“There are no vital national interests at stake in Syria. None. Not Iran, not Israel and not oil. Yes, we can watch from the sidelines and let the Iranians and Syrians form their own politics. This is what the U.S. did with Mexico and Canada. Did the U.S. relish interference from Spain, France, Great Britain and Russia into its affairs? How brainless is it to act as if the refugee crisis is an independent reason for intervening, when it is an outcome of the war itself, encouraged every step of the way by the U.S.? And why must the U.S. rectify this tragedy? What good is a ‘freedom’ that marches us off to wars willy-nilly or grabs our wealth to do what it wills?”
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/138136.html
Related posts:
Ivan Eland: Revealed U.S. Strategy to Battle ISIS Is Wanting
Obama: A Keynesian, Not a Communist
Australia Joins The War On Cash While Venezuela Backtracks Cash Ban
Negative mortgage rates in Denmark; $3.6 trillion of negative yield debt
The FISA Reauthorization Only Boosts Big Brother
Ai Weiwei: NSA surveillance makes the U.S. sound a lot like China
It’s Time to Focus on the "School" in "School Shooting"
‘Boston Strong’: Marching in Lockstep with the Police State
Fusion center director: We don’t spy on Americans, just anti-government Americans
Peter Schiff: The Taper That Wasn't
Blowback From U.S. Role As Global Tax Cop
Alfred McCoy: Tweeting While Rome Burns
Nobel Selects EU ... World Snorts
After 50 Years, Washington Has Lost the War on Poverty
The Bank of Japan must crush all resistance, and will do so