Rand Paul: Arm the Kurds [Video]

[jmdrake]

I don't think there has been a single individual in this thread who has even discussed mobilization of U. S. forces into the region. That is a nonstarter from my perspective

It doesn't matter. It's going to happen anyway. (U.S. troops). Hell, it already has happened! Obama already sent more troops back into Iraq and he announced that the Afghan draw down is going to be delayed. Nobody is gong to do the one thing that would stop ISIS which is to seriously go after their funding. Note that nobody responded to my post to that effect. If we aren't going to take out the ISIS oil wells and go after the Saudi, Kuwati, Qatari, (U.S.?) moneymen funding ISIS, ISIS will only grow.

 

[orenbus]

Hmm video I didn't see back in October it shows an American, Brian Wilson from Ohio, a veteran from the first Gulf War, fighting along side the YPG (which Turkey considers a Terrorist Organization) in Syria at 3:15.



A few interesting notes as well:

Turkey claims the YPG is the same as the PKK, which they consider a terrorist organisation, whereas YPG leaders insist the PKK is a separate organization.[53] Turkey has been accused of supporting ISIS attacks on the YPG, allowing them to conduct attacks from the Turkish border, photographic evidence of Turkish soldier saluting ISIS fighters and providing logistical support.[54]

There is military cooperation with Iraqi Kurdistan and the USA although there is no official support for Rojava or the YPG.

In January 2015, a UK parliament committee asked the government to explain and justify its policy of not working with the Rojava military to combat ISIS.[55]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rojava#Foreign_relations

 

[jjdoyle]

It's possible for someone to be a Constitutional Conservative and support an interventionist or hawkish foreign policy. The Constitution requires that Congress declare war before we go to war; the Constitution doesn't ban wars. Even someone like Ted Cruz, who is fairly hawkish on foreign policy issues, could still be considered to be a Constitutional Conservative since he doesn't believe that the President has the authority to take our country to war unilaterally, without going through Congress.

Yeah, except Rand Paul is for meddling in the internal affairs of other nations, and apparently having an entangling BLIND alliance with Israel, just because he HAS to have that, because he doesn't know how to address the issue. So, because he can't address it, he will continue to vote for more borrowing from China to give to Israel.

 

[Okaloosa]

Pretty sad to see, in all honesty. I know it's been said time and time again, but Rand is no Ron.

Ron would have stood on principle and talked bluntly, even with Fox News. What does Rand accomplish if he doesn't even teach people the way? He's accepting the failed policy of interventionism. Maybe that even gets him elected, but in the end, does it really teach anyone anything? Will history be forever changed? Will the American people learn the truth? Somehow I doubt it, at least with this approach.

Rand is a big fan of the band Rush. I think it's only fitting that I cite some of these lyrics from "Spirit of the Radio".

Policy not opinion affects what happens. Also for someone with a join date in 2015 you really missed Ron Paul and even he has authorized force in Afghanistan.

 

[Brett85]

Yeah, except Rand Paul is for meddling in the internal affairs of other nations, and apparently having an entangling BLIND alliance with Israel, just because he HAS to have that, because he doesn't know how to address the issue. So, because he can't address it, he will continue to vote for more borrowing from China to give to Israel.

Where in the Constitution does it forbid entangling alliances?

 

[cindy25]

Rand is still the most anti-war candidate, but arming the Kurds is useless

 

[69360]

I think we should arm them. I've argued the point here many times in the past.

The Kurds have been a reliable ally despite getting screwed over by the US government many times. The peshmerga has proven itself a reliable fighting force and the Kurds have the safest territory in the area.

They have oil to pay for weapons, it wouldn't be a freebie on the backs of the US taxpayer. The US government it right now actively preventing the Kurds from selling oil. This needs to stop.

Selling weapons to an ally is not an intervention.

 

[jjdoyle]

Where in the Constitution does it forbid entangling alliances?

I would say a quick look at the national debt would be one place to look. You can give your paycheck to Israel if you want, but Rand Paul shouldn't vote to give money from American citizens to Ukraine, Israel, or the Kurds if he is trying to make some claim to being a fiscal conservative.

It's not my fault Rand Paul is changing positions and abandoning positions that attracted many to Ron Paul, and it's apparently only because Rand Paul has no clue how to phrase what was the best record to run on in forever, and he inherited that and is now throwing it under the GOP bus.

 

[Okaloosa]

Rand is still the most anti-war candidate, but arming the Kurds is useless

I think Rand is using this as an alternative to putting troops on the ground that the neo-cons will fight for and call him an isolationist for opposing. Rand doing these things is as much to make the neo-cons that call him isolationist look desperate and out of touch with reality. This election is not going to be about policy of Ron versus Rand but instead Rand going against King, Bolton, and Graham with Jennifer Rubin and the rest of the hawks in full attack.

 

[jjdoyle]

Policy not opinion affects what happens. Also for someone with a join date in 2015 you really missed Ron Paul and even he has authorized force in Afghanistan.

Public opinion can affect policy, and what happens. As someone with a join date of 2011 (unless you were here in 2007/08 under a different name), you must have missed Ron Paul's reading assignment to Rudy Giuliani, but here it is for you (and Rand as well):

 

[orenbus]

This election is not going to be about policy of Ron versus Rand but instead Rand going against King, Bolton, and Graham with Jennifer Rubin and the rest of the hawks in full attack.

Sorry to go off topic but out of curiosity, do you seriously think any of those guys are going to run? I haven't been keeping up with King, Bolton or Graham and their intentions to announce, but just visualizing it, they don't seem like serious candidates to me, could be wrong though.

