Posted on 12/18/2015 7:18:23 AM PST by Kaslin
"If you're in favor of World War III, you have your candidate."
So said Rand Paul, looking directly at Gov. Chris Christie, who had just responded to a question from CNN's Wolf Blitzer as to whether he would shoot down a Russian plane that violated his no-fly zone in Syria.
"Not only would I be prepared to do it, I would do it," blurted Christie: "I would talk to Vladimir Putin ... I'd say to him, 'Listen, Mr. President, there's a no-fly zone in Syria; you fly in, it applies to you.'
"Yes, we would shoot down the planes of Russian pilots if in fact they were stupid enough to think that this president was the same feckless weakling ... we have in the Oval Office ... right now."
Ex-Gov. George Pataki and ex-Sen. Rick Santorum would also impose a no-fly zone and shoot down Russian planes that violated it. Said Gov. John Kasich, "It's time we punched the Russians in the nose."
Carly Fiorina would impose a no-fly zone and not even talk to Putin until we've conducted "military exercises in the Baltic States" on Russia's border. Jeb Bush, too, would impose a no-fly zone.
These warhawks apparently assume that President Putin is a coward who, if you shoot down his warplanes, will back away from a fight.
Are we sure? After the Turks shot down that Sukhoi SU-24, Moscow sent fighter planes to Syria to escort its bombers and has reportedly deployed its lethal S-300 antiaircraft system there.
A U.S. Marine Corps aviator describes the S-300: "A complete game changer for all fourth-gen aircraft [like the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18]. That thing is a beast and you don't want to get near it." There are press reports that an angry Putin has ordered the even more advanced S-400 system moved into Syria.
Is Putin bluffing? Are we prepared to ride the up-escalator, at the top of which is nuclear war, if Putin, who has been boasting of his modernized nuclear forces, is also willing to ride it rather than back down?
Uber-hawk Lindsey Graham wants to send tens of thousands of American troops to fight ISIS, and refuses to work with Iran, Russia, or Syria's Bashar Assad to crush our common enemy ISIS.
Graham prefers "allies," like the Saudis and Gulf Arabs.
But both have bailed out of the air war on ISIS, and sent troops and bombers instead to attack the Houthi rebels in Yemen. Result: The Houthis have been in retreat and al-Qaida and ISIS are moving into the vacated territory.
Another Mideast base camp for terrorists is being created -- by us.
"I miss George W. Bush!" wailed Graham in the undercard debate. How many other Americans are, like Graham, pining for the return of a Bush foreign policy that gave us Barack Obama?
Yet, now, a rival school is taking center stage in the Republican presidential campaign, rejecting the knee-jerk hostility to working with Putin. Not only does Rand Paul belong to this school, so, apparently, do Donald Trump and his strongest challenger, Sen. Ted Cruz.
Cruz had previously disparaged the legacy of the "neocons" who prodded Bush into war in Iraq and championed a democracy crusade in the Middle East. In Las Vegas, he spoke of a new national-interest-based foreign policy, a policy that puts "America First."
"If we topple Assad ... ISIS will take over Syria, and it will worsen national security interests. And the approach -- instead of being ... a democracy promoter, we ought to hunt down our enemies and kill ISIS rather than creating opportunities for ISIS to control new countries."
Cruz rejects the Manichaean worldview of the neocons and their reflexive hostility to Russia, and appears willing to work with a Russian autocrat to crush a monstrous evil like ISIS, as U.S. presidents did in working with anti-Communist dictators to win the Cold War.
Midway through the debate, Trump cut loose with a sweeping indictment of mindless American interventionism in the Middle East:
"We've spent $4 trillion trying to topple various people that, frankly, if they were there and if we could have spent that $4 trillion in the United States to fix our roads, our bridges, and all of the other problems -- our airports and all the other problems we have -- we would have been a lot better off. ...
"We have done a tremendous disservice not only to the Middle East -- we've done a tremendous disservice to humanity. The people that have been killed, the people that have been wiped away -- and for what? It's not like we had victory. It's a mess. The Middle East is totally destabilized, a total and complete mess. I wish we had the 4 trillion dollars or 5 trillion dollars. I wish it were spent right here in the United States on schools, hospitals, roads, airports, and everything else that are all falling apart!"
If we do not want Syria in 2016 to become what Sarajevo became in 1914, the powder keg that explodes into a world war, the War Party Republicans, who have learned nothing from the past, should be relegated to the past.
