HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS
BEFORE THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
October 17, 2003
Borrowing Billions to Fund a Failed Policy in Iraq
2003 Ron Paul 110:1
Mr. Speaker: I rise in opposition to this request for nearly $87 billion to
continue
the occupation and rebuilding of Iraq and Afghanistan. This is money we
do not
have being shipped away on a foreign welfare program. The burden on our
already
weakened economy could well be crippling.
2003 Ron Paul 110:2
Those who argue that we must vote for this appropriation because “we must
succeed”
in Iraq are misguided. Those who say this have yet to define what it
means – in
concrete terms – to have “success” in Iraq. What is success in Iraq?
How
will we achieve success in Iraq? How will we know when we have
succeeded in
Iraq? About how long will “success” take to achieve and about how much
will
it cost? These are reasonable questions to have when we are asked to
spend
billions of taxpayers’ dollars, but thus far we have heard little more
than
nice-sounding platitudes.
2003 Ron Paul 110:3
We have established a troubling precedent that no matter how ill-conceived
an
intervention, we must continue to become more deeply involved because
“we must
succeed.” That is one reason we see unrelated funding in this
supplemental for
places like Liberia and Sudan.
2003 Ron Paul 110:4
Mr. Speaker this reconstruction of Iraq – that we are making but a
down-payment on
today – is at its core just another foreign policy boondoggle. The $20
billion
plan to “rebuild” Iraq tilts heavily toward creating a statist economy
and
is filled with very liberal social-engineering programs. Much of the
money in
this reconstruction plan will be wasted - as foreign aid most often is.
Much
will be wasted as corporate welfare to politically connected
corporations; much
will be thrown away at all the various “non-government organizations”
that
aim to teach the Iraqis everything from the latest American political
correctness to the “right” way to vote. The bill includes $900 million
to
import petroleum products into Iraq (a country with the second largest
oil
reserves in the world); $793 million for healthcare in Iraq when were
in the
midst of our own crisis and about to raise Medicare premiums of our
seniors; $10
million for "womens leadership programs" (more social engineering);
$200 million in loan guarantees to Pakistan (a military dictatorship
that likely
is the home of Osama bin Laden); $245 million for the "U.S. share" of
U.N. peacekeeping in Liberia and Sudan; $95 million for education in
Afghanistan; $600 million for repair and modernization of roads and
bridges in
Iraq (while our own infrastructure crumbles).
2003 Ron Paul 110:5
There has been some discontent among conservatives about the $20 billion
reconstruction price tag. They fail to realize that this is just the
other side
of the coin of military interventionism. It is the same coin, which is
why I
have consistently opposed foreign interventionism. There is a lesson
here that
those who call themselves fiscal conservatives seem to not have
learned. There
is no separation between the military intervention and the
post-military
intervention, otherwise known as “nation-building.” Fiscal
conservatives are
uneasy about nation building and foreign aid. The president himself
swore off
nation building as a candidate. But anyone concerned about sending
American tax
dollars to foreign countries must look directly at military
interventionism
abroad. If there is one thing the history of our interventionism
teaches, it is
that the best way for a foreign country to become a financial dependent
of the
United States is to first be attacked by the United States.
2003 Ron Paul 110:6
This request - which was not the first and will not be the last -
demonstrates in the
most concrete terms that there is a real and concrete cost of our
policy of
interventionism. The American taxpayer paid to bomb Baghdad and now
will pay to
rebuild Iraq – its schools, hospitals, prisons, roads, and more. Many
Americans
cannot afford to send their own children to college, but with the money
in this
bill they will be sending Iraqi kids to college. Is this really what
the
American people want?
2003 Ron Paul 110:7
The real point is that the billions we are told we must spend to rebuild
Iraq is
indeed the natural outcome of our policy of pre-emptive military
intervention.
All those who voted for the resolution authorizing the president to
attack Iraq
have really already voted for this supplemental. There is no military
intervention without a “Marshall Plan” afterward, regardless of our
ability
to pay. And the American people will be expected to pay for far more.
