November 24, 2014—Claiming to be against President Barack Obama’s program to resettle Syrian refugees in America, former congressman Ron Paul used his weekly column at the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity to explain why.
While House Democrats and Republicans voted to require the FBI to closely vet refugee applicants from Syria out of fear terrorists could infiltrate through the program, Paul says he’s against Obama’s plan because American citizens should not be forced to foot the bill.
Especially when Washington’s foreign policy is to blame for the current mess in the Middle East:
“The House legislation was brought to the Floor after last week’s attacks in Paris that left more than 120 people dead, and for which ISIS claimed responsibility. With the year-long US bombing campaign against ISIS in Syria and Iraq, there is a good deal of concern that among those 10,000 to be settled here there might be some who wish to do us harm. Even though it looks as though the Paris attackers were all EU citizens, polling in the US shows record opposition to allowing Syrian refugees entry.
I agree that we must be very careful about who is permitted to enter the United States, but I object to the president’s plan for a very different reason. I think it is a sign of Washington’s moral and intellectual bankruptcy that US citizens are being forced to pay for those fleeing Washington’s foreign policy.”
In the past ten years, Americans have been paying for Washington’s regime change operation in Syria, Paul said. With its policy of intervention, it’s no wonder that Syria is now going through the difficulties its government and people are currently experiencing.
To Paul, the rise of ISIS and al Qaeda is the reason behind the destabilization of the region. With Washington training rebels and sending them weapons, it’s clear US involvement is the reason why innocent people resisting war are now fleeing.
In his column, Paul asks: “Has there ever been a more foolish and wrong-headed foreign policy than this?”
As Americans allow their government to borrow from their grandchildren’s future to wage more unnecessary wars abroad, Paul wants to know who should be paying for the resettlement of millions—not just 10,000—of refugees.
The country’s already broke taxpayers or the military-industrial complex?
“How about the Beltway neocon think-tanks that continue to churn out pro-war propaganda while receiving huge grants from defense contractors? How about President Obama’s national security advisors, who push him into one regime change disaster after another? How about Hillary Clinton, who came up with the bright idea that ‘Assad must go?’ How about President Obama himself, a president elected to end wars, but who has ended up starting more wars than his predecessor?”
To Dr. Paul, the solution to this mess is clear: have those who start wars pay for their consequences.
“Then perhaps we might have some relief from an interventionist foreign policy that is destroying our financial and national security.”
Do you agree that warmongers should pay for the consequences of war? Share your thoughts with us!