Globe

Ron Paul: Can America Afford Ukraine?

OBAMA ADMINISTRATION’S POLICY “HYPOCRITICAL” By Ron Paul || Officially, U.S. debt stands at more than $17 trillion. In reality, it is many times more. The cost of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq may be more than six trillion dollars. President Obama’s illegal invasion of Libya cost at least…

OBAMA ADMINISTRATION’S POLICY “HYPOCRITICAL”

By Ron Paul || Officially, U.S. debt stands at more than $17 trillion. In reality, it is many times more. The cost of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq may be more than six trillion dollars. President Obama’s illegal invasion of Libya cost at least a billion dollars and left that country devastated. The costs of U.S. regime change efforts in Syria are likely thus far enormous, both in dollars and lives. That’s still a secret.

So who in his right mind would think it is a good time to start a war with Russia over Ukraine? And worse, who would commit the United States to bail out a Ukraine that will need at least $35 billion to survive the year?

Who? The president and Congress, backed by the neocons and the so-called humanitarian interventionists!

The House voted overwhelmingly last week to provide $1 billion in loan guarantees to Ukraine. That is just the beginning, you can be sure. But let’s be clear: this is not money for the population of that impoverished country. The administration is sending a billion dollars from U.S. taxpayers to wealthy international bankers who hold Ukrainian debt. It is an international bank bailout, not aid to Ukrainians. And despite the escalating anti-Russia rhetoric, ironically some of that money will likely go to Russia for Ukraine’s two billion dollar unpaid gas bill!

So what happened in Ukraine? The U.S. government and media claims that America must save Ukrainian democracy from an invading Russian army that is threatening the country’s sovereignty. But in reality the crisis was instigated in part by U.S. meddling. Remember the intercepted telephone call in which two senior Obama Administration officials discussed plans to replace the elected government in Ukraine with U.S. puppets? That is exactly what happened. Is that not a violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty? Is that what democracy is all about?

The Obama Administration’s policy toward Ukraine is hypocritical. The overthrow of the government in Kiev by violent street protests was called a triumph of democracy, but when the elected parliament in autonomous Crimea voted last week to hold a referendum to decide its future, President Obama condemned it as a violation of international law. What about the principle of self-determination, which is also enshrined in international law?

I have long thought that a referendum to reorganize Ukraine into a looser confederation of regions might help reduce tensions. I still believe this could help, but it seems the U.S. government is not so enthusiastic about democracy when there is a chance for an outcome it opposes.

I strongly believe that Crimeans have every right to transfer sovereignty over their peninsula to Russia if they wish. The only question that remains is whether there will there be an honest election, and I don’t see any reason there can’t be.

The US government tells the rest of the world, “We want you to be good democrats and have elections,” but if they don’t elect the right people then we complain about it and throw them out, like we did in Egypt. In Crimea they want to have an election to determine their future. President Obama condemned those plans for a vote by saying, “We are well beyond the days when borders can be redrawn over the heads of democratic leaders.” Does he not remember that the authorities in Kiev were installed just weeks ago after a US-backed coup against the Ukrainian constitution?

Congress next week will likely vote for sanctions against Russia. Though many mistakenly believe that sanctions are a relatively harmless way of forcing foreign countries to do what we say, we should be clear: sanctions are an act of war.

Cooler heads in the United States are not currently prevailing. There is a danger of an unimaginable conflict between the U.S. and Russia. We must demand a shift away from a war footing, away from incendiary rhetoric. We are broke and cannot afford to “buy” Ukraine. We certainly cannot afford another war, especially with Russia!

ron paul

Ron Paul is a former U.S. Congressman from Texas and the leader of the pro-liberty, pro-free market movement in the United States. His weekly column – reprinted with permission – can be found here.

Related posts

Globe

Another War?

FITSNews
Globe

More Russian Moves

FITSNews
Globe

Another Warmonger Wants Syria Attack

FITSNews

51 comments

Smirks March 10, 2014 at 8:30 am

B-but, the only thing that stops a bad guy with a nuke is a good guy with a nuke! Nucular holocaust, brah!

We can afford it just as much as we can afford wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria… McCain and Graham have it all figured out!

Reply
GrandTango March 10, 2014 at 9:40 am

Remember: Afghanistan is the war Obama said he LOVES…but he’s losing that, like he loses everything, too.

That said: What we CANNOT afford is an incompetent president, who has failed at everything he touches.

It’s not the policy that we have to fear, it’s the immaturity, ignorance and lack of leadership in the White House currently.

Bush won in Iraq and made it MUCH better than it was. And he freed millions, backed up the ignorant threats of the Clintons and gave us a base-point in a region where we needed it…

But Obama has squandered EVERY life lost, because of his inability to do anything right, or for the sake of American interests.

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia March 10, 2014 at 9:52 am

I was with you until, “Bush won in Iraq…”.

Reply
GrandTango March 10, 2014 at 10:18 am

Hussein (Saddam, not Barack) was imprisoning children, torturing and murdering and raping women on site. He was threatening us every day. He HAD WMDs and planed more, Clinton was bombing him from 15,000 feet.

After we invaded, Iraqis braved death squads to vote at a 70% clip (more than we do.) In Iraq the US freed the oppressed as we ALWAYS have and it snuffed out a tumor before it metastasized.

The Congress and America told Bush to go to Iraq and clean it up after Colin Powell screwed it up the first time.

Liberals have re-written the whole thing, and those w/o a memory have bought into the revision completely.

Reply
Egadsno March 11, 2014 at 3:33 am

Clinton was also bombing Afghanistan and Sudan- I am sure the people there had no hard feelings only a couple years before 911. As for Hussein- many of our allies and even ourselves do horrible things, the difference with people like Saddam and Gaddafi was they were not playing the game the way we wanted and both owed a ton of debt to the world banks. You are kidding yourself if you think our soldiers are dying for anything other then poppy fields and the trans-afghan oil pipeline.

Liberty_NC March 11, 2014 at 2:05 pm

I encourage you to take a trip to Iraq so you can witness first hand the utopia we have created. The death toll there, since our intervention, dwarfs anything the prior regime could muster. Sure, Saddam was a evil dictator but if that’s all it takes to get us involved, we would be in 100 conflicts by tonight. Like egadsno said, our reasons for invading Iraq had zilch to do with their freedom or our security. And just so you know, I am a conservative who strongly believes Obama is nothing more than a bad continuation of Bush foreign policy. He certainly serves the same interests…

Timothy Wenners March 11, 2014 at 4:29 pm

Yea, you were doing good until you started touting iraq success.

Clearly your not in touch with reality.

You have any idea how many millions are dead, and now the country is in bed with Iran?

Read a book dude.

Person20 March 11, 2014 at 7:53 pm

Well my 4 friends from Iraq would disagree. They’re Roman-Catholic, and they had to flee after the US threw out Hussein (who was fairly tolerant as far as religion goes) because killing Catholics is apparently now a sport in Iraq. A quote from one: “With Saddam, if you kept your head down and didn’t make noise, you were safe. With the Americans, your home might be destroyed because you live next to the wrong people.”

GrandTango March 10, 2014 at 9:34 am

America cannot afford to add SSI and welfare payments to gays who demand gov’t sanctioned marriage. And we cannot afford Obamacare, more expanding food stamps even more or global warming extortion…

Bush spent too much, but his economy produced enormous dividends because there was freedom, productivity and the opportunity that a free market affords.

Under this failure of a president now, we are in an economic depression, but even worse, we’re in an human spirit depression. Obama is a dictator-like, militant, freedom-hating zealot. He does not understand what makes America work and flourish as a great country…

We need an enema badly to flush out the toxin that Obama is…Obama has really screwed up.

Ron-Paul, if he ever want to be relevant, needs to go and tell dat….

