...liberty and justice for all.

Ben highlighted how many cords of life intersect, inform, and influence each other. My first post at Cerberus is not quite religious, although the conclusions are hopefully from an increasing application of Scripture to my worldview, namely the distinction between Creator and creature, and the idea that all human beings are crafted in our Creator's image.

Last night, Republican nomination hopeful Ron Paul appeared on The Colbert Report, unlike several other candidates warned to stay away from the program. Stephen Colbert, who does his best to satirize and emulate Fox News pundit Bill O'Reilly (whom Colbert affectionately calls "Papa Bear"), grilled the Texas congressman with the same battery of questions raised against anyone questioning Bush II's "War on Terror." Colbert insisted that traditional American freedoms should only be defended when Americans were free from terrorist threats. "I don't want to be free and dead!" Colbert argued.

Congressman Paul countered, "I want to be alive and free, and I think we can do that," and earned roaring applause from the audience.

Benjamin Franklin warned that "those who surrender their freedom for security deserve neither." I first encountered this statement in high school, before the September 11 attacks. After the War on Terror was underway, and the hideous PATRIOT Act was passed, not many dared to question whether the Bush regime had impaired American freedoms to protect them.

What Ron Paul hopes to do as a President is lead citizens into national security by taking seriously these crucial freedoms. He does not draw that imaginary circle around Americans and suggest that the truths of the Declaration of Independence apply to only citizens of the U.S., but to all other human beings. At the core of his platform, and of the libertarian philosophy of government, is the idea that peace is best preserved by using our rights such as free speech and self-determination and by respecting those same exact rights of other nations and and other peoples.

The United States, particularly in the Middle East, is guilty of abusing these sovereign principles of other nations. Paul recognizes that the interventionist policies of the last half-century have put our nation in a dangerous situation. At the center of most of these policies is a twisted self-interest that denies the same rights to others which we seek to protect for ourselves. The solution to these problems is not more of the same, but a return to the classic ideals of our founding fathers who recognized these truths.

In the early 1950s, Iran nationalized the various oil corporations in the country. Naturally, Great Britain and the United States were opposed, and in 1953 through a pair of coups, one failed and one successful, installed Mohammad Reza Pahlavi as the Iranian monarch, the Shah. The official rhetoric for the coups was not economic, however, and Eisenhower continued Truman's ideas of "containment." The new Shah would be a safeguard against communism in that region. To ensure democracy, Pahlavi establish single-party rule and established government tests for any Muslim scholars hoping to become mullahs. The United States also collaborated with Pahlavi to aid him in developing nuclear weapons, thus expanding the anti-communist arsenal.

When the Iranian Revolution occurred in 1979-80, which was understandably hostile towards the former Shah and ousted him, Pahlavi fled to several countries. President Jimmy Carter ignored the Iranian demands for justice by providing him brief asylum and medical aid. In a completely unjustifiable, but understandable, move, Iranians took American hostages. The tortured Americans had their own freedoms violated by a nation which had endured nearly three decades of quisling governments denying rights of self-determination.

When Ronald Reagan became President in the 1980s, he did not change the fundamental tune of American foreign policy in the Middle East, but instead turned to a new ally, Saddam Hussein. The Reagan administration encouraged Iraq to go to war against Iran, which it did with help from the United States, including arms and the ability to manufacture more potent, unorthodox weapons. In 1989, Iraqi nuclear engineers were allowed to tour advanced weapons production sites.

It should be noted that most of the genocide committed by Saddam Hussein was committed during the presidencies of both Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush, or the twelve years from 1980 to 1992. The crime for which Hussein was executed, the gassing of 154 Kurds, occurred in 1982. In 1982, the Reagan administration dropped Iraq from the list of terrorist-sponsoring states so that American finances could work their magic. Sean Hannity, when he cross-examined Ron Paul about his negative comments about the Iraq war, at the same time suggested that the war was fought to bring a genocidal maniac to justice, that this maniac worked alone, and that he certainly worked against the interests of the United States government.

Only when Saddam invaded Kuwait and international pressure escalated did the United States turn against their former ally.

After September 11th, the United States invaded Iraq for reasons that are numerous and misleading, and all of which probably reveal that the current War in Iraq is unjust. That will be discussed perhaps later, perhaps not.

The past decades of political theater and statecraft have left one nation in shambles and our own nation disillusioned. In such times it is almost impossible to look towards an honest and hopeful future. But in such cases we should remember some of our favorite truths of the past. It is best for the safety of the United States and the liberty of its people that elected officials mind our nation's business and not meddle in the affairs of vastly different cultures and political situations. As you think about candidates for the 2008 Presidential race, see whether opportunist candidates would continue these bizarre foreign policies of intervention or the wisdom of peace.