Rand Paul: Was I right or was I right about Syria last year?
2 posters
Page 1 of 1
Rand Paul: Was I right or was I right about Syria last year?
Rand Paul: Was I right or was I right about Syria last year?
http://www.mofopolitics.com/2014/08/27/rand-paul-was-i-right-or-was-i-right-about-syria-last-year/
In a span of a year, the Obama regime and its GOP collaborators have come full circle on Syria– from seeking to depose Bashar al-Aassad, to essentially allying with him against our shared enemy, ISIS.
Rand Paul hates to say he told you so, but he told you so…
In September President Obama and many in Washington were eager for a U.S. intervention in Syria to assist the rebel groups fighting President Bashar Assad’s government.
:cough: McCain, Graham :cough:
Arguing against military strikes, I wrote that “Bashar Assad is clearly not an American ally. But does his ouster encourage stability in the Middle East, or would his ouster actually encourage instability?”
Our Middle Eastern policy is unhinged, flailing about to see who to act against next, with little thought to the consequences. This is not a foreign policy.
…
Those who say we should have done more to arm the Syrian rebel groups have it backward. Mrs. Clinton was also eager to shoot first in Syria before asking some important questions.
Oh, burn.
Our so-called foreign policy experts are failing us miserably…It seems the only thing both sides of this flawed debate agree on is that “something” must be done. It is the only thing they ever agree on.
But the problem is, we did do something. We aided those who’ve contributed to the rise of the Islamic State. The CIA delivered arms and other equipment to Syrian rebels, strengthening the side of the ISIS jihadists.
Intervening militarily to shape foreign affairs in our favor seems like a good idea, but it shares a fatal flaw with statism: Central planners do not possess the omnipotence to account for the infinite possibilities inherent in human nature.
That military interventionism– on a long enough timeline– will result in catastrophic unintended consequences is a statistical certainty.
In the words of isolationist kook George Washington…
Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?
It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world.
http://www.mofopolitics.com/2014/08/27/rand-paul-was-i-right-or-was-i-right-about-syria-last-year/
In a span of a year, the Obama regime and its GOP collaborators have come full circle on Syria– from seeking to depose Bashar al-Aassad, to essentially allying with him against our shared enemy, ISIS.
Rand Paul hates to say he told you so, but he told you so…
In September President Obama and many in Washington were eager for a U.S. intervention in Syria to assist the rebel groups fighting President Bashar Assad’s government.
:cough: McCain, Graham :cough:
Arguing against military strikes, I wrote that “Bashar Assad is clearly not an American ally. But does his ouster encourage stability in the Middle East, or would his ouster actually encourage instability?”
Our Middle Eastern policy is unhinged, flailing about to see who to act against next, with little thought to the consequences. This is not a foreign policy.
…
Those who say we should have done more to arm the Syrian rebel groups have it backward. Mrs. Clinton was also eager to shoot first in Syria before asking some important questions.
Oh, burn.
Our so-called foreign policy experts are failing us miserably…It seems the only thing both sides of this flawed debate agree on is that “something” must be done. It is the only thing they ever agree on.
But the problem is, we did do something. We aided those who’ve contributed to the rise of the Islamic State. The CIA delivered arms and other equipment to Syrian rebels, strengthening the side of the ISIS jihadists.
Intervening militarily to shape foreign affairs in our favor seems like a good idea, but it shares a fatal flaw with statism: Central planners do not possess the omnipotence to account for the infinite possibilities inherent in human nature.
That military interventionism– on a long enough timeline– will result in catastrophic unintended consequences is a statistical certainty.
In the words of isolationist kook George Washington…
Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?
It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world.
Anti Federalist- Posts : 1385
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-06-16
Re: Rand Paul: Was I right or was I right about Syria last year?
Rand Paul: Letting Assad Fall Will Empower ISIS
http://www.Newsmax.com/Newsfront/Rand-Paul-Assad-ISIS-Wall-Street-Journal/2014/08/28/id/591465/#ixzz3BvlW6bWy
http://www.Newsmax.com/Newsfront/Rand-Paul-Assad-ISIS-Wall-Street-Journal/2014/08/28/id/591465/#ixzz3BvlW6bWy
Anti Federalist- Posts : 1385
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-06-16
Re: Rand Paul: Was I right or was I right about Syria last year?
Rand Paul is right about most things!!!!!!!
WHL- Admin
- Posts : 6057
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2013-01-14
Similar topics
» Rand Paul
» Shutdown bad for obama.
» Rand Paul
» Paul: GOP unlikely to stop Affordable Health Care
» Rand Paul on Toilets...
» Shutdown bad for obama.
» Rand Paul
» Paul: GOP unlikely to stop Affordable Health Care
» Rand Paul on Toilets...
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|