Reply
Napoloen's Knickers March 10, 2014 at 11:58 am

Back from the State Hospital but still off the meds…

What we can’t afford is more bullshit where WE do not belong.

Reply
Jason Comment March 10, 2014 at 8:45 pm

You can’t blame the depression on Obama. It’s not even classified as a depression anymore, more like a slow recovery. But it started before Obama took office, and even then it was predicted there would be a long and slow recovery. And what freedom has Obama taken away from you? Bush was the one who made it legal to detain Americans with no probable cause, and allowed the government to spy on any American.

Reply
GrandTango March 11, 2014 at 9:54 am

A president is judged on how he RESPONDS to crisis. Even if you blame Bush, who responded magnificently to 9-11, Obama has Failed miserable to correct anything.

Reply
Mike C. March 11, 2014 at 9:34 am

One might take your inclusion of gays as a discriminatory, specially considering the government should not sanction any type of marriage, provide SSI benefits or provide welfare benefits to any group.

Reply
GrandTango March 11, 2014 at 9:52 am

Not real sure of what thought you’re trying to perpetuate?

Reply
Mike C. March 11, 2014 at 6:37 pm

Since I am not trying to perpetuate any idea, and because I am merely following libertarian value, I am not surprised you are not “real sure”. Most people don’t understand that true libertarianism is the most non-discriminatory political group out there. Only by not recognizing any social construct, such as marriage (not just for gays), can individuals be equal.

Reply
Timothy Wenners March 11, 2014 at 4:34 pm

If you think the productivity of the boom and bust under Bush’s watch was capitalism or the free market, then you clearly have no idea what your talking about.

Artificial interest rates of 1% (Under Bush) and then 0% (under Obama) is anything but free market.

Price fixing is not free market.

Reply
GrandTango March 11, 2014 at 6:32 pm

It worked Dumb@$$…or Under Bush it did…

And your problem w/ controlling interest rates has more to do w/ the Community Re-Investment Act. A democrat invention to force banks to give bad loans…Bush warned Congress about it a half-dozen times…

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia March 10, 2014 at 9:53 am

If only we had enough sense to have placed Ron in the White House, we might be coming out of the mess that it has taken decades for us to dig ourselves into. Sadly, all we will have going forward, are Ron’s words of tremendous wisdom and the deaf ears they fall upon.

Reply
CNSYD March 10, 2014 at 10:06 am

If you voted for Paul you have “enough sense”. If you didn’t vote for Paul you lack “enough sense”. So, for whom did you vote?

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia March 10, 2014 at 10:54 am

I voted for Ron in the SC primaries. Since SC does not allow us to write-in Presidential candidates, I voted for the Libertarian, being that neither offering from the big two was an acceptable choice to me.

Reply
CNSYD March 10, 2014 at 10:04 am

“I strongly believe that Crimeans have every right to transfer sovereignty over their peninsula to Russia if they wish.” So if northern US border states wanted to “transfer sovereignty” to Canada they should be allowed to do so. Right? After all it is “their” land.

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia March 10, 2014 at 10:53 am

I would have no problem with that.

Reply
CNSYD March 10, 2014 at 11:28 am

Therefore, in 1860 had the 13 states that became the Confederacy wanted to transfer their sovereignty to say, Great Britain, you would have been fine with that.

Reply
Original Good Old Boy March 10, 2014 at 12:29 pm

Actually, yes, if those states chose to do so.

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia March 10, 2014 at 12:40 pm

Yes, I would have, although admittedly, I would likely have not personally favored transferring sovereignty to Great Britain had I been living then. I believe it was what the Founding Fathers would have intended for us to do, if we believed it was right for us at the time.

From The Declaration Of Independence:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

Reply
CNSYD March 10, 2014 at 1:02 pm

I picked GB out of the air, it could have been France or any other nation. So why then did Abe Lincoln, et al get their panties in such a wad when SC and 12 others said adios?

Person20 March 11, 2014 at 7:43 pm

“In order to preserve the Union, I have destroyed the Republic.”-Abraham Lincoln.

justine March 11, 2014 at 7:46 am

so when latin americans become a majority in the southwest, I suppose it will be okay for them to vote to join Mexico, even if 45-49% of the population wishes to remain in the US. That’s the situation in Crimea.

Reply
Bako March 11, 2014 at 7:44 pm

That would never happen. People immigrate to the U.S. because they want U.S., not to make the southwest Mexico…or else they wouldn’t immigrate to the U.S. Plain and simple, these people are escaping corruption of Mexico, not to hand themselves back to the Mexican drug lords.

Reply
justine March 12, 2014 at 10:23 pm

Bako, your argument is the same one Ukrainians are using. They don’t want to be a part of Russia, including a sizable number of people living in Crimea. But now the Ukrainians and Tatars are afraid to speak up in Crimea. In case you haven’t heard, the Russian thugs roaming the streets of Crimea and placing marks above the doors of the Tatars, which is the same thing Stalin did before he deported the Tatars (and in the process, butchered nearly half the population) of Crimea in the 1940s

Julia Dimitriadi March 13, 2014 at 2:59 am

I am one of those Russians, who have a family in the Crimea. My father was born there and my grandfather was a soldier defending this land in the 2nd WW. On behalf of Crimean Rusiians and Greeks I can say that many people there are very much sensitive to some aspects of the Kev policies. The new authorities show great dislike to anything russian, including such “unpolitical” things like monuments having russian names on them. Some of them have already been destroyed in the Ukraine, just like Eastern Europe cleaned off every sign of us after they stopped being Soviet Union. For me personally it’s very painful to accept that some “democratic” people are going to come to Sevastopol and dismount the monuments to Russians defenders only because they are russian. Some of my family died to win the war and I want nobody to intefere when it comes to the land I have an absolute right to call MY land, as many generations before my father did. If Kiev was mature enough to show respect to Crimean people regardless of their nationality, I would go along with defending the Ukraine’s souvernity and integrity. But it just never happens – moods in Ukraine are not just anti-russian, they are ultra-anti-russian. We’ve used to being hated by half of the world and I don’t demand any love for us, but letting anti-russian-ultra-nationalists rule over the russian Crimea is far too much. Kiev shold better learn some basics of tolerance and human attitude first.
All I posted above is of course my personal attitude which is neither objective or true for everybody. Indeed there are more objective things around the issue. The core of the Crimean crisis is not Putin or Obama, or even Kiev. The very centre of the problem is not that sophisticated. It’s 2 feelings that let the whole situation happen: hope and believe. And bloody figures, as usual: minimum (and mostly average) pension in the Ukraine (incl. Crimea) is 500-900 grivnas. This is $50-100. Half of this goes to pay for electricity and gas. In some regions even this money is not on time, there might be delays for several months. Teacher earn $300 or less, doctors earn $150 on evarage. (All of the figures are monthly salaries). Compare it to figures in Russia: the very minimum pension is $250, teachers: $500-1.500 (directly depending on qualification), doctors: almost same story: $500-1.200. They are figures for state institutions, doctors and teachers in private companies can get more. I am not saying the figures are very big in Russia… But it does make a difference for a Crimean pensioner or doctor. And this difference becomes significant and worth thinking about when people in the Crimea realise they can have it tomorrow and garanteed. What is the objective result of referendum on 16th March is going to be, do you think?
Even those Crimeans who favour Ukraine are very much likely to vote for the budget of the families. People simply hope for better life and believe they can live better if they join Russia.
Thank you for reading such a long text:)

Abanamat Bullamaka March 13, 2014 at 11:45 pm

Please check out how this worked out for Abhasia, Soth Osetia and Pridnestrovye. Russia was technically your ruler for at least last 4 years.

