Have We Forgotten 2003 Already? Statement on H Con Res 21 by Ron Paul
This resolution is an exercise in propaganda that serves one purpose: to move us closer to initiating a war against Iran. Citing various controversial statements by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, this legislation demands that the United Nations Security Council charge Ahmadinejad with violating the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
Having already initiated a disastrous war against Iraq citing UN resolutions as justification, this resolution is like déja-vu. Have we forgotten 2003 already? Do we really want to go to war again for UN resolutions? That is where this resolution, and the many others we have passed over the last several years on Iran, is leading us. I hope my colleagues understand that a vote for this bill is a vote to move us closer to war with Iran.
Clearly, language threatening to wipe a nation or a group of people off the map is to be condemned by all civilized people. And I do condemn any such language. But why does threatening Iran with a pre-emptive nuclear strike, as many here have done, not also deserve the same kind of condemnation? Does anyone believe that dropping nuclear weapons on Iran will not wipe a people off the map? When it is said that nothing, including a nuclear strike, is off the table on Iran, are those who say it not also threatening genocide? And we wonder why the rest of the world accuses us of behaving hypocritically, of telling the rest of the world "do as we say, not as we do."
I strongly urge my colleagues to consider a different approach to Iran, and to foreign policy in general. General William Odom, President Reagan's director of the National Security Agency, outlined a much more sensible approach in a recent article titled "Exit From Iraq Should Be Through Iran." General Odom wrote: "Increasingly bogged down in the sands of Iraq, the U.S. thrashes about looking for an honorable exit. Restoring cooperation between Washington and Tehran is the single most important step that could be taken to rescue the U.S. from its predicament in Iraq." General Odom makes good sense. We need to engage the rest of the world, including Iran and Syria, through diplomacy, trade, and travel rather than pass threatening legislation like this that paves the way to war. We have seen the limitations of force as a tool of U.S. foreign policy. It is time to try a more traditional and conservative approach. I urge a "no" vote on this resolution.
link to thestressblog.com
Nevermind that this is all based on a falsified translation of Ahmadinejad's words, nevermind that the UN itself had condemned Zionism as a form of racism for many years, nevermind that Iran poses absolutely no threat to anyone in the region - the US Congress has covered itself in shame and disgrace yet again.
After cheering on Israel for its "continued efforts to prevent civilian casualties" during the war in Lebanon last summer, after congratulating Israel on its illegal conquests, Congress now call on the world to condemn the President of Iran and "reaffirms the unwavering strategic partnership between the United States and Israel and reasserts the steadfast commitment of the United States to defend the right of Israel to exist as a free and democratic state" (nevermind that it is the last self-declared ethno-religious state on the planet whose internal policies similar to the South African Apartheid according to Desmond Tutu).
Nearly unnoticed Congress yesterday declared all but open war on Iran. The House passed Resolution 21:
"Calling on the United Nations Security Council to charge Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with violating the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and the United Nations Charter because of his calls for the destruction of the State of Israel."
And if the U.N. doesn't act the U.S. will have to take on the burdon alone ...
Only two representatives voted against the resolution. Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul.