He didn't quite answer the questions - I pointed back at mistakes made in the past (which is good that he did) and said that we should apply the knowledge to future decisions regarding the region but didn't give any options he would do in the present time.
I think he would be sound much better saying "As president I will defeat ISIS and the best place to start is looking back and seeing the mistakes we've made in the past that unintentionally made ISIS stronger and make sure we don't repeat any of them. It was a mistake to arm them in Syria, it was a mistake to topple secular leaders, etc. etc.
We don't have any perfect options on the table, unfortunately, and we can't go back in time. But with knowledge gained from the past I think we should work with Jordan, the Kurds, etc. etc."
"As a Senator I was the leading voice warning against ISIS when the president wanted to arm them in Syria. If elected to be commander and chief I can assure the American people the same mistake won't be made twice. Anyone running for president that advocated for arming them in Syria would be a disastrous and dangerous president."
I don't know.
I think looking back and showing the mistakes is important, very important, but I think people are very curious as to what he would do. He would also be very wise to show a military budget plan that outlines the waste and maybe even highlight some areas that he wants to increase the budget (by taking money from the areas of waste) to show that under president Paul America will have a stronger military than under president Rubio.
Have any of the GOP candidates said they would step up the military in Syria?He didn't quite answer the questions - I pointed back at mistakes made in the past (which is good that he did) and said that we should apply the knowledge to future decisions regarding the region but didn't give any options he would do in the present time.
I think he would be sound much better saying "As president I will defeat ISIS and the best place to start is looking back and seeing the mistakes we've made in the past that unintentionally made ISIS stronger and make sure we don't repeat any of them. It was a mistake to arm them in Syria, it was a mistake to topple secular leaders, etc. etc.
We don't have any perfect options on the table, unfortunately, and we can't go back in time. But with knowledge gained from the past I think we should work with Jordan, the Kurds, etc. etc."
"As a Senator I was the leading voice warning against ISIS when the president wanted to arm them in Syria. If elected to be commander and chief I can assure the American people the same mistake won't be made twice. Anyone running for president that advocated for arming them in Syria would be a disastrous and dangerous president."
I don't know.
I think looking back and showing the mistakes is important, very important, but I think people are very curious as to what he would do. He would also be very wise to show a military budget plan that outlines the waste and maybe even highlight some areas that he wants to increase the budget (by taking money from the areas of waste) to show that under president Paul America will have a stronger military than under president Rubio.
He didn't quite answer the questions
Have any of the GOP candidates said they would step up the military in Syria?
I tell you whenever FAUX has a young inexperienced reporter interview Ron and/or Rand, those newbies really give away the FAUX bias. They always stutter when they try to interrupt. It is as if the producers are speaking into their little ear piece "Hey he is starting to make a good point, interrupt in 3...2...1...NOW!"
I disagree. Given the circumstances that include a media jackass attempting to paint him into a corner and the fact that he was given very little time to respond, I'd say he did a fair to middling job of it. Note that the moment the douche (or rather his handlers in the booth) realized they were either not going to get what they want or more than they'd bargained for, they were probably screaming into said douche's earpiece to cut it short, as notable in the very sudden termination despite the fact that these guys usually drill down at this point.
All the "conservatives" on my Facebook feed are very riled and it feels like post 9/11. Oddly enough, John Bolton was on Fox today and he says this is very tricky business. We should be very careful how we react and so forth. To be honest I was really surprised.
Vitter is trying to push the neocon narrative. Rand could maybe mimic Bolton, but at the end of the day, it was France, not the US that was attacked and I have not yet heard them invoke NATO.
That said, Rand is pushing the vetting of anyone coming in to the US...and he has been for some time. He's also pushing a narrative about waste and abuse at the DOD. Nothing anyone could say is isolationist unless they want to deflect profligate spending i.e. Rubio.
Do more? They do too much.