Ron Paul and Charlie Wilson’s War
by Max Raskin We all know Rudy’s stance on books. When Ron Paul stood up to him and explained that 9/11 did not occur in a vacuum, but rather the attacks were a reaction to failed American policy, Giuliani (the mayor of New York on 9/11) was astonished. "I don't think I have ever heard that before and I have heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th." So like any respectable debater, Paul gave Rudy a reading list, which vindicated his argument. This list including the 9/11 Commission Report and a book by the former head of the CIA’s bin Laden Unit, Michael Scheuer. Unfortunately Paul doesn’t understand the mind of Rudy. The books he assigned were filled with big words, no pictures, and rational arguments – virtually assuring that the former mayor (during 9/11) would not look at them. Given that Giuliani (who was mayor during 9/11) hasn’t dropped out of the race and apologized to the American public, one can only assume that he hasn’t been doing his reading. So I have a solution. Giuliani should see the new film, Charlie Wilson’s War. Though based on a book written for adults, the film contains few sentences, making it an apt choice for the former mayor. The story follows Texas Congressman Charlie Wilson’s crusade to supply Afghani militants (mujahideen) in their fight against the Red Army. Almost a billion dollars of sniper rifles, bullets, machine guns, rocket launchers, antiaircraft guns, grenades, surface to air missiles, and an array of mines were given to these fanatics. The logistics and politics of Operation Cyclone is the topic of this film, adopted by Aaron Sorkin. Witty dialogue and outrageous characters make this a madcap adventure into the dark world of politics, complete with Mossad agents, strippers, and evangelicals. While one can read about blowback and the devastating consequences of clandestine intervention, seeing the deeds done hits viscerally. It seems, as Bismarck said, that to retain our appetite for sausages and foreign policy, one ought not see them made. But this is what we want. Americans should be disgusted with the fact that we helped arm Muslim extremists – that their tax dollars were given to terrorists and murderers. What Charlie Wilson’s War does is unflinchingly expose the American people to the corruption and danger of our world-policing foreign policy. Those familiar with Congressman Ron Paul and his philosophy of nonintervention will see Charlie Wilson as his antipode. Whereas Paul stresses staying out of the internal affairs of foreign nations, Wilson dedicates himself to the proposition that everything is the business of America. He, like Rudy Giuliani, clearly had never heard of blowback – the concept that our actions can have unforeseen implications. In the polarized world of Wilson, there is only Good and Evil. At the time, Communist Russia was the Devil himself and had to be stopped at all costs…even if it meant sending weapons to bin Laden’s friends – the future Taliban. And while there was no explicit mention of bin Laden, there doesn’t need to be. Whether we armed bin Laden is irrelevant. The movie makes it clear that we allied ourselves with religious zealots, including Gulbuddin Hekmatyar (who is now listed as a terrorist). Even if we didn’t directly fund or train him, did we not support his cause? Were these rebels not labeled "freedom fighters"? A powerful illustration of this flip-flopping comes when some powerful Congressman goes to the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan to chant, "God is Great" in Arabic. Imagine doing that today! And this is exactly what Ron Paul is decrying. He understands that the world is complex and changing, filled not with monoliths but nuance. He is too humble to profess to mete out perfect justice. Eventually Wilson gets it. So does he seek to rectify the situation by eschewing future intervention? Nope. The solution is more money – this time to build schools and infrastructure. Afghanistan was to become the 51st state, for America to rule and westernize. If the medicine isn’t working, reasons Wilson, the only answer is a higher dosage Contrast this view with that of Dr. Paul. Just as the Soviets of yesteryear were the boogeyman, today Islamofascism is. And just as some said we needed to accept totalitarianism at home to fight the Red Menace abroad, so too today do we have the neocons who sound the clarion call against the archaic notion of rights and liberty. But Paul says we need to understand blowback. We need to understand our enemy if we ever hope to protect ourselves. Our war against the Soviets created unintended consequences. Who knows what the War on Terror will create. Unless there is a direct threat against America and the retribution is targeted and declared, all intervention must necessarily be deemed unwise and intrusive. Far from an archaic relic, Ron Paul’s foreign policy of noninterventionism is the only viable one for the real world. Ron Paul is the only one sensible enough to understand that no council, Congress, or commander-in-chief can rule the world. How can a man like Giuliani, who reads only neoconservative tracts with titles like World War IV, be expected to understand much of anything? Like Giuliani, Wilson snarkily demeans this philosophy when he responds that America’s inaction is a result of Congress’s "tradition." But there’s nothing wrong with a tradition of peace and obeying the Constitution. It’s the tradition Ron Paul wants to bring back. What disturbs me the most, however, is the real Charlie Wilson. On CBS’s Sunday Morning, an interviewer asked him if had any regrets. He brazenly replied, "None. What’re you gonna regret?" I’m not sure. Maybe it could be the arming of butchers and despots who killed thousands and paved the way to September 11th. Just a thought. January 7, 2008 Max Raskin [send him mail] goes to high school in New Jersey. He was a summer fellow at the Mises Institute in 2007. Copyright © 2008 LewRockwell.com |
