House and Senate Republican leaders McConnell and Ryan are praising President Trump’s missile strike on Syria last week in retaliation for an alleged chemical attack on civilians, while when President Obama proposed the same thing in 2013 they strongly opposed the plan. Meanwhile, the mainstream media and even many “progressives” are turning pro-Trump after the US attack. Few are the true progressives like Tulsi Gabbard, who is questioning the claims that Assad gassed his own people. So are we all neocons now? Not so fast! While earning praise from the establishment, Trump’s base and the opinion-makers around his base are furious. We discuss the changing political environment – and whether the accepted narrative makes any sense in today’s Ron Paul Liberty Report:
Reprinted from The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity.
6 thoughts on “Ron Paul Asks: After Trump Bombed Syria, Are We All Neocons Now?”
Maybe an idea Ron, would be to just forget the term ‘neocon’. After all, it’s literal meaning doesn’t make any sense in our fight to discredit those who are pushing for another war.
And also how about dropping the term ‘progressive’ because the bastardization of the word has no meaning.
In fact there’s no word coined yet to describe those who favour wars, other than perhaps hawks or warmongers.
The real issue that must be kept alive is the question of where the guilt lays for the gas attack. The propagandists are succeeding in placing the blame on Assad even though it’s far from logical to think he would use chem/bio weapons at this stage of the war.
Can we win that fight at least? Can the majority of the American people, from both major parties as well as lesser parties be convinced that an impartial investigation must take place and the UN is the only party to do it?
Sadly…NO…republicans and democrats alike are pouncing on this without having it wholly verified. Not unlike something that happened in the lead up to Iraq. We never learn the frigging lesson it seems. How long ago was “shock and awe”? Is it SO distant in history that we risk falling into such a trap yet again? Syrian rebels would relish nothing more than full insertion of america’s military apparatus, thinking that THEY will be the sole inheritors of what remains of Syria by the time it’s been bombed back to the stone-age. Ah…to be kings of a frigging graveyard.
Barrel bombs have been mentioned today and that’s breaking through a glass ceiling at least here on this site. It may be within the capacity of Americans to understand if the message isn’t prevented from getting to them.
However, it’s almost sure now that the wars aren’t going to be stopped from within the US. The threat of MAD is the only factor that can stop it now.
I think the term “neocon” is now understood by a fair percentage of people, at least those of us who “keep up.” Paul is the person who popularized its usage, I think. This said, perhaps he and others can define it more often in media appearances for those who are still unsure of his meanings.
I share your view on the importance of discrediting the “false flag” narrative, which was accepted as gospel in record time. How about trying the facts of this incident like you would in a court case, with real experts and witnesses testifying and cross-examined? Now what impartial and trustworthy body would organize such a proceeding I’m at a loss. We can count out any MSM “investigative reporters” from doing the leg work.
Comments are closed.