Sen. Rand Paul Full Interview With Glenn Beck (April 10, 2015)

[ClydeCoulter]

I strongly disagree with rand on this notion of defending embassies abroad.

If you're not welcome; provided security by the host, the noble thing to do is LEAVE.

Embassies are not bases or imperial outposts.


eta

otherwise great interview.

^^^ This ^^^

I'm outta rep for you at the moment...

 

[whoisjohngalt]

I strongly disagree with rand on this notion of defending embassies abroad.

If you're not welcome; provided security by the host, the noble thing to do is LEAVE.

Embassies are not bases or imperial outposts.


eta

otherwise great interview.

I think it's pretty obvious that Rand is stretching for a reason to support limited military intervention against ISIS, and that's the best he can do.

We don't believe it and I don't think he does either, but he just happened to develop this position when the beheadings occurred and the opinion of the GOP electorate lurched in the hawkish direction.

 

[brandon]

yo beck looks freaking weird now. I mean I guess it's kind of a cool style... but whoa he looks totally different. All white everything?

 

[whoisjohngalt]

Rand sounded like he had a cold or something. Unfortunate time to get sick.

 

[AuH20]

I think it's pretty obvious that Rand is stretching for a reason to support limited military intervention against ISIS, and that's the best he can do.

We don't believe it and I don't think he does either, but he just happened to develop this position when the beheadings occurred and the opinion of the GOP electorate lurched in the hawkish direction.

I'm pretty sure Rand would help any willing & non-radical Arab faction with logistical support and supplies if they were they were serious about confronting ISIS. That's about as far as it would go though.

 

[whoisjohngalt]

I'm pretty sure Rand would help any willing & non-radical Arab faction with logistical support and supplies if they were they were serious about confronting ISIS. That's about as far as it would go though.

Agreed. And he reinforced that stance by clarifying he wanted no American boots on the ground now or ever.

What I meant it's pretty obvious that Rand knows in his heart that his basis for justifying that intervention is not consistent with his or our principles. But because he feels like he has to endorse some kind of limited military action against ISIS he is grasping for a reason to do it.

This is one of the truest examples of Rand playing politics. You can either tolerate it or you can't.

 

[phill4paul]

Rand sounded like he had a cold or something. Unfortunate time to get sick.

Lol. Everyone around here sounds like that with the spring pollen dump. My grey truck has turned yellow.

 

[dillo]

he made it 6 minutes before talking about Israel, thats a world record

 

[OReich]

I'm pretty sure Rand would help any willing & non-radical Arab faction with logistical support and supplies if they were they were serious about confronting ISIS. That's about as far as it would go though.

The problem is virtually everyone there is a radical Muslim faction (and yes, the vast majority of Syrians are Islamists, meaning political extremists, and this includes Assad supporters). Other than the Yazidis and Kurds (who are also prob extreme by Western standards, but truly victims in all this bloodshed), there's no one we could even possibly ally with. Syria illustrates clearly why intervention there is a joke. Our intervention in Iraq PROVED that the opponents of Saddam were just the OTHER genocidal, evil Islamist factions, they weren't yearning for freedom and equality, they were yearning for tribal domination rather than Saddam's tribe being the dominant tribe. There really are NO non-radical groups there fighting ISIS, they're just less radical, other than arguably the Kurds and the Yazidis.

This can only end when Muslims themselves reform, and they CAN'T REFORM FROM WESTERN INTERVENTION because the Quran blatantly says the infidels are coming to get all of you. We empower ISIS' ideology, and all other Islamists' ideology, whenever we join their conflict, we literally make the Quran come to life like a popup book when we invade these shitholes. And this is just a vulgar way of saying what Rand is already saying: we can't trust any of these Syrian militia groups, just like we couldn't trust Iraqis to form a democracy just by deposing Saddam. We just turned the Shiites into the oppressors via a dysfunctional democratic govt, and now the Sunni ISIS are getting their revenge.

 

[TNforPaul45]

Not a bad interview, but Beck's white shirt, white undershirt, white hair, and white microphone all remind me of another celestially-oriented figure . . . wonder who he thinks he is?

 

[anaconda]

yo beck looks freaking weird now. I mean I guess it's kind of a cool style... but whoa he looks totally different. All white everything?

Maybe pink make-up base? Or fell asleep in the tanning booth? And, no hipster goatee? And what about the cool Rick Perry glasses?

 

[r3volution 3.0]

I think it's pretty obvious that Rand is stretching for a reason to support limited military intervention against ISIS, and that's the best he can do.

We don't believe it and I don't think he does either, but he just happened to develop this position when the beheadings occurred and the opinion of the GOP electorate lurched in the hawkish direction.

Agreed. And he reinforced that stance by clarifying he wanted no American boots on the ground now or ever.

What I meant it's pretty obvious that Rand knows in his heart that his basis for justifying that intervention is not consistent with his or our principles. But because he feels like he has to endorse some kind of limited military action against ISIS he is grasping for a reason to do it.

This is one of the truest examples of Rand playing politics. You can either tolerate it or you can't.

Exactly

Also note how it provides a segue into attacking Hillary over Benghazi.

....which is also why he's gotten away with it; the GOP media cannot come out and say "O, well, embassy security isn't really that important"

....not after harping on Benghazi for 2 years.

That's why he chose this particular rationale, I imagine.