Thursday, March 6, 2014

Rand Paul Goes on Rant Against Putin

In an op-ed for Breitbart, Rand Paul has taken a decidedly neocon turn and writes:
Russia's Putin has invaded his neighbor’s sovereign territory. He must and will face serious repercussions for doing so, and the international community must make the price severe.
He then goes on in his typical style of saying things that can be interpreted in many different ways, but he certainly hints that he is in favor of freezing Russian assets:
 The international banking system effectively squeezed Iran. Does Putin really desire the opprobrium of the civilized world? Is salvaging some nostalgic conception of Soviet hegemony worth the ostricization and calumny of becoming the new Iran?
Nostalgic conception of Soviet hegemony? Does Rand have any idea what is going on in Ukraine?? Russia's only warm water port for its navy is in Crimea, for which it has a legitimate multi-year lease? (SEE Russia allowed to have 25,000 troops in Crimea since 1999... & other facts you may not know) Doesn't it appear that Russia is attempting to protect this strategic outpost rather than spreading Soviet hegemony? And don't forget, it is the U.S. that was caught red-handed plotting the coup in the Ukraine. (SEE: An Important Second Listen to the "F--k the EU" Ukraine Recording)

The U.S. really has no business interfering in disputes 5,000 miles from its border. As the 2016 presidential  gets closer, I always suspected that Rand would become more of an interventionist but, his aggressive, globalist tone with regard to the Ukraine crisis is truly shocking.


  1. "Rand Paul has taken a decidedly neocon turn "

    He took the turn just now? He hadn't advocating with the neocons before this?

    1. Exactly.
      nothing new.
      He is just being exposed more and more.

      I am waiting for him to pull a Romney and suggest increasing the Pentagon's budget to counter this horrific new "threat".

  2. Some observations/questions:

    1. Is there any evidence that Russia has actually sent troops over the border into Crimea? We say they have, they say they haven't. The cynic in me thinks that we would be watching reconnaissance footage of troop movements all over the idiot box if they had. So I'm guessing that they haven't. Which means that Putin is telling the truth and we are lying.

    2. Does Rand really think the they stalwart supporters of his father are going to support him? Gary North wrote awhile ago about the fact that there weren't enough teapartiers (he was speaking of Ron Paul type teapartiers) to win an election for a particular candidate, but that there were enough to punish candidates who misbehave, so to speak. Mitt Romney lost Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida by fewer votes that Ron Paul received in the respective primaries in those states. Read: PUNISH. There is no chance that I will vote for Rand Paul in the election.

    3. What is going to transpire if the Crimeans vote to become part of Russia? Part of me wants this to happen. Putin is a thug and a ganster, but so are the US gov't and EU. I like Putin, if for no other reason than he is not likely to back down when the gansters go toe to toe. He is actually the only one I can think of that could put our gov't in its place, so to speak. Who knows how this will play out, but can you see in a hundred years a holiday dedicated to Putin in the US for setting us back on the correct path, LOL.

    4. I am so sick of this s#%t! I really want somebody to smack this country hard (no violence against innocents, please), sort of like the proverbial 2x4 upside the head, to wake us up to the damage our supposed leaders do IN OUR NAME.

    1. Much to my shock and surprise, it appears that large swaths of the rural, southern and anti-"progressive" population believe that it is God's will that the USA help Israel start WW3 and bring forth Armageddon. They don't seem particularly receptive to changing direction on this.

    2. Chris its hard to tell as they didn't have any insignia, my bet they were Ukrainian troops that had defected to Simferapol in exchange for a promise of a regular paycheck.
      Again the DC gang closes ranks around its message. that crazy old fool John McCain flapping his gums about the failure of US Intelligence to warn Washington about this crisis when that stupid old meddling so and so, was in Kiev urging the local corrupt banksters union and neo nazis on.

      "A Ukrainian teenager with $200 of explosives and a burning desire to thwart the Russian bear can disrupt a pipeline. 80 percent of Russia's oil and gas traverses Ukraine." Nice pipeline you've got there Vladimir, shame if something happened to it......

      and then digs up Reagans corpse (only the 2nd time this week by the Republicans) I am one who values Reagan's words to potential adversaries: "Don't mistake our reluctance for war for a lack of resolve." Since when has DC been reluctant for war?

    3. "Much to my shock and surprise, it appears that large swaths of the rural, southern and anti-"progressive" population believe that it is God's will that the USA help Israel start WW3 and bring forth Armageddon. They don't seem particularly receptive to changing direction on this."

      Morons never will.

    4. @ Chris Watson

      Apparently Russian troops (16.000 of them) have NOT been moving into Crimea, because they were already there. According to a deal struck in the past with previous Ukrainian government, they are actually allowed to have even more troops stationed there. 25.000 of them.
      Even Glenn Greenwald is taken to task for being misinformed about this by propaganda.