 

[cindy25]

Peter King wants exposure for a senate run. Bolton is a joke, but Graham will run. and with the southern tilted schedule, a pro-war base, and a possible terror attack (real or false flag) could win the nomination. France fell, and Wilkie won the 1940 nomination, so it could happen

 

[twomp]

I think we should arm them. I've argued the point here many times in the past.

The Kurds have been a reliable ally despite getting screwed over by the US government many times. The peshmerga has proven itself a reliable fighting force and the Kurds have the safest territory in the area.

They have oil to pay for weapons, it wouldn't be a freebie on the backs of the US taxpayer. The US government it right now actively preventing the Kurds from selling oil. This needs to stop.

Selling weapons to an ally is not an intervention.

Why don't you cut out a check and pay for it out of your own pocket instead of rallying the rest of the country to support you in your crusade against ISIS.

 

[twomp]

Training and arming the people in Afghanistan to fight for freedom against the Russians. Train and arming the people in Kosovo. Training and arming the people in Syria. Training and arming the people in Iraq. Training and arming the people in Libya. Training and arming the people in Yemen. Training and arming the Kurds. Training and arming the people in Western Ukraine.

It's the same old tired line over and over again. Why do you old people constantly fall for this B.S.?

 

[AuH20]

It doesn't matter. It's going to happen anyway. (U.S. troops). Hell, it already has happened! Obama already sent more troops back into Iraq and he announced that the Afghan draw down is going to be delayed. Nobody is gong to do the one thing that would stop ISIS which is to seriously go after their funding. Note that nobody responded to my post to that effect. If we aren't going to take out the ISIS oil wells and go after the Saudi, Kuwati, Qatari, (U.S.?) moneymen funding ISIS, ISIS will only grow.

I think you had a well-constructed, logical post earlier. I couldn't respond earlier at length, being on my smartphone.

 

[AuH20]

Rand is still the most anti-war candidate, but arming the Kurds is useless

The Peshmerga is a proven fighting force which has triumphed over ISIS numerous times. It's not like these weapons would be going to Iraqi security forces, which were basically yellow bellied mercs.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

It's the same old tired line over and over again. Why do you old people constantly fall for this B.S.?

Because it's not the usual suspects that are pushing for it.

 

[AuH20]

See my commentary in red

I can think of a lot of other options.

1) End the policy of "regime change" against Assad and openly team up with Assad to wipe out ISIS in Syria. Assad was initially working with the United States in the global war on terror. But he never supported the war against his fellow Ba'thist Saddam Hussein, and more recently he was in talks with Iran for a gas pipeline that would have sold natural gas to Europe. Can't have that now can we?

Given the geopolitical tension (see Russia) which led to the civil war in Syria to begin with, that's probably not going to happen.

2) Quit giving any help to the FSA as they have shown themselves to be feckless at best and allies of ISIS at worst. It was the FSA that sold that American journalist to ISIS that got beheaded.

Agreed, but that is easier said than done. Once again you have the problem of ancillary organizations within the U.S. intelligence umbrella acting independently.

3) Bomb ISIS controlled oil wells. Oil is ISIS #1 source of income. Currently we aren't bombing the oil wells because we want to preserve them for a "post Assad" Syria. (See point #1) We are bombing ISIS controlled refineries but so what? They take crude oil across the border with Turkey and sell it for money or swap it for refined fuel. The only way to stop this is to take out the damn wells.

Future contracts come into play as you noted.

4) Let the CIA snatch and grab all Kuwaiti, Qatari and Saudi billionaires who are bankrolling ISIS. Seriously, why do we keep Osama Bin Laden's goat herder in Gitmo but the people financing this terror group are getting away scot free? Hell, we even know the names of these people.

Another logical alternative but the system will never let this take this place.

See: http://www.newsweek.com/2014/11/14/how-does-isis-fund-its-reign-terror-282607.html
Treasury also singled out Qatari Salim al-Kuwaru, who secured “hundreds of thousands of dollars” for ISIS, as well as acting as the financier for the terror group’s Iraqi affiliates. A third Qatari targeted by Treasury is Abd al-Rahman bin ‘Umayr al-Nu’aymi, a funder and fixer for ISIS-linked Islamist groups in Syria and Iraq who, according to a December Treasury report, “oversaw the transfer of over $2 million per month to [Al-Qaeda] in Iraq for a period of time.”

Seriously, why isn't Mr. al-Kuwaru or Mr. Umayr al-Nu'aymi looking over his shoulder worrying about a drone strike? Because the whole global war on terrorism is a fake a farce and a fraud.

 

[sabu140]

Public opinion can affect policy, and what happens. As someone with a join date of 2011 (unless you were here in 2007/08 under a different name), you must have missed Ron Paul's reading assignment to Rudy Giuliani, but here it is for you (and Rand as well):

Public opinion can only do so much. If you can't win you can't change anything. Ron and Rand are outnumbered when it comes to foreign policy with only Amash and Jones being close to them on foreign policy in the Republican Party. We have work to do since that reading list hasn't affected much of anything except for the opinions of those on ronpaulforums and dailypaul.

 

[AuH20]

Training and arming the people in Afghanistan to fight for freedom against the Russians. Train and arming the people in Kosovo. Training and arming the people in Syria. Training and arming the people in Iraq. Training and arming the people in Libya. Training and arming the people in Yemen. Training and arming the Kurds. Training and arming the people in Western Ukraine.

It's the same old tired line over and over again. Why do you old people constantly fall for this B.S.?

Afghanistan was Brzezinski's brainchild.

Kosovo was all about keeping the Albanian & Turkish heroin trade routes open.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/mar/13/balkans

Syria was largely predicated on hurting Russia economically.

This is a completely different animal.