We have no reason to be in Syria at all. We’ve had no diplomatic relations with them for quite sometime and it has been “understood” that Syria was in Russia’s sphere of influence.
Let Russia handle it.
What happens in Syria, stays in Syria.
Thanks for posting, every once and a while Pat knocks one out of the park.
As Ann Coulter said in her latest column
It’s as if there’s a law of toughness conservation: The weaker a candidate is on protecting our borders, the more aggressively he talks about bombing foreign countries, a move known as “the Lindsey Graham.”
We should keep Russia Closer as they are no ally.
What gave us Barack Obama was the Republican Party's inability to find a good candidate to run for president in 2008.
Oh, my. If Christie actually said that, then Rand Paul is absolutely right. Christie would be starting WW III.
And as a side note, what gives the US any right to declare a no-fly zone over another sovereign country in the first place? It's not like the Syrian government attacked us, is a mortal threat to us, or anything like that.
Sounds good to me.
Same exact thing will happen in 2016 once elitists and RINO’s run Cruz and Trump off.
Christie needs a no-donut zone in NJ.
I'm not a student of history, but has the Republican Party ever given it's members a good candidate?
Reagan wasn't given by the Party, he was slipped around their 'gatekeepers'.
Just as Trump is.
I abhor the Rand Paul approach to foreign policy, which is at its heart isolationist. We have to be a leader in this world, or the Russians, Chinese and Iranians will carve it up and be much more powerful and much better positioned enemies.
OTOH, I also abhor the “intervene everywhere, all the time” school of thought. It costs us PLENTY - not just in blood and treasure, but in lost allies and also in the character of this nation - we become more bloodthirsty and imperial. This route, of military intervention everywhere, is the road the Rome traveled - and ultimate fell because it had made so many enemies, and destroyed its finances.
We DO need to intervene overseas - sometimes. Better to pick our battles carefully and, when we enter one, break lots of things and kill lots of people...and then go home, leaving the locals to clean up the mess that they brought upon themselves. Believe me, the lesson won’t be lost on others hostile to us. But no nation-building - we not only cannot, but we should not impose our culture and values on others (with one exception, when a nation/empire actually threatens our existence, like Germany or Japan - then you occupy them for a half century).
What we need to do is re-build our military so that it is very well trained, very well stocked with huge amounts of ordnance, fuel, spare parts, etc., and extremely mobile. Be the backstop to our allies, who must ALL know with 100% certainty that we will be there for them, help them fight their own battles until they simply cannot do without our help - and then intervene if it is in our vital interest to do so. Oh, and treat our veterans with extreme honor when they return, especially those who were wounded and will bear the cost of their service for the rest of their lives.
Obama has failed miserably at that, among many other things. Neither Rand Paul nor the Graham/McCain school of thought give me the warm & fuzzies on this issue - we need someone like Trump, who will stay out as long as possible from a conflict but will, once we enter one, unleash absolute Hell on the enemy.
Trump and/or Cruz debating this against that warmonger Clinton: Priceless.
If Cristie said this he is a moron. The correct response should have been questioning a poorly impose policy that created a dangerous situation with Russia.
Good heavens.
What we need is a leader that represents the American people’s interests, not one that supports those few sadistic elites that would benefit from WW3.
Would the American people’s interests be well served by WW3? It’s possible, but it’s extremely, extremely unlikely and certainly not in our current global situation.
How many other Americans are, like Graham, pining for the return of a Bush foreign policy that gave us Barack Obama?
*************************************************************
Make no mistake, first John McCain, then Mitt Romney “gave us Barak Obama”. Remember the alternative to Bush in 2000? Remember the alternative to Bush in 2004?
Rubio, Jeb, and Christie would send US ground troops into Syria on their first week in office. I’m surprised that Trump and Cruz, who are on the side of realism and reason on this issue, don’t spend more time highlighting the fact that the foreign policy agenda of Rubio, Jeb, etc. is basically the same as Hillary Clinton’s.
This all must stop. Trump and Cruz are right. Leave it alone. My son has been at war for 13 years. All that has happened is he is now in danger stateside because he is military. Thank God he is Guard and can carry so I don’t have to worry about him being ambushed on the way home.
We have not won anything, just made it worse and endangered the homeland. If we need to fight somewhere again, destroy the enemy completely and come home. Anything else is not worth the blood of our military.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.