  3. The lies of the Neo-Cons and regimists about the Ukraine are on par with the lies about the NAP and Walter Block which are on par with the entire Keynesianian Hoax which completely suppresses and obfuscates the concepts of the NAP, violent intervention, voluntary exchange and economic calculation/miscalculation.

    This is the nature of our opponents. Get used to it.

  4. Absolutely sick of this guy.

  5. No statesman like his dad, Rand Paul is a republican senator first and a libertarian politician second. He zigs and zags. That means, he will "steer neocon right, and go back libertarian" each and every time. You've watched him do this when running for the Kentucky Senate. You've seen him do this on his endorsement of Mitt Romney, only to a month later go back libertarian. You've seen him vote for Iran sanctions, only to go back and questions the wisdom of sanctions on Iran. If you've ever wondered what a Democratic Senator first, and a libertarian politician second would act and behave like, just take a page from Rand's book. He'd be for "public education" and then be for public charter schools. He'd zig and zag. under the Democratic umbrella to "be a democrat" and then zag out when the coast was clear to do so. With an eye on his opponents inside the GOP 2016 race and with an eye on Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, he's GOT to be able to say, "I said this about Russia and Iran and I will say it again." And just like he and other politicians do when the race is over, they'll go back to voting how they want. We have our very first "libertarian politician". Its not as sweet or reassuring as having a libertarian Statesmen, but then again, Statesmen are rare enough. What we need are more "republican libertarians" and most of all, some high profile "democrat libertarians". There is no other way for liberty to win -- other than pitting a "republican libertarian" up against a "democratic libertarian". This is how the war party wins with Liberal Hawks vs Neocons, ie war wins. Indeed, socialist on the Left and big business welfarist on the Right, they win it for welfare. For liberty to win, we must also break into the 2 party duopoly and have our issues win FROM within, just as its been done before again and again. Yes its stranger than fiction that the democratic and republican host, welcomes us. But BEST of all, its fun to wear the D or R label and then go about your quest to decentralize, decommission, and liberate. After all, we want a small government sector, a large vibrant trading sector, and a HUGE charitable voluntary sector. The way to get that is by infiltration of the 2 party duopoly. Rand is doing his part....what are we doing?

    1. Yawn...
      I have a bridge to sell you. For $100 only.
      If you can believe that is what Rand is doing, then you can also take this bridge off my hands.

  6. I get the fact you don't like Rand Paul and accuse him of selling out. I've been following your posts on the Ukraine thing as well. I get the fact you don't want us getting mired in another world conflict. What I don't get is the reposting articles like the one from Lew Rockwell about the sniper perhaps being instigated by the Ukraine nationalist opposition. There is absolutely no evidence that is the case except some gossip and hearsay. As you are wont to point out that the facts are usually murky enough in these situations and we (U.S.) rarely get it right. But you are adding to the problem here. The facts about Putin and his actions are relatively clear (Occam-ishly so): he has a hegemonic-mercantilistic world view and he will go as far as he can to keep Ukraine in Russia's orbit. He has stated this many times that he seeks to recover the Russian Empire and establish Russia as a “great power”. The Russian naval base has nothing to do with it other than as an excuse to exert hegemony. Nothing ever threatened their Crimean military interests. The Ukraine nationalists (i.e., non-Russians) have good historical reasons to fear Russia. Why don't you vocally support those liberal aspirations in Ukraine? Just because the U.S. may wade into this mess is not an excuse for spreading baseless rumors to detract from the nationalist movement. Whatever that movement may be, it certainly aspires to the liberal values offered by the West, and those should be encouraged. As was demonstrated by the Yukovich pro-Russian administration, the nationalists have good reason to worry about Russia.

    1. Where do you come up with this stuff? I did not repost an article from I posted a leaked phone conversation between an EU official and a official from Estonia. The Estonian official was on the ground in Kiev and reported what the doctors and nurses told him, Estonian has subsequently verified the call as legitimate.

    2. "The facts about Putin and his actions are relatively clear"

      Yes they are. He doesn't want Ukraine to fall under the influence of the U.S. and NATO, because it could be used to place military bases and equipment right next to Russia's border. Remember how the U.S. felt when the Soviets wanted to put nukes on Cuba? Not allowing this to happen is clearcut real-politics in the name of Russian national security.

      "The Ukraine nationalists (i.e., non-Russians) have good historical reasons to fear Russia."

      You mean the Jew hating neo-nazi's that seem to be all the rage now? Maybe they have more fear of having to pay their debts to Russia for the gas they'd gotten. And now, of course, rather than having to pay money they are actually receiving money (or LOOT, as i'd like to call it) from the U.S. and the EU. Now that's a nice deal, isn't it?

      "Why don't you vocally support those liberal aspirations in Ukraine?"

