outwardly
at our own policies as well as
those of others.
2002 Ron Paul 1:59
The founders of this country were
precise in their beliefs regarding foreign
policy. Our Constitution reflects
these beliefs, and all of our early Presidents
endorsed these views. It was not
until the 20th century that our Nation
went off to far-away places looking for
dragons to slay. This past century reflects
the new and less-traditional
American policy of foreign interventionism.
Our economic and military
power, a result of our domestic freedoms,
has permitted us to survive and
even thrive while dangerously expanding
our worldwide influence.
2002 Ron Paul 1:60
There is no historic precedent that
such a policy can be continued forever.
All empires and great nations throughout
history have ended when they
stretched their commitments overseas
too far and abused their financial system
at home. The overcommitment of
a countrys military forces when forced
with budgetary constraints can only
lead to a lower standard of living for
its citizens. That has already started
to happen here in the United States.
Who today is confident the government
and our private retirement systems are
sound and the benefits guaranteed?
2002 Ron Paul 1:61
The unfortunate complicating factor
that all great powers suffer is the
buildup of animosity of the nation currently
at the top of the heap, which is
aggravated by arrogance and domination
over the weaker nations. We are
beginning to see this, and the Wall
Street Journal editorial clearly symbolizes
this arrogance.
2002 Ron Paul 1:62
The traditional American foreign
policy of the founders and our Presidents
for the first 145 years of our history
entailed three points: one, friendship
with all nations desiring of such;
two, as much free trade and travel with
those countries as possible; three,
avoiding entangling alliances.
2002 Ron Paul 1:63
This is good advice. The framers also
understood that the important powers
for dealing with other countries and
the issue of war were to be placed in
the hands of Congress. This principle
has essentially been forgotten.
2002 Ron Paul 1:64
The executive branch now has much
more power than does the Congress.
Congress continues to allows its authority
to be transferred to the executive
branch as well as to the international
agencies such as the U.N.,
NAFTA, IMF and the WTO. Through
executive orders, our Presidents routinely
use powers once jealously guarded
and held by the Congress.
2002 Ron Paul 1:65
Today, through altering aid and
sanctions, we buy and sell our friendship
with all kinds of threats and
bribes in our effort to spread our influence
around the world. To most people
in Washington, free trade means internationally
managed trade, with subsidies
and support for the WTO, where
influential corporations can seek sanctions
against their competitors. Our alliances,
too numerous to count, have
committed our dollars and our troops
to such an extent that, under todays
circumstances, there is not a border
war or civil disturbance in the world in
which we do not have a stake. And
more than likely, we have a stake, foreign
aid, on both sides of each military
conflict.
2002 Ron Paul 1:66
After the demise of our nemesis, the
Soviet Union, many believed that we
could safely withdraw from some of our
worldwide commitments. It was hoped
we would start minding our own business,
save some money, and reduce the
threat to our military personnel. But
the opposite has happened. Without
any international competition for superpower
status, our commitments
have grown and spread so that today
we provide better military protection
to Taiwan and South Korea and Saudi
Arabia than we do for New York and
Washington.
2002 Ron Paul 1:67
I am certain that national security
and defense of our own cities can never
be adequately provided unless we reconsider
our policy of foreign interventionism.
Conventional wisdom in
Washington
today is that we have no choice
but to play the role of the worlds only
superpower. Recently we had to cancel
flights of our own Air Force over our
cities because of spending restraints,
and we rely on foreign AWACS to fly
over to protect our air spaces.
2002 Ron Paul 1:68
The American people are not in sync
with the assumption that we must
commitment ourselves endlessly to
being the worlds policemen. If we do
not reassess our endless entanglements
as we march toward world government,
economic law will one day force us to
do so anyway under very undesirable
circumstances. In the meantime, we
can expect plenty more military confrontations
around the world while becoming
even more vulnerable to attack
by terrorists here at home. A constitutional
policy and informed relations of
nonintervention is the policy that will
provide America the greatest and best
national defense.
This chapter appeared in Ron Pauls Congressional website at http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2002/cr012402.htm