This
current request is only perhaps step four in what will likely be a 10
or more
step program to remake Iraq and the rest of the Middle East in the
image of
Washington, D.C. social engineers and “global planners.” What will be
steps
five, six, seven, eight? Long-term occupation, micro-managing Iraq’s
economy,
organizing and managing elections, writing an Iraqi constitution. And
so on.
When will it end?
2003 Ron Paul 110:8
There is also much said about how we must support this supplemental because
to do
otherwise would mean not supporting the troops. I resent this dishonest
accusation. It is nothing but a red herring. I wonder if an American
currently
serving an open-ended occupation in Iraq would think that bringing him
home next
week would be a good show of support for our troops. Maintaining an
increasingly
deadly occupation of Iraq and bankrupting many of our reservists and
National
Guard troops by unilaterally extending their contracts to serve in an
active
deployment is hardly “supporting the troops.” Perhaps that is why a
Stars
and Stripes newspaper survey of the troops in Iraq this week found that
a
majority had very low morale. And according to the same Stars and
Stripes
survey, an increasing number are not planning to re-enlist.
2003 Ron Paul 110:9
Conservatives often proclaim that they are opposed to providing American welfare to
the rest
of the world. I agree. The only way to do that, however, is to stop
supporting a
policy of military interventionism. You cannot have one without the
other. If a
military intervention against Syria and Iran are next, it will be the
same
thing: we will pay to bomb the country and we will pay even more to
rebuild it -
and as we see with the plan for Iraq, this rebuilding will not be done
on the
cheap. The key fallacy in the argument of the militarists is that there
is some
way to fight a war without associated costs - the costs of occupation,
reconstruction, “institution-building,” “democracy programs.”
2003 Ron Paul 110:10
I opposed our action against Iraq for two main reasons. I sincerely
believed that
our national security was not threatened and I did not believe that
Saddam
Hussein’s regime was involved in the attack on the United States on
9/11. I
believe what we have learned since the intervention has supported my
view.
Meanwhile, while our troops are trying to police the border between
Syria and
Iraq our own borders remain as porous as ever. Terrorists who entered
our
country could easily do so again through our largely un-patrolled
borders. While
we expend American blood and treasure occupying a country that was not
involved
in the attack on the US, those who were responsible for the attack most
likely
are hiding out in Pakistan - a military dictatorship we are now allied
with and
to which this supplemental sends some $200 million in loan guarantees.
2003 Ron Paul 110:11
Our continued occupation of Iraq is not producing the promised results,
despite
efforts to paint a brighter picture of the current situation. What once
was a
secular dictatorship appears to be moving toward being a fundamentalist
Islamic
regime – not the democracy we were promised. As repulsive as Saddam’s
regime
was, the prospect of an Iraq run by Islamic clerics, aligned with
Iranian
radicals and hostile to the United States, is no more palatable. There
are signs
that this is the trend. The press reports regularly on attacks against
Iraq’s
one million Christians. Those hand-picked by the United States to run
Iraq have
found themselves targets for assassination. Clerics are forming their
own
militias. The thousands of non-combatants killed in the US intervention
are
seeking revenge against the unwanted American occupiers.
2003 Ron Paul 110:12
Mr. Speaker, throwing billions of dollars after a failed policy will not
produce
favorable results. We are heading full-speed toward bankruptcy, yet we
continue
to spend like there is no tomorrow. There will be a tomorrow, however.
The money
we are spending today is real. The bill will be paid, whether through
raising
taxes or printing more money. Either way, the American people will
become poorer
in pursuit of a policy that cannot and will not work. We cannot re-make
the
world in our own image. The stated aim was to remove Saddam Hussein.
That
mission is accomplished. The best policy now for Iraq is to declare
victory and
bring our troops home. We should let the people of Iraq rebuild their
own
country. I urge my colleagues to vote against this supplemental request.