Suspension of Logic

News has recently come to light that Congressman Ron Paul currently garners the most money (among Republicans) in donations to his Presidential campaign among members of the United States military. If you don’t care to read the entire article I just linked to, just press “CTRL+ F” and type in “active members of the military”. That will show you what I am talking about. I would prefer that you read the entire article, but I cannot and will not coerce you into it. It’s a free country, right?

So, the point of this blog writing is to state that Fox News has accomplished what I would consider to be a complete suspension of logical thought. During the October 17^th broadcast of their morning show “Fox & Friends”, they actually asked Congressman Paul why the military supported him so much when he constantly advocated their withdrawal from Iraq. Are they functionally retarded? Why would the members of the military NOT support Ron Paul, who advocated that they immediately return home to safety? Why would the members of the military NOT support Ron Paul, who advocates going to war only when necessary and only when declared? The way I see it, not wanting to go to war without a damn good and provable reason is the ultimate way of supporting the troops. They volunteer to fight for those Americans who cannot or will not fight for themselves and all they ask in return is to be treated fairly and sent into harm’s way only when absolutely necessary.

I could see how members of the highest echelons of the chains of command would not support Ron Paul. However, these are not the men and women who are on the ground actually fighting this war. They are not being shot at, losing limbs, being blinded, being poisoned by depleted uranium munitions’ radiation, missing their children growing up, living in constant fear that the next person that they save may be the one with a bomb strapped to their chest under their shirt or that the next trip they take across town may just be their last. No, they’re sitting in their nice, air-conditioned office back at the Pentagon or in the confines of the relatively safe Green Zone of Baghdad, waiting on the day that they can retire and go to work for one of the contractors that they serve making millions of dollars in salary and stock options. They do not actually want the war to end because, for them, it is an investment in their own financial future. It’s literally a case of money over substance of character. These people do not care at all about the well-being of anyone or anything outside of their own bank account. It’s a free-for-all. Well, not free for ALL. Maybe a more accurate term would be “free-for-some”.

Sorry, I skewed a bit there. I can’t help it. It makes me angry. I would like to think that this sort of thing makes enough people angry to actually change this, but I am a realist and I know that all I can do is to put these things out there and hope that someone is listening.

Back to the point. There is a very simple and logical reason why so many members of the United States Armed Forces would support Ron Paul. It is simply because he supports going back to the drawing board (the Constitution) and making right what has been made so wrong. If a ship is lost because its captain won’t look at a map; someone has to relieve the captain of duty, get out the map and steer the ship back on course. The United States is that ship and the US Constitution is that map. All members of the US Armed Forces take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution upon enlistment. Here it is:

“I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”

Note that it also states that the enlistee swears to obey the orders of the President and the officers over him/her. It also says that this is to be done according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. This is the important part. The United States Constitution dictates that the US President cannot enter a war without a declaration of war by Congress. Did the current President get the approval of Congress to go to war in Iraq? Yes, he did. However, he did so by deception. This has been proven. Also, no declaration was ever made. Now, it is simply a matter of how to withdraw. Nevertheless, a soldier/Marine/sailor/airman is only required to obey lawful orders as defined by the UCMJ. The UCMJ does not override Federal law. Federal law is derived from the US Constitution and the Constitution states that we are required to recognize all treaties that we enter into. The invasion of Iraq as authorized by Congress is a direct violation of international law under Principle 6 of the Nuremberg Principles as defined by UN General Assembly Resolution 177. As far as I can tell, this is a war crime. Under this same set or rules, George W. Bush is guilty of war crimes under Principle 3 and likely more than half of our current government and a large number of people in the mass media are guilty under Principle 8. Pay particular attention to Principle 6, though. That is the one that bothers me most. I’ll go ahead and post it here, that way you don’t have to do the work:

“Principle VI

The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

(a) Crimes against peace:
(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).

(b) War crimes:
Violations of the laws or customs of war include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave-labour or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.

(c) Crimes against humanity:
Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.”

Okay class… how many of the above listed items have the United States violated over the last 4 years with regards to Iraq? I can name at least 9. How about you? The point of it is that Ron Paul wishes to follow the Constitution in all matters, including matters of war, which affects the military directly since they are the ones who fight it. If we followed the Supreme Law of the Land (the Constitution) with regards to the Iraq war, then 3,829 American troops might just still be with us and MANY more might just still have all of the body parts and functions they were born with.

The things that I just said may give certain Ann Coulter/Bill O’Reilly/Sean Hannity types reason to label me a traitor or an America-hater. I assure you, the opposite is true. I absolutely LOVE my country. I would happily and readily lay down my own life for it if I knew that doing so would preserve its future, its dignity and its integrity. It is for this reason that I say the things that I say. Criticism is necessary in order to improve. Dissent is vital to the blood of a nation. Without dissent, how would anyone know that their liberties were being squashed, their rights trampled or their very existence threatened? Dissent is patriotic.