Alexey Rybalko March 14, 2014 at 4:25 pm

“and placing marks above the doors of the Tatars” OMG! No comments.

justine March 15, 2014 at 9:43 pm

From PBS http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/referendum-looms-over-divided-crimea/ …there is this intimidation going on. Some Tatars in a nearby city report having X’s put on their doors by thugs. That’s exactly how the Stalin forces marked the doors of Tatars who were going to get deported.

Alexey Rybalko March 16, 2014 at 5:02 am

Partly true but not representative. Nobody tells that everybody there is for Russia. But ‘X signs above the doors’… I recall Fox News and BBC reports about “ruins of Gori” actually showing broken building in Tshinval (after Georgian attack). There’s information war. Use as more sources as you can. And not only English.

justine March 17, 2014 at 11:22 am

sorry, but all my languages are English or romance languages. There was never any important reason to learn Russian. It’s a has been country.

Person20 March 11, 2014 at 7:46 pm

That is a fantastic argument against amnesty for illegal immigrants. Does the Mexican government have any military bases in the Southwest, though?

Reply
rkm1 March 11, 2014 at 5:35 am

It’s easy to compare the breakup of the Soviet Union to the American Civil War. The state of West Virginia was created out of the Confederate state of Virginia and was recognized immediately recognized by congress… so what’s the problem? During the course of the USSR, many Russians moved to other “states” since they perceived that they were still living within the union, but now since that union has dissolved, many Russians find themselves stuck; living in lands that they do not call home. Families, communities and regions colonized by Stalin or whoever. And many who were born there call it their home, but still (and always will) consider themselves as Russians. Since regions like Crimea and South Ossetia are autonomous, I believe that they should be allowed to break free, just West Virginia did.

So What side is President Obama really on?

Reply
justine March 11, 2014 at 7:51 am

It’s not that cut and dry in Crimea. Most young ethnic Russians, and nearly all ethnic Ukrainians and Tatars wish to remain with Ukraine. That’s about 45-50% of the Crimean population, and maybe more. So while many ethnic Russians wish to join Russia, about half of the Crimean population wishes to remain with Ukraine. By your logic, the Russian speakers in Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Germany and the Baltic States should also break away and join Russia.

Reply
rkm1 March 11, 2014 at 11:07 am

I’m afraid you’re gonna have to show me the source for your statement, because I didn’t see any old Bolsheviks storming the headquarters and raising a flag! I am only discussing the unhappy ethnic Russians in Crimea.

Reply
justine March 12, 2014 at 10:26 pm

I’m not sure what source you need. There are ethnic Russians throughout the former Soviet Union. Putin has lamented the breakup of the USSR because it left so many Russians in other countries. You can google that if you want a source. Maybe the Russians aren’t beating on the Baltics yet, but given his history of invading Moldova, Georgia, and now Ukraine, other countries may follow.

Reply
Alexey Rybalko March 14, 2014 at 4:18 pm

Is that some kind of western fairy-tale that Putin is dreaming about USSR reunion? Your example of Russian speakers in other countries regarding the situation in Crimea is not correct. Crimea was area of Russian presence/interests for more than a century. US care about their “defense” and “democracy” so far from home (Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan), why other countries can not do the same on their own borders taking the complex historical context into account?

justine March 15, 2014 at 9:45 pm

You are obviously Russian and a Putin supporter. If you really think Crimea should be Russian based on the amount of time it was held, then you should fully support returning Crimea to Turkey. They held it longer than Russia and have actual ethnic ties to the indigenous Tatar population.

