<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[CO-OP NEWS]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[https://cooptv.wordpress.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Coop Anti-War Cafe Berlin]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://cooptv.wordpress.com/author/zeitgeistmusic/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[Ron Paul, former US-congressman and founder of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity: Assad had no reason to launch chem attack, unlike those who want US&nbsp;involvement]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/news/423655-syria-assad-no-motive-douma-attack/">https://www.rt.com/news/423655-syria-assad-no-motive-douma-attack/</a>10 Apr, 2018</p>
<p>Washington and the US media seem to have no doubts about the Syrian government&#8217;s complicity in the Douma incident despite the fact that those who want America to stay in Syria have far more solid motives, Ron Paul told RT.</p>
<p>The assertion by White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders that Washington is &#8222;confident&#8220; that Syrian President Bashar Assad is culpable for the alleged chemical attack on the Damascus suburb of Douma does not stand up to scrutiny, <strong>Ron Paul, former congressman and founder of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity,</strong> told RT. &#8222;I don&#8217;t know what they are confident about. They are confident in telling lies and hope people will believe it,&#8220; he said. Mainstream American media don&#8217;t seem to need facts to back the White House&#8217;s claims, either. &#8222;Most of the time when a crime is committed in this country, the stations, when they are not sure, they carefully say: &#8218;this is allegedly&#8216; – but they never do this under these circumstances and they have zero bits of information,&#8220; Paul pointed out.</p>
<p>While there are few questions in the US media over who is to blame for the alleged incident, the former congressman argues that Assad is the last person to suspect. &#8222;I think that least likely it would be Assad,&#8220; he said, noting that the same goes for Moscow. &#8222;I cannot see any reason why Assad would do this, there&#8217;s no reason for Russians to have done that.&#8220; Unlike Russia and Syria, the forces who want to see the US staying in Syria have a clear motive, Paul said. &#8222;There are so many who want to stir up trouble, and the people who want us to stay there,&#8220; he said, suggesting that Trump&#8217;s recent promise to leave Syria &#8222;very soon&#8220; might have prompted war hawks to take action. &#8222;I think the policy makers here did not want us to leave and somebody does it for them,&#8220; he argued, stressing that &#8222;this whole idea that, all of a sudden, Assad is gassing his own people, is a total nonsense.&#8220;</p>
<p>Speaking about what drives the US to keep entrenching in Syria, Paul argued that the &#8222;ulterior goal&#8220; here is to contain Iran. &#8222;It&#8217;s been Iran for a long time, and it has a lot to do with Saudi Arabia and Iran. I think that&#8217;s the number one,&#8220; he said, adding that tensions between Sunnis and Shia are part of the conflict. &#8222;And then, there are neocons in this country who have their agenda – perpetual war for perpetual profits – and the military industry complex. And they all come together and then you throw in oil, and guess what, it&#8217;s bipartisan,&#8220; Paul said of internal US motives that feed into the protracted conflict in war-ravaged Syria.</p>
<p>Speaking about Trump&#8217;s foreign-policy strategy in a broad terms, Paul noted that what should be taken into account is not the US president&#8217;s often self-contradictory statements, but his appointments that &#8222;got worse&#8220; with John Bolton as part of his &#8222;war cabinet.&#8220; &#8222;All of a sudden, neocons run the show. Therefore, that is what really counts. Now, John Bolton, he is really going to help us out on a sensible foreign policy!&#8220; Paul said sarcastically, recalling Bolton&#8217;s hawkish record of preaching war in Iraq.</p>
]]></html></oembed>