Enduring Commitments Abroad
Listen to Rep. Paul deliver this address.
Last week President Obama made a surprise pre-dawn trip to Afghanistan to mark the one-year anniversary of the killing of Osama bin Laden and to sign a document further extending the U.S. presence in that country. The president said, “We’re building an enduring partnership. … As you stand up, you will not stand alone.” What that means in practice is that the U.S. will continue its efforts to prop up the government in Afghanistan for another 10 years beyond the promised withdrawal date of 2014.
To those of us who believe the U.S. should leave Afghanistan immediately, the president retorted, “We must give Afghanistan the opportunity to stabilize.” But how long will that take, when we have already fought the longest war in our nation’s history at incredible human and economic cost to the nation and no end is in sight?
There is little evidence of any sustained increase in stability in Afghanistan, and, in fact, April saw the loss of 34 more American troops and an escalation of violence and upheaval. Within 90 minutes of the president’s departure, seven more people were killed in Kabul by a suicide bomber. It is clear that our presence in that country is not creating any real stability. With Osama bin Laden dead and the al-Qaeda presence in Afghanistan virtually nonexistent, we are reduced to nation-building in a nation where there is no real nation to build.
We should ask ourselves why Obama’s trip was a “surprise” visit rather than a normal state visit. The reason is that after 10 years it is still far too dangerous to travel in or out of that country. Does that not speak much more loudly than the president’s optimistic words about the amazing progress we have made in Afghanistan?
What does our enduring commitment mean? Ask the South Koreans, where the United States has maintained an “enduring commitment” of U.S. troops more than 50 years after hostilities ended. By some estimates, the United States taxpayer is saddled with a $40 billion annual price tag for our “enduring commitment” to maintaining a U.S. military presence in Korea. Polls suggest that, in particular, younger Koreans are tired of the U.S. military presence in their country and would prefer us to leave. The same is true for the residents of Okinawa, who have argued strongly, and with some recent success, for American troops to leave their island.
The Soviets believed the road to their goal for a universal form of government ran through Afghanistan. They were also wrong and paid an enormous price. However, after nine years and 15,000 Soviet lives lost, the Communist regime in Moscow realized its mistake and withdrew from that country. The Soviet withdrawal was complete in early 1989. The Soviet Union by that time had further plunged into economic crisis, fueled in great part by its commitment to maintain a global empire of client states. Later that year, the Soviet world began crashing down, with first the collapse of Eastern European regimes and then the Soviet Union itself. That collapse produced an economic calamity for the successor states from which most have not yet fully recovered. It is not too late for the United States to learn what the Soviets discovered too late, back in 1989. Mr. President: the time to leave Afghanistan is today, not in 2024.
Read more by Rep. Ron Paul
- Obama’s Syria Policy Looks a Lot Like Bush’s Iraq Policy – June 16th, 2013
- Government Spying: Should We Be Shocked? – June 9th, 2013
- Iraq Collapse Shows Bankruptcy of Interventionism – June 2nd, 2013
- The Real Meaning of President Obama’s National Security Speeches – May 26th, 2013
- What No One Wants to Hear About Benghazi – May 13th, 2013





Sanjay
May 7th, 2012 at 9:22 pm
The Marxist-Neocons are hell bent on destroying Western peoples and Western Civilization.
These cultural and financial marxists who control federal reserve, IMF, World Bank, Mass Media and our government, want nothing less than our total destruction.
We must retire them from power or they will exterminate the West.
Tom Mauel
May 7th, 2012 at 10:37 pm
Marxist-Neocons? Isn't that a contradiction of terms? Ultra right wing Neo-Cons is more descriptive. A true Marxist would never support an imperial war against some of the poorest Agrarian farmers on Earth. Capitalist Neo-Cons would be a more accurate description as capitalism leads to imperialism, racism, and war.
You need to brush up on your study of Marxism. Hitler called his party national socialists in order to gain power and popularity and then did everything in his power to exterminate communism. The IMF and World bank have been used to expand U.S. imperialism for decades
and the right wing mass media has supported U.S. imperial design against the left in Korea, Vietnam, Central America, Iran, Iraq, Columbia, Venezuela, Peru, Grenada, Cuba, Yugoslavia, and dozens of other nations around the world. You can make up labels but the historical record proves the opposite of your claim.
Tom Mauel
May 7th, 2012 at 10:44 pm
Great article by Ron Paul. Thirty four more dead Americans in April as Obama claims victory.
greedrulesin dc
May 8th, 2012 at 4:38 am
I know how Ron Paul feels about foreign entanglements. What I want to know is, when is he going to run as an independent?
Bruce Richardson
May 8th, 2012 at 5:02 am
Ron Paul for President. The only Member of Congress who really get's it!
If You Love the Police State, Vote for Obama or Romney (and more news…) » Scott Lazarowitz's Blog
May 8th, 2012 at 7:53 am
[...] Ron Paul: Enduring Commitments Abroad [...]
J M Sterling
May 8th, 2012 at 8:03 am
Excellent essay/speech!! Ron Paul is the only candidate who would put and end to our wars and so-called "foreign commitments". Best line in the speech: "With Osama bin Laden dead and the al-Qaeda presence in Afghanistan virtually nonexistent, we are reduced to nation-building in a nation where there is no real nation to build."
Bertram
May 8th, 2012 at 7:44 pm
"capitalism leads to imperialism, racism, and war."
What an idiotic statement. I could just as easily say Marxism leads to gulags, killing fields, secret police, purges and mass starvation.
Believers in the free market and voluntarism find the Imperial Wars funded by money stolen from taxpayers by our "Democratic" government for the sake of occupying countries continents away abhorrent. The socialization of costs through inflation and borrowing to fight these wars is the furthest you could get from genuine free market capitalism.