Rand Paul op-ed: ‘I Am Not an Isolationist’

[Tywysog Cymru]

How does ISIS pose a threat to us? They can't even conquer Iraq and Syria.

 

[phill4paul]

If this is the logic of the average libertarian, I'm sorta cautious to associate myself with you guys.

Then don't. You truly do not get what was proposed by Shane and are likely never to.

 

[Brett85]

And Saddam had WMDs remember. That was a really imminent threat. And North Korea threatens us all the time. And how about the USSR 50 years ago. Now if we could only do something about the actual imminent threat that our police pose to us on a daily basis, 1 mile away, instead of the boogeymen 1000s of miles away.

Not even remotely close to the same situation. Those countries never threatened us, never killed our people, and weren't expanding across the world and committing mass genocide.

 

[phill4paul]

Not even remotely close to the same situation. Those countries never threatened us, never killed our people, and weren't expanding across the world and committing mass genocide.

Killing our people? A couple of journalists in a war zone? Those countries never threatened us? Are you serious? Not worth the time googling the threats that have been made to the U.S. of A. from Saddam, North Korea and Russia. Waste your own time educating yourself. Expanding across the globe? Well, I haven't encountered them in the Carolinas yet so...yawn.

 

[T.hill]

This is something I can't agree with Rand on.

 

[presence]

Smedley Butler would not approve these shenanigans

 

[economics102]

And? The fact is, we do have it. You can't allow Americans to be killed just because previous administrations did dumb shit.

I agree, IF there's a rationale for keeping the base. In this case, there's not. So we should close the base and not chase after people who are no longer a threat, rather than behaving like Charles Bronson.

 

[cajuncocoa]

If this is the logic of the average libertarian, I'm sorta cautious to associate myself with you guys.

Speaking only for myself, the feeling is mutual.

 

[JohnGalt23g]

Jennifer Rubin is still saying that Rand is a radical isolationist who shares his father's foreign policy views, despite his stance on this. These people are just ridiculous. If you don't support every war or every intervention, you're a radical isolationist pacifist. Rand is going to make these people look ridiculous to the general public when they continue to call him an "isolationist" in the GOP primary.

I'll paraphrase Chris Matthews, paraphrasing Pat Buchanan, quoting Richard Nixon: Buchanan, when you see a committee of people all getting together to stop 'X', put your money on 'X'...

 

[twomp]

You realize that ISIS is lopping American heads off, right? Going to congress and presenting a case for war or marque against them, is entirely justified. In fact, I would NOT trust a president who did anything but that. Nutjob Muslims are actually a threat to Americans. They aren't an existential threat to America, but they are definitely a threat to individual Americans, and if we can kill them before they kill us, and we have proof that they are trying to harm us, we absolutely should kill them. Anything else is foolish.

Do you know why they were lopping American heads? They did it AFTER Obama's air strikes. The keyword being AFTER. You see, we kill them, they kill us. Tough to understand, I know. After the first journalist died, they said stop the air strikes and they won't kill the second guy but you and your fellow part time non-interventionists kept clamoring for more air strikes for justice and peace. So they killed the second guy and so now you use that as an excuse to go to war. If you want them to stop lopping American heads? Stop bombing them, come home and watch our borders. It isn't that difficult.

 

[twomp]

You can make the argument that there's an imminent attack likely in this situation. If this situation doesn't qualify as an imminent threat, I'm not sure what would.

LOL @ imminent threat. Quick TC they are under your bed, or maybe outside your window right now! The attack is coming! Oh wait, maybe not. They are preparing their ships, submarines and airplanes to strike us right now!! Oh wait, maybe not that either.

Oh you must be talking about terrorists attack? Then you should be clamoring for attacks on Chechnya then, after all, the Chechens actually did pull off an attack on our soil during the Boston marathon. Why aren't you calling for war in Chechnya? Oh I know why, you are waiting for the tv to tell you first what to do right. If Sean Hannity and John McCain comes on tv later telling us he wants to bomb Chechnya, I'm sure you would be all for that too! Since you know, they did attack Americans.

 

[twomp]

Awhile back, people were saying that wasn't much difference from Rand Paul and Ted Cruz. I see what they mean now.

 

[phill4paul]

Then you should be clamoring for attacks on Chechnya then, after all, the Chechens actually did pull off an attack on our soil during the Boston marathon. Why aren't you calling for war in Chechnya? Oh I know why, you are waiting for the tv to tell you first what to do right. If Sean Hannity and John McCain comes on tv later telling us he wants to bomb Chechnya, I'm sure you would be all for that too! Since you know, they did attack Americans.

I CANNOT fathom why Theye have not come out with "new intelligence" linking the Boston bombings to ISIS. Somebody dropped the ball.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Awhile back, people were saying that wasn't much difference from Rand Paul and Ted Cruz. I see what they mean now.

In fairness, Rand opposed intervention in Syria, so at least he doesn't want to support BOTH sides of this screwed up conflict.

I still think Rand Paul is better than Ted Cruz. But is he good enough? I guess that remains to be seen.

 

[Acala]

Not even remotely close to the same situation. Those countries never threatened us, never killed our people, and weren't expanding across the world and committing mass genocide.

This is ridiculous. Exactly how are they going to expand across the world? On foot?

By your criteria, if somebody murders a US citizen in a foreign country, and someone else in the vicinity says something threatening about the USA, this constitutes an imminent attack and we are justified in attacking the region and killing anyone we don't like? Even though the hostile individuals are on the other side of the planet? Your theory does not hold water.

 

[twomp]

This is ridiculous. Exactly how are they going to expand across the world? On foot?

By your criteria, if somebody murders a US citizen in a foreign country, and someone else in the vicinity says something threatening about the USA, this constitutes an imminent attack and we are justified in attacking the region and killing anyone we don't like? Even though the hostile individuals are on the other side of the planet? Your theory does not hold water.

I think TC's computer has been hijacked by Lindsey Graham honestly. Being logical about this no longer matters. The only thing that matters now is that we drop bombs.

 

[twomp]

Not even remotely close to the same situation. Those countries never threatened us, never killed our people, and weren't expanding across the world and committing mass genocide.

Can you also tell me who they are committing mass genocide to? The Yazidi? You mean the 40,000 that were stuck on a mountain top in Iraq? That actually turned out to be 20,000, that actually turned out to be 10,000 that actually turned out to be 2,000 most of whom were already living there and didn't want to leave?

 

[twomp]

In fairness, Rand opposed intervention in Syria, so at least he doesn't want to support BOTH sides of this screwed up conflict.

I still think Rand Paul is better than Ted Cruz. But is he good enough? I guess that remains to be seen.

Well Ted Cruz was also calling for congressional authorization before those air strikes so in essence, they were both saying the same thing about Syria. He just added in the caveat of wanting to send in "special forces" to destroy the chemical weapons. WITH congressional approval of course....

 

[JK/SEA]

how about this...we get Rand elected, and then see how he does?...

got a better idea?...

 

[newbitech]

Rand is saying a lot here. It's hard to wholesale agree or wholesale disagree with his opinion.

This is why I think the most important part of what he says is the following.

This is one set of principles. Any strategy, though, should be presented to the American people through Congress. If war is necessary, we should act as a nation. We should do so properly and constitutionally and with a real strategy and a plan for both victory and exit.

I don't care whose opinion, whose strategy, whose policy or whatever words you want to listen to, if the above does not happen, I am against it. Likewise, if the above DOES happen regardless of all the other stuff around it, there won't be much anything that I will be able to say or do to stop it.

I respect that quote and I think out of anybody else running their mouths about issues, I believe Rand respects that the most.