The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity
The Ron Paul Peace and Prosperity Institute
Subscribe to the Institute View Us on YouTube Follow Us On Twitter Join Us on Facebook Join Us at Google Plus

Search Results

for:

Michael S. Rozeff

  • Prev
  • 1
  • Next

The Right to 100 Percent Security?

Monday May 7, 2018


The basic fault in the Bush Doctrine and in Norman Podhoretz’s praise of it is that they both assume a state’s or people’s right to perfect security or 100 percent safety. This is impossible, because not everyone can simultaneously have such a right and still remain free.

To get 100 percent security, a state has to defeat and control its neighbors and eventually every last one of them. Even then, it won’t be 100 percent secure until it controls every rebellious element under its flag.

Extremism in defense of 100 percent security is a vice: wicked and immoral behavior. Such extremism stems from an erroneous moral philosophy in which one does not allow equal freedom to one’s neighbors, but instead one exercises power over them in the name of one’s own false conception of one’s right.

As an important example of this thinking and how it can lead to war, consider Israel and Iran. Trump and Pompeo have both made statements that support the neoconservative position of Norman Podhoretz. His position and theirs contain the flaw of making extreme demands for the extreme security of Israel that cannot be met without making war against Iran and suppressing their rights.
read on...

Memo to Lindsey Graham on Syria

Monday April 2, 2018

Senator Graham:

Your recent views on Syria, expressed here, are mistaken and confused.
If we withdrew our troops anytime soon ISIS would come back…
This prediction is mistaken. If ISIS reconstitutes, the Syrian coalition (Syria, Syrian Kurds, Hezbollah, Iran and Russia) will defeat it again. Remember, “ISIS has suffered consecutive defeats at the hands of separate but simultaneous offensives in Iraq and Syria by the Russian-backed Syrian forces and allied militias as well as US-backed Iraqi and Syrian fighters.”
read on...

Rex Tillerson: Neocon

Saturday January 27, 2018

In case it is not clear, the Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, is a neocon. Strong evidence of this unfortunate fact is his speech on January 17, 2018 at Stanford’s Hoover Institute. After warmly acknowledging his debt to Dr. Condoleezza Rice and George Shultz, Tillerson goes into his “Remarks on the Way Forward for the United States Regarding Syria.”

What do we hear? “…it is crucial to our national defense to maintain a military and diplomatic presence in Syria, to help bring an end to that conflict, and assist the Syrian people as they chart a course to achieve a new political future.” He wants the US to stay in Syria indefinitely, its purposes being to defend the American nation, to cause the war to end, and to create a new government/state in Syria.
read on...

Trump and Haley: Shut Up About Iran

Wednesday January 3, 2018

The US government has chosen to be against Iran’s government. Neocon Elliott Abrams says “We should be expressing support” for protests. Given his record and views, we therefore can be quite sure that this is exactly what should not be done. Mere support sounds “moderate”, but it’s only a first step, a wolf in sheep’s clothing. The full Abrams and neocon agenda on Iran and many other foreign lands, shown clearly by his record is full neocon, meaning intervene, interfere, use any means, make war if need be, so as to influence, control and dominate these regions. The agenda is to expand the American empire.

Nikki Haley refers to Iran as a “dictatorship.” She says that “a long-oppressed people [is] rising up against their dictators.” Actually, Iran has a system of elections. Their institutions vet candidates, to be sure. In America, our institutions also vet candidates, our Supreme Court has immense power over laws, and our deep state and agencies wield considerable undemocratically-restrained power.
read on...

Neoconservatives Stand for Anti-American Foreign Policies and Empire

Thursday October 9, 2014

Both the Democratic and Republican parties today house neoconservatives, and whatever their differences, they coalesce on foreign policies of war, empire, support for Israel, foreign interference, sanctions, an anti-Iran stance, and American exceptionalism. The Democratic Party has its left-neoconservatives like Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama. The Republican Party has its right-neoconservatives, and they are allied with the Christian Right and such media as Rupert Murdoch’s Fox.

There is one War Party that includes both the left and right neoconservatives. Washington is under their control. No matter which of the two major political parties anyone votes for, the result is the same: neoconservatism in foreign policy. The left-right distinction is of no significant importance in this respect.
read on...

Michael Ledeen Wants 'Us' to 'Destroy Radical Islamism'

Monday June 23, 2014

Michael Ledeen wants a new American war on “radical Islamism”. This is the man who in his efforts to get the U.S. to attack Iraq wrote in 2002:
He [Brent Scowcroft] fears that if we attack Iraq ‘I think we could have an explosion in the Middle East. It could turn the whole region into a cauldron and destroy the War on Terror.’

One can only hope that we turn the region into a cauldron, and faster, please. If ever there were a region that richly deserved being cauldronized, it is the Middle East today. If we wage the war effectively, we will bring down the terror regimes in Iraq, Iran, and Syria, and either bring down the Saudi monarchy or force it to abandon its global assembly line to indoctrinate young terrorists. That’s our mission in the war against terror.

read on...

Subscribe

Authors

Tags