Posted on 03/10/2014 11:47:56 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
I missed this on Friday but, having now read it, Rand’s surprisingly hawkish take on Russia in Time this morning makes more sense. If his Breitbart op-ed was aimed at Cruz, I think I can guess who the Time one was aimed at.
By the way, any bets on how a secession referendum held in a small province under military occupation by a superpower next door might go? Ron Paul’s been conspicuously sensitive to the perils of occupation in the past, but not so much here.
“I’d like to see the people [in Crimea] make the decision rather than outside parties,” [Ron] Paul tells U.S. News. “It’s pure hypocrisy on our part to think we have the moral high ground. The only question that remains is: Will there be an honest election? And I don’t see any reason there can’t be an honest election.”…
“We say, ‘We want you to be good democrats and have elections,’ but if they don’t elect the right people then we complain about it and throw them out, like we did in Egypt,” Paul says. “They’re doing exactly what they should do [in Crimea]. They should have an election.”…
Obama’s sanctions against Ukrainian and Russian officials, Paul alleges, are acts of theft.
“That’s just people looking to start a war,” Paul says. “This is criminal, it’s stealing and will just aggravate things and escalate things. Sanctions are acts of war … to freeze assets if you’re at war with Hitler and there’s a declared war, that’s a little different, but to do this so easily and casually as we do, that’s just looking for a fight.”
Paul does support having nongovernmental election monitors supervise the Crimea vote — as long as they’re not Americans, since “we would send CIA agents over there.”
I take it Team Rand wouldn’t agree that freezing the assets of billionaire Russian kleptocrats is an impermissible act of “theft.” And I know for a fact that they wouldn’t agree that sanctions in this case are “criminal.” From the Time op-ed:
Economic sanctions and visa bans should be imposed and enforced without delay. I would urge our European allies to leverage their considerable weight with Russia and take the lead on imposing these penalties. I would do everything in my power to aggressively market and export America’s vast natural gas resources to Europe…
It is important that Russia becomes economically isolated until all its forces are removed from Crimea and Putin pledges to act in accordance with the international standards of behavior that respect the rights of free people everywhere…
I would reinstitute the missile-defense shields President Obama abandoned in 2009 in Poland and the Czech Republic, only this time, I would make sure the Europeans pay for it.
All of which raises the question: Is it better or worse for Rand to have Ron on TV giving the Paul 1.0 take on foreign policy? Arguably, the more attention Ron’s comments get, the more opportunities Rand has to show people that he’s more mainstream on this subject than his old man is. He’s running against the GOP establishment on one hand and against his father on the other, so theoretically the more Ron sounds off, the more Rand gets to attack (however obliquely). If, though, you’re like DrewM in suspecting that someone born and raised in libertarian politics, who twice endorsed his father for president and whose lurch towards the mainstream coincides with making noise about running for president himself, might indeed be a Paul at heart on foreign policy then maybe Ron speaking up isn’t a good idea. This is one of the great X factors in the next election: How much can hawks make Ron’s words stick to Rand? Given that most voters follow politics only casually, maybe they’ll dismiss “Ron = Rand” messaging as a bizarre attempt to make one candidate answer for the positions of another. Or, maybe Ron made enough of an impression on mainstream Republican voters over the last two cycles that there’s no avoiding this problem for Team Rand now. I honestly don’t know. I don’t even feel confident guessing whether Rand might ask Ron to lie low in the media if he concludes that doing so would help his presidential odds. Would Ron even agree to do that?
Anyway. It’ll be fun watching libertarians struggle with a perennial problem for members of the two major parties, namely, how far their guy should stray from core beliefs in the name of electability. Usually that doesn’t come up until the general election; for Rand it’ll be an issue in the primary. Presumably half the movement is cursing Rand today for taking a position on Russia that conflicts sharply with dad’s and half the movement is applauding him for a canny move that improves his shot at the nomination. I wonder how many of that latter group agree with Drew’s take, that President Rand would be more like President Ron than anyone expects.
Clue time: Is there an illegal Russian army currently occupying Scotland and Catalonia?
Scots think that the Brits are occupiers and Catalans think rhat Spaniards are occupiers, otherwise they wouldn’t seek independence from UK and Spain.
And Russia army doesn’t “occupy” Crimea. Russian navy have bases in Crimea since 1783.
According to the agreement signed in 1997, Russia may have as many as 25,000 troops there. Actually , it has 17,000.
Don’t try historical facts and logic
Theyre on a roll
I actually have friends in Scotland, and they think you're full of it. The Scottish socialists want independence to setup their utopia, and there isn't an illegal army occupied in Scotland making sure that the voting goes just like how they want.
