Thank you, Rand Paul

I know many of you think Rand Paul is too libertarian… too pacifist… too related to Ron Paul. But whatever you may think of Senator Rand Paul, you cannot argue with his flawless logic here.

War should occur only when America is attacked, when it is threatened or when American interests are attacked or threatened. I don’t think the situation in Syria passes that test. Even the State Department argues that “there’s no military solution here that’s good for the Syrian people, and that the best path forward is a political solution.”

The U.S. should not fight a war to save face. I will not vote to send young men and women to sacrifice life and limb for stalemate. I will not vote to send our nation’s best and brightest to fight for anything less than victory. If American interests are at stake, then our goal should not be stalemate.

I couldn’t have said it better myself.

 

11 responses

  1. I am not a Libertarian, but I have libertarian principles and I couldn’t agree more with Rand Paul. His Dad… is a kook. Military personnel are probably the most stringent anti-war people on the planet. Hell, none of us want to go die, or see our friends die, or give up our lives for nothing… and Syria is “nothing” to me and most of us.

    That said, I’ll say military personnel are also pragmatic about war. When it must be done, it must be done right, accurately, quickly and with overwhelming force – to win. Not to let people die for no reason.

    IF there were a LEGITIMATE reason to go into Syria, it should NOT be a “limited in scope and duration” but it should be done in a manner that obliterates and secures WMD, removes those who used them and brings those responsible in front of legal body for punishment.

    Otherwise, we shouldn’t be there in the first place. (And Syria is NOT a legitimate war)…

    Like

    1. Always keep in mind that being pro-liberty, or even libertarian, doesn’t mean you have to be a Libertarian. By and large, that party is an ineffective waste of time.

      Like

      1. I absolutely do understand with that and agree. I don’t think drugs should be easy to get. But at the same time, I want the US Government (and hell, for that matter the local government) out of my business, out of my life, out of the kids and grandkids lives. They have no business telling me what I can eat, what I can’t eat, drink, where I can sleep, what guns I can and can’t have or any other thing in my life. I want to be left alone.. and I’ll leave them alone. Otherwise, when they cross MY red line, I kick asses.🙂

        Like

  2. I kept hearing Kerry talk about “American interests” in regards to Syria, but he didn’t enumerate what those “interests” are. Did I miss something?

    Like

  3. Is it possible that those WMD’s that were not found in Iraq wound up in Syria?

    Like

    1. Virtually a certainty, Jan. It’s POSSIBLE that Kerry wants to go in and destroy them solely so they CAN’T be traced back to Saddam since that would utterly RUIN the lefts ongoing meme about Bush “lying” about them.

      Like

      1. FTR, I can’t imagine ANY administration going to war to ensure that the left continues to hate Bush! Come on!

        I think this administration needs to save face since it’s constantly writing checks with its mouth that its ass can’t cash. But going to war to hide Iraqi weapons that were probably moved there two decades ago? I doubt it.

        Like

  4. Back in the early eighties, I had a short conversation with Ron Paul before a speech for a local event.

    That was in the early days of his political career, but he was passionate about adhering to the Constitution, which is a passion he passed on to his son. From watching his political career, he didn’t waiver from his belief.

    Considering all of the economic, political and social problems that developed from straying from the Constitution, I can’t say he’s a kook; I say he’s a patriot.

    Like

    1. I like Ron Paul’s principled stands on the constitution and his domestic policy views. When it comes to defense and foreign policy, he’s a FAIL

      Like

  5. If the WMD’s were moved to Syria from Iraq it was a SINGLE decade ago…not two, and do you REALLY believe that this administration–which has been blaming everything that goes wrong on Bush–would hesitate for a second to do whatever necessary so they wouldn’t have to give up their principle excuse for things going wrong….”Bush lied and people died?” I’m virtually certain, based on continuing contacts with friends and acquaintances in the intel community, that the WMD stockpiles and manufacturing equipment belonging to Saddam’s government WERE spirited out of the country at the last moment right before the resumption of hostilities in 2003…and very likely to Aleppo, Syria, where, not so coincidentally, they’re turning up today. Knowing how devious Kerry is–and how much of his wife’s money he’s spent to hide the REAL truth of his own military history from us–I doubt they’d hesitate for a second to do exactly what I postulated might be PART of their motivation for urging missile-bomb-only attacks in Syria. Using Bush as the left’s boogie-man is a large part of what got the Democrats in charge of Congress in the 2006 elections, Obama elected in 2008 and even re-elected in 2012. Continuing the meme that he got us into war in Iraq based on a “lie” is VERY important to them. They’ve even blamed the economy on that decision, claiming that he started an “undeclared war” to avenge the assassination attempt on his father and to secure Iraq’s oil to the benefit of his and Cheney’s pals in “Big Oil.”

    Sorry, Nicki, but I find it ENTIRELY plausible that being able to continue those false attacks on the Bush administration is important enough to the “progressives” that they’d actually risk war in the Middle East to continue to sell them to voters.

    Like

%d bloggers like this: