In a column entitled "Iowa’s Choice: Dr. Paul or U.S. bankruptcy, more wars, and many more dead soldiers and Marines" published on his website over the weekend, Scheuer said voting for any candidate other than Paul would help inflict further damage on an already-wounded America. It would also contribute toward the continuation of a foreign policy that will ensure total national bankruptcy, noted the 22-year intelligence-community veteran, who now serves as an adjunct professor at Georgetown University’s Center for Peace and Security Studies.
“Dr. Paul’s non-interventionist policy will allow foreigners to work out their political destiny in their own way and at their own pace; prevent unnecessary additions to America’s growing list of enemies; and save countless young lives,” Scheuer wrote in his endorsement, blasting senior leaders and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle with harsh words. “Electing anyone but Ron Paul will further increase the already strong chances of widespread Islamist-conducted violence inside the United States.”
Scheuer, who has authored several books criticizing U.S. foreign policy, emphasized the fact that Paul’s campaign has received far more donations from the American military than all other Republican candidates combined. He also lambasted establishment talking heads and politicians for improperly mischaracterizing the 12-term GOP Congressman’s non-interventionist views, pointing again to his strong support among members of the armed services.
According to Scheuer’s analysis, Paul is the only presidential candidate who would truly push for cuts in American militarism as well as out-of-control domestic spending. And any other candidate — Obama included — would continue to unconstitutionally squander U.S. taxpayer money promoting feminism, “elitist democracy,” and “mindless anarchy” around the world, the counter-terror expert asserted.
On top of that, Scheuer said, all of the presidential contenders except Paul would continue to “slavishly obey” lobbyists in the drive to start a war with Iran. And it would be an unmitigated tragedy for Americans.
“Such a war would be a financial and military disaster for the United States, and would be watched with glee by Russian and Chinese leaders who — while their countries would lose some trade with Iran during a war — would applaud another U.S. self-inflicted wound that further erodes the already failing economy that is the base of American power,” Scheuer wrote in his endorsement.
The broader bipartisan foreign policy of the last several decades will continue unabated if any other contender becomes President, Scheuer also explained. And it will have predictable consequences: more resources wasted, more Muslims taking up arms against America, and possibly even the beginning of a disastrous “clash of civilizations.”
“Notwithstanding the damnable lies about Dr. Paul’s foreign policy … only the gentleman from Texas speaks for the Founders’ non-interventionist vision of America’s role in world affairs and for plain common sense,” Scheuer argued. “In the Founders’ non-interventionist design for U.S. foreign policy that is championed by Dr. Paul, Iowans will find a proven road to the maintenance of America’s sovereignty, independence, peace, and prosperity. In the realm of common sense, Dr. Paul beats his fellow candidates, the Obamaites, and the media hands down.”
In the long and detailed piece endorsing Ron Paul, Scheuer also accused Obama and Paul’s fellow GOP contenders of lying about the true motivations of Islamists in waging a war on America. He said that, contrary to the bipartisan narrative, Muslim extremists attack American interests because of U.S. government meddling abroad — not because they hate Americans’ liberties or gender-equality laws.
And on issues such as energy independence, Ron Paul is also the best candidate, Scheuer argued. “Only Dr. Paul could be counted on to allow the unfettered development of all domestic energy resources to promote energy self-sufficiency and allow the gradual abandonment of our mujahedin-motivating exploitation of Muslim oil,” he wrote.
Scheuer warned about looming troubles coming to American streets, too — assuming something does not change soon. According to the expert on Islamic terrorism, continuing the same policies could very well lead to America becoming a battlefield — a situation that would likely result in having to use the military on U.S. soil. Paul and the policies he advocates, Scheuer said, offer the best hope for preventing such a calamity.
“Indeed, the national-security policy advocated by Dr. Paul’s opponents and critics boils down to the clear and absurd argument that: America needs more and more wars — and the dead/maimed military personnel attendant thereto — that are motivated by Washington’s intervention abroad if Americans are to be safe and secure at home,” Scheuer concluded. “For Iowans and Americans as a whole, then, the best choice for their children, grandchildren, and country clearly lies in the Founders’ foreign-policy wisdom and Dr. Paul’s sturdy advocacy and promised application thereof.”
So far, neo-conservatives and most of the establishment media have largely ignored Scheuer’s powerful endorsement of Ron Paul and his views. By January 3, only the Des Moines Register and U.S. News & World Report had even mentioned the announcement.
But Paul’s campaign was thankful nonetheless. “We’re pleased to have the endorsement of Michael Scheuer, who is the world’s leading expert on the notorious terrorist Osama bin Laden and who like Ron Paul understands the connection between U.S. military adventurism and emerging threats against America,” said Ron Paul campaign chairman Jesse Benton.
“Michael Scheuer understands that only Dr. Paul will put our national security first and stop the foreign wars and nation building,” Benton concluded. “Our campaign is very proud to have his support.”
Photo: Michael Scheuer