HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
July 21, 2003
The Justifications for War
2003 Ron Paul 85:1
Madam Speaker, the truth about whether
or not Saddam Hussein sought to buy uranium from Niger has dominated
the news
for the past several weeks. Many of those challenging the
administration on this
issue are motivated more by politics than by policy. Some of today’s
critics
were strongly in favor of going to war against Iraq when doing so
appeared
politically popular, but now are chagrined that the war is not going as
smoothly
as was hoped.
2003 Ron Paul 85:2
I am sure once the alleged attempt to buy uranium is thoroughly debunked, the
other excuses for going to war will be examined with a great deal of
scrutiny as
well. It is obvious that the evidence used to justify going to war is
now less
than convincing.
2003 Ron Paul 85:3
The charge that Saddam Hussein had aluminum tubes used in manufacturing nuclear
weapons was in error.
2003 Ron Paul 85:4
A fleet of unmanned aerial vehicles capable of dispensing chemical and biological weapons did not exist.
2003 Ron Paul 85:5
The 63,000 liters of anthrax and
botulism have not been found, nor have any of the mobile germ labs.
There are no
signs of the one million pounds of sarin, mustard, and VX gasses
alleged to
exist.
2003 Ron Paul 85:6
No evidence has been revealed to indicate Iraq was a threat to the security of
any nation, let alone America.
2003 Ron Paul 85:7
The charge that Saddam Hussein was connected to the al Qaeda was wrong. Saddam
Husseins violations the UN resolutions regarding weapons of mass
destruction
remain unproven.
2003 Ron Paul 85:8
How could so many errors have occurred? Some say it was incompetence, while
others claim outright deception and lies. Some say it was selective use
of
intelligence to promote a particular policy already decided upon. This
debate, I
am sure, will rage on for a long time, and since motivations are
subjective and
hard to prove, resolving the controversy will be difficult. However,
this should
not diminish the importance of sorting out truth from fiction, errors
from
malice.
2003 Ron Paul 85:9
One question, though, I hope gets
asked: Why should we use intelligence cited by a foreign government as
justification for going to war? One would think the billions we spend
would
produce reliable intelligence-gathering agencies.
2003 Ron Paul 85:10
Since we lack a coherent foreign
policy, we see support for war from different groups depending on
circumstances
unrelated to national defense. For instance, those who strenuously
objected to
Kosovo promoted war in Iraq. And those who objected to Iraq are now
anxious to
send troops to Liberia. For some, U.N. permission is important and
necessary.
For others, the U.N. is helpful provided it endorses the war they want.
2003 Ron Paul 85:11
Only a few correctly look to the Constitution and to Congress to sort out the
pros and cons of each conflict, and decide whether or not a declaration
of war
is warranted.
2003 Ron Paul 85:12
The sad fact is that we have lost our
way. A legitimate threat to national security is no longer a litmus
test for
sending troops hither and yon, and the American people no longer
require
Congress to declare the wars we fight. Hopefully, some day this will
change.
2003 Ron Paul 85:13
The raging debate over whether or not
Saddam Hussein tried to buy uranium, as important as it is, distracts
from the
much more important strategic issue of the proper foreign policy in a
republic.
2003 Ron Paul 85:14
Hopefully, we will soon seriously
consider the foreign policy approach advocated by our Founding Fathers,
a policy
of nonintervention in the affairs of other nations. Avoiding entangling
alliances and staying out of the internal affairs of other nations is
the policy
most conducive to peace and prosperity. Policing
the world and nation building are not proper for our
constitutional republic.