Author: Daniel McAdams

Ron Paul’s Liberty Report:

President Obama’s visit to Vietnam was more about bringing this former adversary into the US sphere of influence against China than about truly developing further mutually-beneficial trade and other relations. The opening of weapons sales to Vietnam will be a boon to the US military-industrial complex (Lockheed-Martin and Raytheon are already eyeing juicy deals) and is designed to cut out the Russians. Pushing the Trans-Pacific Partnership is to the benefit of the “deep state” and a new world order of non-elected global governing bodies. And the implied US support for a more confrontational Vietnamese relationship with China shows the “Pivot to Asia” as nothing more than an Asian version of NATO’s policy of encircling Russia. It is a shame that in his “farewell tour” Obama is carrying such dangerous baggage…

Reprinted from The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity.

For the “privilege” of being groped and radiated before being allowed to travel, passengers are now facing the additional TSA abuse of being forced to miss their flights due to unimaginably long security check lines. Thousands are missing their flights, and much of the problem is that the agency has thrown a hissy-fit over a slight reduction in the number of screeners. Some 4,600 screeners were cut in hopes that more people would sign up for “TSA-PRE” (they didn’t) and thus fewer screeners would be necessary. They now want not only all of those back – they want an additional 6,000 screeners, which would far exceed the limit set by Congress! To top it off, a recent Homeland Security investigation of TSA performance at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport found that nine out of twelve times TSA screeners missed simulated explosive material passing through checkpoints. What to do about an inefficient government agency that abuses our civil liberties? We have some ideas in today’s Ron Paul Liberty Report:

Reprinted from The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity.

The Defense Authorization bill is supposed to be an opportunity for Congress to shape national defense priorities and share the responsibility with the president when it comes to foreign policy. Generally the president has significant authority to make his mark on foreign and defense policy and the authorization process for both the Defense and State Departments is the Constitution’s way to make sure the co-equal Legislative Branch of government is properly part of the process. Sadly though this is what was intended, current reality no longer resembles what was meant to be. Instead, Congress members abrogate their authority to set defense spending priorities to the Pentagon, the military-industrial complex, and to special interests in their districts. The result is a mess that has very little to do with defending this country and a whole lot to do with enriching those in position to feed from the trough. This week the House will vote on the Defense Authorization Act for 2017. Today’s Ron Paul Liberty Report explains the process and previews the result:

Reprinted from The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity.

With the ongoing larger US wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, and elsewhere, it can easily become the "new normal" that US troops are also fighting in (relatively) small numbers in places we just do not hear about, in wars the media does not question, in bloody conflicts that Congress does not bother to debate much less authorize. Once it was news when US troops were fighting overseas. But now the total US militarization of the rest of the world is so non-controversial that the average American doesn’t even seem fazed about it.

For example, most Americans either had not heard or had not stopped to scratch their heads upon hearing that US Special Forces in Somalia ordered airstrikes yesterday while operating alongside Ugandan forces who were battling Al-Shabaab militants. Why is the US backing up the Ugandans? Why are the Ugandans in Somalia in the first place? Is Al-Shabaab such a clear and present threat to the United States that the president was forced to send US troops there without notifying Congress? No one asks these questions (aside from us, of course). The US has been using drones to strike at Al-Shabaab, a small group with no international ambitions, for a number of years, but that too is seldom reported in the media. It’s just normal that US troops are on the ground in Somalia. After all, they are only "advisors" – until they call in airstrikes, that is.

Continue reading “Did You Know? US Special Forces Fighting in Libya and Somalia”

“Why has the world’s mightiest military achieved so little even while absorbing very considerable losses and inflicting even greater damage on the subjects of America’s supposed beneficence?” This is the question asked by Professor Andrew Bacevich, a retired US Army colonel, in a must-read recent article. It is an excellent question that no one in the mainstream dares ask. But this is critical when considering our interventionist foreign policy: why are the constant wars not working? Why has 30 years of constant US warfare in the greater Middle East produced less peace, less harmony, less democracy, and less economic development than before we started? If war is so critical to peace and prosperity in the world, why has constant war produced less of it? The neocons would say that we simply have not waged enough of it. But that’s like going to a doctor after a bad reaction to medicine and having him tell you to double up. In today’s Ron Paul Liberty Report we are delighted to have Professor Bacevich, author of the excellent new book, America’s War For The Greater Middle East, join us to trace the history of our failed foreign policy and plot a new course.

Reprinted from The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity.

For the third time in seven months, the US has sent a warship to challenge China in territorial waters it claims in the South China Sea. The US claims its purpose is to keep shipping lanes open, while China arguably benefits as much as anyone from trade going in and out of the region. Similar to US military operations off the Baltic coast, this latest clash in the South China Sea resulted in military jets being dispatched to send a message. With its interventionist policies toward both Russia and China, is the US opening itself up to the unintended consequences of pushing Russia and China closer together in opposition to the US empire? Can the countries in the region not better solve these disputes without US involvement?

Reprinted from The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity.