Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – The decepticon desperation here to reinvigorate the Cold War is just reprehensible. The Russkies do have a naval base in Syria. There is basically a Russian outpost in Syria. The Russians are allies with the Syrians. Let’s just say you plan all this out, all you Syria bombers out there. One of your precious little Tomahawk cruise missiles, your implements of death, just happens to land on something that belongs to the Russians. What do you propose to do about that? Has anyone even though about that? Check out today’s transcript for the rest…
Begin Mike Church Show Transcript
[start audio file]
Ron Paul: Plans, rumors and war propaganda for attacking Syria and disposing Assad has been around for many months.
This past week, however, it was reported that the Pentagon indeed was finalizing plans to do just that. In my opinion, all the evidence to justify this attack is bogus. It is no more credible than the pretext given for the 2003 invasion of Iraq or for the 2011 attack on Libya.
The total waste of those wars should cause us to pause before this all-out effort at occupation and regime change is initiated against Syria.
Mike Church Show Transcript – Syria’s Assad Denies Use Of Chemical Weapons, Urges The West To Stay Out Of His Sovereign Country’s Affairs
There are no national security concerns that require such a foolish escalation of violence in the Middle East. There should be no doubt that our security interests are best served by completely staying out of the internal strife now raging in Syria.
We are already too much involved in supporting the forces within Syria, anxious to overthrow their current government. Without outside interference, the strife – now characterized as a civil war – would likely be nonexistent.
Whether or not we attack yet another country occupying it and setting up a new regime that we hope we can control poses a serious constitutional question: Where does a president get such authority?
Since World War II, the proper authority to go to war has been ignored. It has been replaced by international entities like the United Nations and NATO or the president himself while ignoring the Congress. Sadly, the people don’t object.
Our recent presidents explicitly maintain that the authority to go to war is not the U.S. Congress. This has been the case since the 1950s when we were first taken into war in Korea under a UN resolution and without congressional approval.
Once again, we are about to engage in military action against Syria, and at the same time irresponsibly reactivating the Cold War with Russia.
For the rest of today’s transcript please sign up for a Founders Pass or if you’re already a member, make sure you are logged in!
[end audio file]
Mike: Congressman Ron Paul said that in June of 2012. Still applies today. That is a great point that I hadn’t heard anyone else make, few people have made it. The decepticon desperation here to reinvigorate the Cold War is just reprehensible. The Russkies do have a naval base in Syria. There is basically a Russian outpost in Syria. The Russians are allies with the Syrians. Let’s just say you plan all this out, all you Syria bombers out there. One of your precious little Tomahawk cruise missiles, your implements of death, just happens to land on something that belongs to the Russians. What do you propose to do about that? Has anyone even though about that? [mocking] “We don’t have time to think about it. There’s a chemical weapon. We’ve gotta get in there.” You haven’t even thought about that, really? It is amazing to sit here and watch.
Mike Church Show Transcript – Someone Send Congress A Copy Of The Constitution Before Obama Starts Another War
I remember as a child, and I’m a little older than my counterparts in the DC command center. I began my schooling in the late 1960s. I remember, in the early day, first, second, third grade, somewhere in there, I still remember the duck under your desk drill for fear that a Soviet nuclear weapon was going to be detonated somewhere nearby. I can still remember the fears that most Americans carried around with them of mutually-assured destruction. I can still remember all the espionage and all of the acrimony between the United States and the expansion of red Soviet communism.
Do any of you people wonder why we have this embargo with the Cubans? It was never about Cuba, per se. It was always about stopping the spread of red communism in this hemisphere. The Kennedy administration, probably never believing that this would be a long-term thing, initiated that embargo against the Cubans as a way to economically punish Cuba, which was by all accounts a great place for Americans to vacation, visit, a good trading partner, the whole nine yards until the Castro brothers. That was the reason why. The embargo was a relic of the Cold War. There are many Americans today that don’t like the embargo and think the embargo ought to be lifted. Why in God’s holy name then would we do anything that could even remotely regenerate Cold War issues and a Cold War stance with the former Soviet Union, what remains today of the great bear Russia? This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
You have to ask yourself a question, ladies and gentlemen, and no, I’m not being a pacifist, and no, I’m not being naïve here. I realize that there are threats. All the noninterventionists I know realize that there are threats. There are not threats here to us directly. They are threats that have evolved and have been cultivated as a result of our bellicosity in foreign policy over the last 50 years. In other words, our interventions have created the need for future interventions because we won’t mind our own business, we won’t stand down, and we won’t be humble, liberty-loving, peace-loving people.
We’re now sitting here and actually actively talking about this. This is amazing. We’re talking about and considering kick starting the old Cold War. Who wants that? It just defies all common sense to me. It defies all manner of respect for American history and respect for the direction and the course that our early settlers set us on and then the founding fathers codified into our union of states. It just defies all of this. We want to be at peace. Why don’t we always pursue peace? I don’t like the idea that our government kills people. [mocking] “Mike, there are dangerous people.” That’s right, and you do have to defend yourself. We do have the legal and mechanical means to do so. We are not being attacked here, but we’re going to make sure we’re attacked in the future. Ever heard of blowback? This is how we ensure we’re going to be attacked somewhere, someday by some Pakistanis and Yemenis who have had wives and children and grandmothers and sisters and daughters and sons killed by our indiscriminate use of drones, or the Obama administration’s indiscriminate use of drones. [mocking] “It’s a little collateral damage but it’s worth the price to get terrorists.” Really? Tell that to the people that lose their innocent loved ones.
Again, instead of pursuing peaceful actions, as Congressman Paul points out later in that speech — I posted it in today’s Pile of Prep — instead of pursuing pure diplomacy, open and free trade with all who want to openly and freely trade, and the course and action of peace as Americans did all the way since the conclusion of hostilities against the British Empire in 1783, all the way up until we got this bright idea: Hey, let’s invade the Philippines. For over 100 years, we were largely at peace. Even after the Philippines, cooler heads prevailed, the internationalists were sent packing — for a little while anyway — and things got back to peaceful normal. Then Wilson got the bright idea: We need to get involved in the war in Europe. Why? We instigated more death and mayhem by entering that conflict, and many Americans knew it at the time and refused to be conscripted. They said no. Then again, cooler heads prevailed and there was relative peace all the way up until the big event in 1941.
Folks, it should not be lost on you and you should not disregard the history of your state and of your country. In 1940 when Franklin Delanobama Roosevelt was running for his third term, one of his campaign slogans was he was not going to send your sons into that European conflict. He was not going to do it — he was lying — even though he was commiserating, he was secretly having meetings with Winston Churchill. They were sending American assets and American hardware. It was called the lend-lease program. We lend them ships in their struggle against the Germans. Roosevelt was reelected on the promise of peace. Try getting elected on the promise of peace today.
As George Carlin said, we’re a warlike people. War is costly in blood and in treasure and in the liberty that it has robbed us of. Why do you think we have this national security super spy state? It’s because of the damn wars, that’s why. This has got to end. Folks, either it’s got to end or the people that won’t end it, we need to secede from them. There, I said it. We’re going to have to part ways. If that’s the way you want to behave internationally, fine. There are tens of millions of us that want nothing to do with this and we’re tired of arguing with you. We’re tired of our sons and daughters being embroiled in this. We’re tired of being taxed for it. We’re tired of being spied on for it. We’re just tired of it. You go and do that. You leave us out of it. What a great irony that would be if we tried to do that. What would happen? They would probably go to war with us. That tells you everything you need to know about current members of the current political establishments in the United States and many of the citizenry that support them. It’s sad, folks, sad.
End Mike Church Show Transcript