HUME: Congressman Paul, what if this happens again?
PAUL: I would certainly urge a lot more caution than I'm hearing here tonight. It reminds me of what happened in the Gulf of Tonkin. We went to war there, then, later on, found out there was a lot of false information.
So here we have -- let's put it in perspective. We have five small speedboats attacking the U.S. Navy with a Destroyer? They could take care of those speedboats in about five seconds. And here we're ready to start World War III over this?
And now, guess what, today, the Navy commander of the Fifth Fleet was on ABC and announced that, you know, that voice might not have come from those vessels. So what does that mean?Was there a rush to judgment on this, ready to go to war?
And you know there are people in this administration and in Washington, D.C., that are looking for the chance.They were so disappointed with the national estimate on intelligence. And they were disap-pointed that there's no attempt to build weapons in Iran since 2003.
HUME: Congressman...
PAUL: So what -- I just don't see this rush to judgment.
HUME: Well, wait a minute. All of these people I've asked this question to so far have said they sup-ported the decision to be passive. What are you responding to?
Brit Hume asked Paul what if this happens again, a pretty open ended question as far as a possible response goes. Hume didn't ask him what he thought about the original response of the commander. He asked him about future incidents. Paul was perfectly logical about answering Hume's new question with a rush to judgment response considering Giuliani's and Huckabee's responses. Hume made Paul to look like a fool and this new question should be a part of countering that Paul wasn't following the debate.