Editorial
Iran Sanctions Are Precursor to War
Last week the House overwhelmingly approved a measure to put a new round of sanctions on Iran. If this measure passes the Senate, the United States could no longer do business with anyone who sold refined petroleum products to Iran or helped them develop their ability to refine their own petroleum. The sad thing is that many of my colleagues voted for this measure because they felt it would deflect a military engagement with Iran. I would put the question to them, how would Congress react if another government threatened our critical trading partners in this way? Would we not view it as asking for war?
This policy is pure isolationism. It is designed to foment war by cutting off trade and diplomacy. Too many forget that the quagmire in Iraq began with an embargo. Sanctions are not diplomacy. They are a precursor to war and an embarrassment to a country that pays lip service to free trade. It is ironic that people who decry isolationism support actions like this.
If a foreign government attempted to isolate the US economically, cut off our supply of gasoline, or starve us to death, would it cause Americans to admire that foreign entity? Or would we instead unite under the flag for the survival of our country?
We would not tolerate foreign covert operations fomenting regime change in our government. Yet our CIA has been meddling in Iran for decades. Of course Iranians resent this. In fact, many in Iran still resent the CIA's involvement in overthrowing their democratically elected leader in 1953. The answer is not to cut off gasoline to the Iranian people. The answer is to stay out of their affairs and trade with them honestly. If our operatives were no longer in Iran, they would no longer be available as scapegoats for the regime to, rightly or wrongly, blame for every bad thing that happens. As bad as other regimes may be, it is up to their own people to deal with them so they can achieve true self-determination. When foreigners instigate regime change, the new government they institute is always perceived as serving the interest of the overthrowing country, not the people. Thus we take the blame for bad governance twice. Instead we should stay out of their affairs altogether.
With the exception of the military industrial complex, we all want a more peaceful world. Many are hysterical about the imminent threat of a nuclear Iran. Here are the facts: Iran has never been found out of compliance with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) they signed. However, being surrounded by nuclear powers one can understand why they might want to become nuclear capable if only to defend themselves and to be treated more respectfully. After all, we don't sanction nuclear capable countries. We take diplomatic negotiations a lot more seriously, and we frequently send money to them instead. The non-nuclear countries are the ones we bomb. If Iran was attempting to violate the non-proliferation treaty, they could hardly be blamed, since US foreign policy gives them every incentive to do so.
l 
|
You must be a site member to submit suggested edits or post feedback. In addition to submitting edit suggestions and posting feedback, your Free Membership to The Daily Bell gives you access to our Member Zone where you will discover a plethora of other member benefits. Want to learn more? click here |
|||||
|
|
||||
 |
Posted by John Digweed on 06/29/10 01:47 AM
I'm amazed to see so many so-called libertarians advocating interventionism and another war. In my opinion, it sums up a great deal about the somewhat self-serving and self-contradictory nature of many so-called libertarians.
|
Posted by Eric on 12/23/09 11:13 AM
Ok, so how did the diplomacy of giving economic aid work out for us in North Korea??
Reply from The Daily Bell
But didn't the US fight on the soil of North and South Korea rather than vice-versa? Maybe we should try leaving these countries alone? ...
|
Posted by Trevor Dupuy on 12/22/09 11:15 PM
Dr Paul has not thought through the Iran dilemma very thoroughly. Does he really think that further negotiations with Iran will change Iran's behavior?
Does he think Israel really cares that Iran has as much right to nuclear weapons as anyone else?
Does he think it's important for Iran to change its behavior?
If negotiations won't work and payoffs won't work and sanctions aren't attempted, nothing will stop Israel from preemptively attacking Iran to preserve its very existence?
Although, sanctions may not work either, they're one step short of war and better than doing nothing at all until Israel attacks, which would automatically draw the US into the war without any help from our allies who have all but deserted Israel.
If war is inevitable to preserve Israel, it is best done on our terms and hopefully with the support of our allies.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Thanks for the feedback.
|
Posted by David on 12/22/09 07:10 PM
Ron Paul has some good ideas but those described here are not. Does the US suggest giving sanctions on any countries that are following a "peaceful" path?
I don't agree with Obama but he did offer to change the relations (or at least talk) between the US and Iran. That wasn't successful and would suggest to a rational thinker that Iran doesn't want to ease the strain between the to countries.
I wonder what the world would be like if the "good countries" (metaphor for the good guys) isolated themselves and didn't help out if needed.
Does anyone think that the school yard bully would disappear? I think not. There would just be more of them. Somehow I can't imagine not coming to the aid of a woman on the street being attacked by a thug.
Ron Paul apparently would close his eyes and walk on just because the thug had something in his past that engendered such activity.
Reply from The Daily Bell
And yet, when one looks over the past century, once sees that much violence in the world has been generated or perpetuated by the west.
We refer you to the following link:
Click to view link
|
Posted by John Acord on 12/22/09 04:07 PM
One matter that the American right and left agree upon is War with Iran. On this single subject Limbough, Hannity, Durbin, Schumer all agree arguing only who can pull the trigger first.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Yes, that's why the right and the left are on one side (state action) and libertarians are on the other (anti-statist).
|
Posted by Martin on 12/22/09 02:06 PM
Dr Paul has made more sense that anyone,I'm not American. However he know's what he's talking about he's bang on with almost everything he's always right on the money.But I've come to the realization that America doesn't give a S--t and that isn't going to change anytime soon.....
Reply from The Daily Bell
Maybe the Internet will change some minds ...
|
Posted by Robert Goodfellow on 12/22/09 01:29 PM
Ron Paul reminds me ofhow we squeezed Japan on oil before WWII. I think that we have to come to real grips with Iran and that we will have to participate in an armed conflict if not support actively Israel. We cannot put this off forever. We have the overpowering strength now. First thing would be to destroy their gasoline storage facilities if not taking out their refinery. Second destroy their Navy to keep open the straits. We have given Iran too many years to come to their senses.
RG
Reply from The Daily Bell
But perhaps if the US hadn't "squeezed" Japan so hard, the Japanese might not have gone to war?
|
Posted by GIVEMEFREEDOM on 12/22/09 01:04 PM
To hear Mr. Paul complain about sanctioning Iran, you'd think Iran had never done anything wrong. Mr. Paul is wrong, the sanctions are an attempt to make Iran STOP being abusive, aggressive, and make them more open to the world community. It is NOT an attempt to qualify our military industrial complex for another war.
Reply from The Daily Bell
His point is that sanctions will only empower the current government and disenfranchise moderates.
|
Posted by Ted Sorce on 12/22/09 12:42 PM
Somehow I missed Ron Paul's solution preventing Iran from passing on nuclear capability to terrorists. They already send everything but the kitchen sink to kill Americans.
Reply from The Daily Bell
"They already send everything but the kitchen sink to kill Americans."
Because they are evil or because they have been provoked for so long by Western intel?
|
Posted by John Wiggin on 12/22/09 12:30 PM
How rare to read a mature understanding anything these days. You publish what others fear to whisper.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Thanks. Ron Paul is a courageous man.
