Monday, September 2, 2013

What the Hell Kind of Argument is This?

Does Rand Paul understand that the current Obama Syria strike plan calls only for launching missiles from Navy ships? This is typical Rand muddying the waters. Does this mean that A. he is in favor of an attack that does not call for boots on ground? B. That he would be in favor of an attack that leads to victory rather than stalemate?

Where is the opposition based on principle that the U.S. shouldn't be the world's policeman?


  1. That's fine Senator. now, tell me, when was the last time there was a legitimate war. If you say anything other than the Revolutionary War then you're a neocon.

  2. You hate Rand. We know. Give it a rest already.

  3. He's clumsily trying to win over the premillennials. Rand, Ron and Gary North are postmillennials. You have to understand a little about Christian eschatology to know what is motivating Rand these days. Israel is extremely important to premillennials and Israel supports a Syria strike.

    Quote from Page 8 of Gary North's "The Intellectual Schizophrenia of the New Christian Right":

    ""Bible principles" is a euphemism for Old Testament law. The leaders of the fundamentalist movement are generally premillennial dispensationalists. Some are believers in a pretribulation "rapture," meaning that Christians will be secretly "called into the heavens" before the great tribulation of the nation of Israel."

  4. Rand Paul will take the position that most satisfies his neocon masters, he made that clear when he went to Israel 9 months ago with an evangelical group that places Israel's needs above those of his constituency. To make matters worse he dragged his son into the midst of his servile performance while in Israel to show his families generational fealty to his neocon puppet masters.

    The most that Rand Paul is capable of is uttering some clever phrase which someone smarter than Rand has trained him to repeat while doing a cringe worthy parroting of Ronald Reagan.

  5. Way to take a stand Rand!

    Guy is in total political mode. Trying to please everyone and not step on any toes.

  6. On July 23 Rand DID say we should not be the world's policeman: “For our country’s sake, certainly for our soldiers’ sake — for the sake of every veteran who ever donned a uniform and fought for this country — America’s mission should always be to keep the peace, not police the world,” Paul said.

  7. I'm not a huge fan over the way Rand Paul has done things, but he's been very good on this issue. Yeah he qualifies things and is more nuanced, but he's fighting the good fight here and "playing the game". He'll vote "no" on Syria; that's good enough.

    "If you say anything other than the Revolutionary War then you're a neocon."

    Mike, you define neocon way too broadly. James Baker was an awful warmonger, but he was a realist interventionist, not a neocon.

  8. It looks like there are boots on the ground....
    Apparently the CIA is training the rebels to fight.
    This never turns out good.

  9. Weasel words, "fight because we have to" and "fight to win". These mean whatever he wants them to and commits him to nothing. Rand is already a very skilled politician and we still haven't seen his true face. We probably won't see it unless and until he becomes president. (It won't be pretty.)