Alexey Rybalko March 16, 2014 at 4:51 am

I’m Russian. But I’m not a Putin supporter (even never vote for him). You are obviously very far from these territories. And very aware of Crimea situation. Probably NATO base in Crimea is good for you. But not for us. Sorry. You rhetoric argument for Turkey doesn’t work. As well as for Greece /there’re Greeks in Crimea/. And you know it.

justine March 17, 2014 at 11:27 am

your rhetoric for Russia’s illegal annexation doesn’t work. I’m not bothering to respond to you again. You are Russian, and there’s no discussing anything with you. Russia is led by pathetic leader, and if you want to return to czarist days, that’s fine. It’s what you deserve. But if Putin and his minions do anything else to Ukraine, you will have war, and it will be unpleasant not only for Ukrainians, but also for Russians. As for you, if you aren’t already living in Russia, you should go back. It’s a country made for stupid sheep that want to be told what do by a Napoleonic midget.

gg March 12, 2014 at 10:35 pm

if what you say is true, then, let them vote

Reply
justine March 15, 2014 at 9:48 pm

Fine, but let’s have a vote that’s fair. The show Putin is putting on is not a fair election. You might be surprised to find out that young ethic Russians and the ethnic Ukrainians and Tatars in Crimea don’t want to be a part of Putin’s empire. In a free and fair election, there’s a good chance they would want to remain in Ukraine and aspire to a better life than living under a dictatorship

Reply
M2000 March 11, 2014 at 9:32 pm

Get off the stage Dr. wRONg Paul, if Russia invades the Ukraine it’d be just like Russia’s version of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria but with neo-Nazis:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/28/the-swedish-neo-nazis-of-kiev.html

You know it’s one thing to attack the US for supporting an opposition group that will misuse the money to not be in our best interest it’s another thing to outright SHILL for a foreign power like Russia to intervene into the Ukraine that’d cause more problems than there shouldn’t be.

Hey even Paul’s friends over at Infowars run by Alex Jones even report neo-Nazis gee you think it’s so bright that someone who claims to be anti-war claims it should be okay for Russia to even look forward into a possible war into the Ukraine?

Reply
Abanamat Bullamaka March 13, 2014 at 11:27 pm

From your loyal supporter, Dr Paul.
Let me suggest that you are greatly disinformed on what is going on on in Ukraine.
There already was a referendum on the same matter in 1991. 54% was in favor of Ukraine. Current referendum is conducted under gunpoint. Country is occupied.
And did not US, among others nuclear powers was supposed to protect sovereignty of Ukraine after it gave up it’s 3rd largest in the world arsenal of nukes. This agreement was signed in 1994, not to far ago.
And do you think that Putin will be satisfied with Crimea? Us, taxpayers, will spend much more defending our NATO allays like Poland in a few years if Putin is not stopped now.

Also, I am very tempted to conduct referendum based on “principle of self-determination” in my neighborhood.
Greatly disappointed and and “deeply concerned” voter.

Reply
Lora March 14, 2014 at 7:10 pm

After watching these comments from Ron Paul

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwK_xtzyS74

there is only one conclusion to be made: RON PAUL IS A TRAITOR TO AMERICA! The man talks exactly as Soviet apologist Vladimir Posner used to talk in defense of communism dictatorship or Jane Fonda in defense of North Vietnam. Those two were among the propagandists who defended communism as the free and genuine choice of their people and communist elections as totally democratic. To say that a referendum conducted with foreign forces and menacing armed thugs everywhere and ubiquitous one-sided propaganda will make for democratic elections cannot be excused as the babble of a senile politician. Ron Paul is consciously abetting America’s enemy.

Considering that Putin considers the collapse of the Soviet Union the “greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century,” how can one doubt that the Russian invasion of Crimea and next of Ukraine is not part of Putin’s effort to resurrect the Soviet empire, which for our younger viewers was America’s biggest and most dangerous enemy in the second half of the 20th century. After these remarks Ron Paul should be shunned by all American patriots. Nothing Ron Paul has done or said in the past can excuse such despicable assistance to an enemy that wants America buried.

Reply
polarbuffalo March 14, 2014 at 9:54 pm

War with Hitler was more affordable in 1938 than in 1941. When US became involved most of the Europe was making weapons for Germany. Similarly fight Putin in 1914 is more affordable than in the nearest future.

Reply

Leave a Comment