Ron Paul talks ‘blowback’,advises against U.S. intervention in Africa and saying it would be ‘foolish’
With all the chaos brewing around the world–whether it be Egypt, Syria, Libya, Algeria, Mali or elsewhere, former Congressman Ron Paul told Neil Cavuto on his TV program recently, “all these problems we have, makes my case clear, that we should have followed the Founders advice of staying out of the entangling alliances and staying out of the internal affairs of other nations, mind our own business and save a dollar now and then cause we’re flat out broke”.
As things get progressively worse around the world, particularly in areas of northern Africa, the calls are getting louder for US involvement as Mr. Cavuto points out. Do we do anything about the very mobile terrorists? Cavuto asks, “Do we just let them brazening grow unobstructed”?
Why do we have this problem? Do they just hate Americans for their freedom or other reasons? Or is there truly an issue of “blowback”, a term coined by the Central Intelligence Agency and written about extensively by such experts as Michael Scheurer and the late Dr. Chalmers Johnson, that haunts the US?
Is it because we are over there? Is it because innocents are killed anonymously with drones that are operated hundreds, perhaps thousands of miles away?
The terrorism issue continues to grow and expand and will likely expand even further over time, much of it based on anti-American sentiments. We were warned by the likes of Dr. Paul and similar thinkers.
Remember the 2007 Republican Presidential primary debate when Paul talked of blowback only to the chastised by former NYC Mayor Rudy Guiliani?
Guiliani, playing to the Republican/Fox News crowd may of thought he got the best of the good doctor at that moment in time; however, I ask, when Ron Paul said in that debate, “if we ignore that [blowback], we ignore that at our own risk”, is history showing Paul to be correct?
What are your thoughts?