      What a joke...liberal aspirations. Such as affiliating with the undemocratic bureaucratic monster the EU, at expense of European tax payers? Last i checked, they got democracy, and the leader was democratically elected in elections deemed fair by the same foreign monitors that are now on the protestors' side. Now Ukrainians wanted to get rid of their president because he didn't want to make deals with the European oligarchy of the EU, all of this for "liberal aspirations"?
      Besides, they replaced one government for another. It is still statism.

      "Whatever that movement may be, it certainly aspires to the liberal values offered by the West, and those should be encouraged."

      Liberal values? WHAT liberal values? The ones of America, a warmongering empire that is bankrupt and is domestically turning into a police state where the president has people assassinated by executive order? The ones in Europe, where the EU is making a joke of democracy with politicians nobody elected and cares for, where national sovereignty has been surrendered by national politicians without consent of their populations? Where real liberal values like freedom of speech are constantly threatened in the name of political correctness? These liberal values?

      The west is constantly sticking its big fat nose in the world's business and uses force to impose its views. It invades and meddles with country after country. It meddled with Ukraine which is how this whole ugly business got started. A simple protest over turning down trade deals with the EU turned into a full scale revolution and coup due to the meddling of Western politicians who wanted to drag Ukraine away from Russia in order to diminish the latter. Meanwhile, domestically the west is continually eroding the very things it demand the world adopts. This whole 'liberal values' thing is poppycock propaganda as are your beliefs in the mainstream narrative.

    3. Bob, I saw the "leaked phone conversation" first on LR site which you often refer to. Apologies if that's not your source. But you miss my point. The point is that the matter of the phone call is rumor and hearsay. My view of the whole Ukraine thing is as valid as yours based on what I have read. If you wish to always see the dark side of this, fine.

    4. Which is the biggest imperialist ruler in world affairs? Russia or the West in particular the U.S.?
      Who's influence reaches the furthest corner of the world in geopolitical affairs? Russia or the West in particular the U.S.?
      Who have engaged in the most invasions and wars over history until this very day? Russia or the west in particular the U.S.?

      If you state that your version is as valid as those who believe the whole Ukraine thing is set up and exacerbated by the west and the sniper was a false flag operation, then the question remains: which side deserves more skepticism and criticism? Russia or the west in particular the U.S.?

      All governments are morally bankrupt and that includes ANY government the Ukraine will have. The Ukrainians behind the coup, in so far as they are not nationalist neonazi thugs, would merely substitute one morally bankrupt government for another, and the sphere of influence from one hegemonic outsider for another (from bad to worse). Just as any piss poor nation who wants to join EU they are looking at the EU trough, salivating. Are European taxpayers or American taxpayers, who are now funding their third world nation, supposed to care?

      The dark side is to be on the side that Western rulers and their MSM lapdogs are on. The fact that Russian troops are in a part of the country where the majority actually WANTS to be part of Russia, and wants the coup-friendly Ukrainian troops out, also speaks volumes. Are you suggesting that *they* should not have a right to secede, per libertarian rights?

    5. Tony, I was going to not respond to you but ... I'm not debating the influence we exert upon the world and on that we probably agree. But Russia has an actual huge empire and historically this is so. From the czars to Stalin they cobbled together a vast empire of unwilling subjects most of whom are kept in thrall by Putin cronies. Just name a 'stan' who has truly escaped their orbit and that is not mired in poverty. While it's easy to condemn the US, one cannot say that Putin doesn't dream of an evil empire. If Russia had our economic power you know they would invade and conquer. As to government immorality, get over it. They are here to stay so plant your flag on the one that will best protect your rights in an imperfect world. If you don't think the US is that country, please vote with your feet and join Simon Black in Chile. I am not a uber patriotic right winger but a very long time libertarian and so far I choose the US. The US has the most libertarian foundation in history (don't lecture me on the details which I am very familiar with) and still has more than pretensions of protecting our (diminishing) rights which rights are probably still greater than any other country on the planet. So, if I were to be skeptical, which I am, I would be much more skeptical of Russia and Putin's goals. You speak of Putin's referendum in Crimea. What a joke! As if those folks had a real choice. What about the Tartars? The ethnic Ukrainians? They hate and fear the Russians for good reason. Is the Ukrainian opposition pure? Hell no, but compared to what? At least they can look west and see a better world.

  7. Rand Paul is Israel's little neocon tart, and has been since he went to the Wailing Wall with his son in January of 2013. This most recent statement by Rand only proves what I have been saying for over 4 years, that he is nothing more than a hard core neocon who is closeted from those who still worship his father.

    The American people count as less than nothing in Rand's cosmos of rarified bankers, zionists, and born again rapture timers. Israel is at the center of Rand's warped universe, and he will do his best to pull us all into their sphere of zealotry induced hell.