Hotair: Rand Paul differentiates foreign policy from his father’s brand

[Lucille]

Rand Paul’s Unnecessary Security Guarantee
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/rand-pauls-unnecessary-security-guarantee/

...In fact, Sen. Paul went a little beyond that and said that the U.S. should publicly “announce to the world” that an attack on Israel would be treated as an attack on the United States. There are several things wrong with this idea. First, it isn’t a true reflection of what U.S. policy has been and what it presumably will be in the future. The U.S. has no formal defense obligation to Israel, and attacks on Israel have never been treated as attacks on the United States. Especially because of the strains on our military and our current fiscal woes, it doesn’t make any sense for the U.S. to extend yet another security guarantee to a prospering client state that can already provide for its own defense. The U.S. needs to reduce allied and client dependency on the U.S. We certainly shouldn’t be adding any new security guarantees.

More to the point, making this announcement would be unnecessary. Israel has the most powerful military in the region, and it possesses its own nuclear deterrent. No state that would be deterred by such an announcement is going to launch an attack on Israel, because it is already deterred from doing so by Israel’s military arsenal. Those militias and groups that are still willing to launch strikes on Israel would still be willing to do so after such an announcement. The only things that this announcement would achieve would be to link the U.S. even more closely with Israel in the eyes of the world and potentially to make Americans targets of these groups.

If the U.S. made such an announcement and followed through on it the next time there is a conflict between Israel and Hizbullah, for example, the U.S. would be committing itself to involvement in a conflict in Lebanon that serves no discernible U.S. interest. If the U.S. makes the announcement and then doesn’t honor the guarantee being made, other U.S. security guarantees that may be necessary elsewhere in the world could be undermined. The worst-case scenario is that providing such a guarantee to Israel could make a future Israeli government more aggressive in its behavior towards one of its neighbors, and that could end up pulling the U.S. into a war that it wasn’t seeking and shouldn’t be fighting.

 

[deadfish]

Really? Please point to me where someone said that. Nice try at spinning peoples words though.

Not much difference between Romney and Obama. Significant different between Rand Paul and everyone else. I've watched too many hours of Rand Paul's speeches and filibusters to be convinced otherwise. Just as an example, who else has watched all 1.75 hours from his speeches/filibustering on 9/21/12?

Also note that my nobody ever brings up the worst legislation (imo) that Rand Paul every pushed and continues to support rhetorically. He introduced legislation to ban abortion, and in a really dumb way too. Do people not know this or what? After some deep-thought, and some soul searching, and that video by G. Edward Griffin, I decided that I would still support Rand because I have faith that he wants to destroy the ring of power. I feel that faith is justified in the nuances that you pick up on when watching him speak... and by Ron Paul standing at his side.

Incredible that someone would rather have Rand Paul than Ron Paul.
How... Why... Isn't that just stupid?

Now go troll somewhere else.

Unfortunately, I feel Ron Paul did not want to win. If I could take back every dollar I donated, I would. It was no small sum. Instead, I would have invested primarily in Liberty For All and saved for smaller races. Doesn't change the fact that Ron changed my life and inspired my passion for politics. Sorry, but I was not a happy camper about being mislead.

At the end of the day, I have a goal. Taking control of the positions of power. I believed that if Ron was president, we would be better off. I believe that to be true with Rand. Maybe I will be wrong about Rand's intentions like I was about Ron's, but I will be more more cautious when Rand's money bombs begin. Big difference than trying to suck the wind out of his sails like so many on RPF.

As petty as it is, a big landmark will be whether Rand's campaign hires Benton or not. If he does, it's going to be really hard to donate.

 

[P3ter_Griffin]

Turning ugly. But I guess it is better to get this ugliness out now than for it to come out later.

Sooooo. Can someone point out someone better for 2016? Anyone??? Can anyone suggest someone other than Rand for 2016? Heck, possibly 2020? Someone who is like Ron and has a chance of even getting the nomination. With the current pool of politicians, its not that great of a pool to choose from. There are some junior politicians, but they'll take a while to blossom and to get name recognition.

GARRRY!!... but no, I can't think of anyone with a chance.

 

[fj45lvr]

Ron is a libertarian and Rand is not, which is why he can stand beside a horrific state such as Israel while they systematically steal while pointing guns at the heads of their victims...

if anybody is dumb enough to believe that rand is going to "fool" the oppressors into backing him they are delusional. They are getting a laugh at Paul pissing on liberty before they kick him to the curb....

 

[belian78]

Ron is a libertarian and Rand is not, which is why he can stand beside a horrific state such as Israel while they systematically steal while pointing guns at the heads of their victims...

if anybody is dumb enough to believe that rand is going to "fool" the oppressors into backing him they are delusional. They are getting a laugh at Paul pissing on liberty before they kick him to the curb....

Unfortunately this is what I see happening as well.

 

[Agorism]

Wonder if the Ron Paul supporters in Alaska are going to bother showing up at this point to take the chairmanship next month. Rand is sabotaging the movement.

Not saying it's not in their best interest to do so, but I think a lot of people are going to lack enthusiasm at this point. But so long as Glen Beck is backing you, that should be enough.

 

[sailingaway]

People need to find motivation in something else then. Look at the states we've taken or almost taken. Look at, if not winning, Priebus having to fly around the country making concessions to keep his job. The R3VOLution is worth fighting for, even if we are just getting in place so that if the next Ron Paul appears he has a party to push him rather than cheat him. We can't change the world sitting still.

The r3VOLution isn't about who is running for President, necessarily, it is about us.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Wonder if the Ron Paul supporters in Alaska are going to bother showing up at this point to take the chairmanship next month. Rand is sabotaging the movement.

Not saying it's not in their best interest to do so, but I think a lot of people are going to lack enthusiasm at this point. But so long as Glen Beck is backing you, that should be enough.

If their enthusiasm is contingent upon having some figurehead to rally around (such as Rand Paul - or even Ron Paul), then it was never going to amount to anything anyway - so what would it matter?

Führerprinzip has no place in the liberty movement.

 

[sailingaway]

If their enthusiasm is contingent upon having some figurehead to rally around (such as Rand Paul - or even Ron Paul), then it was never going to amount to anything anyway - so what would it matter?

Führerprinzip has no place in the liberty movement.

Joe Miller is pushing events up there at the moment.

 

[Dystopian]

If he walks like a neocon
and talks like a neocon
then he might be a....

Seriously, if he really said these comments, then why should he not be considered a neocon? Maybe he should move to Israel if he loves it so much.

 

[LibertyEagle]

^^^
If he walks like a troll
and talks like a troll
then he probably is a troll

A perusal of your posts since you have joined, is quite interesting.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Do you think Israel would never PROVOKE an attack, resting assured of backup from the mighty American Military (and Taxpayer)?

They provoke attacks all the time, but the people they provoke luckily are smart enough to know that if they attacked Israel that their country would be toast.

 

[cheapseats]

They provoke attacks all the time...

Something Rand Paul should bear in mind when he proposes to broadcast to the globe that "ANY ATTACK ON ISRAEL IS AN ATTACK ON US."

...but the people they provoke luckily are smart enough to know that if they attacked Israel that their country would be toast.

Then "we" don't need to be offering blank-check, no-questions-asked backup.

What happens if hyper-sensitive, perpetual-victim Israel slaps the ATTACK label on the "usual" rockets from Gaza and seeks U.S. involvement?

 

[Dystopian]

A perusal of your posts since you have joined, is quite interesting.

Unlike yours

 

[klamath]

^^^
If he walks like a troll
and talks like a troll
then he probably is a troll

A perusal of your posts since you have joined, is quite interesting.

Don't feed it. It wants attention, so bad.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Seriously, if he really said these comments, then why should he not be considered a neocon?

Perhaps because neo-conservatives are war-mongering leftish Republicans who are the intellectual descendants of ex-Trotskyites - something that Rand Paul obviously is not.

Of course, that would also require that people who run around hissing "OMG! Neo-con! Neo-con!" at everyone who says something they don't like would have to actually learn the meanings of the words they use.

Apparently, though, this would be asking too much ...

 

[LibertyEagle]

The Truth about Neoconservatism by Ron Paul

Here is a brief summary of the general understanding of what neocons believe:

They agree with Trotsky on permanent revolution, violent as well as intellectual.
They are for redrawing the map of the Middle East and are willing to use force to do so.
They believe in preemptive war to achieve desired ends.
They accept the notion that the ends justify the means – that hard-ball politics is a moral necessity.
They express no opposition to the welfare state.
They are not bashful about an American empire; instead they strongly endorse it.
They believe lying is necessary for the state to survive.
They believe a powerful federal government is a benefit.
They believe pertinent facts about how a society should be run should be held by the elite and withheld from those who do not have the courage to deal with it.
They believe neutrality in foreign affairs is ill-advised.
They hold Leo Strauss in high esteem.
They believe imperialism, if progressive in nature, is appropriate.
Using American might to force American ideals on others is acceptable. Force should not be limited to the defense of our country.
9-11 resulted from the lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many.
They dislike and despise libertarians (therefore, the same applies to all strict constitutionalists).
They endorse attacks on civil liberties, such as those found in the Patriot Act, as being necessary.
They unconditionally support Israel and have a close alliance with the Likud Party.

read the rest....

 

[FSP-Rebel]

if anybody is dumb enough to believe that rand is going to "fool" the oppressors into backing him they are delusional. They are getting a laugh at Paul pissing on liberty before they kick him to the curb....

The point is not to fool the oppressors, it's to make his message palatable to mainstream conservatives so that he can pull them further into a liberty mindset. Unfortunately, deflecting non-interventionist foreign policy demagoguery by standing strong with Israel will allow him to make better inroads in promoting non-interventionism in general. I mean, he's on record stating that aid must stop to all at some point and I'm confident that once the rug is pulled on the hostile countries then it won't be too long afterwards that it only makes sense to end Israel's goodies to balance things out. Rand won't be able to single-handedly end aid on his own, it's to get the ball rolling in that direction so that support for reversing our overseas policies can bare fruit. Rand is hustling libertarianism to conservatives in the most innovative way in this day and age. If his language got too extreme too soon he'll cut off his nose to spite his face and lose all future progress.

 

[itshappening]

read the rest....

Once again Ron Paul shows us the way. The 2003 Neoconned speech was one of his classics and will be remembered for years to come.

No wonder Krauthammer wants to disown the term.

 

[cheapseats]

Top of Drudge: ATTACK ON SYRIA IS ATTACK ON IRAN

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-01-26-14-55-01

And THAT is how shit escalates.