Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As the Islamist militia group ISIS gains new ground in Iraq, capturing four more towns near the Syrian border and barreling towards Baghdad, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is holding strong to his belief that the United States should stay out of the conflict in the region.
"There's jihadists everywhere. If we were to get rid of Assad it would be a jihadist wonderland in Syria. It's now a jihadist wonderland in Iraq, precisely because we got over-involved."
Paul said he does not believe ISIS currently poses a national security threat to the U.S. It's going to be a civil war, he said, in which the U.S. military has no business being involved.
Although I disagree with Paul on a lot of things, he is absolutely right about this. And if I needed further convincing, hearing warmonger chickenhawk Dick Cheney vehemently disagree with him and say that it's "absolutely essential" that the U.S. stay involved in the region did the trick.
Last edited by HeyJude514; 06-23-2014 at 10:08 AM..
I have always loved the "Pauls" view on foreign engagement.
However its their stance on many other national programs that a vast majority of Americans enjoy, and are willing to be taxed for to keep, in which Senator Paul and his father would like to see abolished that I do have a problem with.
If you know anything about the Pauls' history this would not be some huge shocker.
Both have always vehemently opposed US Military Intervention abroad.
On global security issues Ron Paul doesn't see further than his nose. With that said, Middle East is a mess and there is nothing the US can do to fix the situation. There are no good guys and democracy seems very far. Even if one group "wins", instability will continue.
So yes, we shouldn't get involved because there is nothing we can contribute.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,284 posts, read 54,079,395 times
Reputation: 40572
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoomBen
If you know anything about the Pauls' history this would not be some huge shocker.
Both have always vehemently opposed US Military Intervention abroad.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.............................................. ......................
Bullies will always get called out by a conservative.
It is these progressive bullies that you have to watch
Like Bush was called out in 2003, right? There were people from both sides of the aisle who supported, and opposed that war.
But it had nothing to do with party, or the party of the President. Few people called Bush out on his intelligence reports, some did, and were labeled "unamerican"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