Get lost, Paulistinian. Your moral relativism is a cancer to the republic.
And Russia army doesn’t “occupy” Crimea.
Since when does their Navy expand to the entire Crimean area, complete with landmines along the borders of Ukraine and soldiers surrounding and guarding inside the Parliament, amongst other places?
Get lost.
I’m not talking to people, who call me names.
If the world were sane, every red-blooded American would tell off the Russkie lovers. They're traitors to the Republic.
No, but I missed the knowledge tag on your post. Crimea wants to be part of Russia. The other half of Ukraine does not [hint: that's the part we're concerned about]. Why would you deny Crimea's desire to return to Russia?
Why is that wrong in your opinion -- if you really have one.
And you know this as a fact, based on what? I have family in Kherson and Odessa, just outside of Crimea, and this is not true; that the vast majority want to be ruled by Russia. They are very worried about what might happen next and are in fear.
Ingatar is correct: Their referendum has two choices: join Russia or join Russia.
From the Kiev Post: Voters in Ukraine’s Russian-occupied Crimea who vote in the March 16 referendum have two choices – join Russia immediately or declare independence and then join Russia..
re: http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/two-choices-in-crimean-referendum-yes-and-yes-338745.html
Typical 'soviet' logic /s
kyivpost
Yeah, sure. That’s what the putschist thugs are saying in town.
And it is not Kyiv, but Kiev.
10 March 2014
“Over 80% of Crimea residents are going to vote for accession to Russia, according to yesterday’s focus-group surveys,” Mr. Konstantinov, Crimea Supreme Council’s chairman said.
He predicted a “considerably high” turnout for the upcoming referendum on March 16 that will decide the fate of the Black Sea peninsula. “We are even glad to learn that the Kiev authorities are refusing to recognize the referendum. We have not recognized them either.”
The Autonomous Republic of Crimea’s legislature has officially invited observers of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe to come to the Crimea to monitor the March 16 referendum.
An invitation has been handed to Switzerland, the country that holds the rotating presidency of the OSCE.
The Chairman of the Crimean Supreme Council, Vladimir Konstantinov, told reporters that Kiev’s decision to block Crimea’s treasury accounts would not hinder the holding of the referendum, since Crimea has its own funds, its own budget and taxes.
It would be a lot easier to accept Crimea’s desire to be a part of Russia if this wasn’t being done at the point of a gun.
Check back with me when the Kiev parliament is surrounded with Russian soldiers and they have to vote on rejoining Russia.
How did the confusion arise? Well Kiev is the recognized transliteration of the name of the city in Russian, and also the old Ukrainian name which has been used for centuries (by the likes of national hero, Taras Shevchenko, no less) right back to the times of Kievan Rus. Kyiv meanwhile is the transliteration of the modern Ukrainian name of the city and the official name as far as all legal and political issues are concerned. Following the establishment of an independent Ukraine in 1991, there was a move by many Ukrainians to favour Kyiv as it symbolised a departure from all things Russian, and indeed Kyiv is now used by the UN and many other official bodies as the correct name.
http://www.local-life.com/kiev/articles/kiev-or-kyiv
Am glad you wrote of Kosovo/Serbia because what’s happening in Ukraine is quite similar...........Members of this ‘new government’ have spoken of ‘ethnically-cleansing’ Russians - and even if they don’t go this far, their intent towards the Russian population is clear enough.
I think people need to understand Ukraine’s people and how they approach life in general...they don’t see or address issues as we do...it’s another culture entirely.
Additionally.....We were an ant’s hair away from nuclear showdown before in the Cuban Missil Crisis.......And what triggered that?...The deployment of NATO/US missiles into Turkey aimed at the USSR.
What defused that crisis? The agreement by the USA to withdraw such missiles. And we’re seeing this today in Ukraine.....An attempt by NATO powers (US, UK, France and Germany) to annex a state bordering the Russian federation, Ear-marked by the USA to becoming a short-range missile launch-site. .....And what will Putin do to oppose such a threat?
Truly amazing Americans cannot see through this, especially since we have such access to both sides of an issue and can find information to assess and come to conclusion of what’s really happening.
When I first watched Ukraine I couldn’t believe Nazi’s were in play and actually stated so...I was so wrong! I jumped to quick.
He will also be the first to say that California has the right to join Mexico
Insane
Anyone who thinks a vote of an occupied country to join their invader is legitimate is insane
Well BPH I said the same thing, that Nazi’s had nothing to do with Ukraine. I was dead wrong and learned so as I looked closer at these characters, the demonstrations, who was organizing them. I gotta say I was stunned to see not only were they in the protests but are now actually in Gov.. positions. Take a closer look at those leading their Gov. now...and it’s not RT nonsense or Alex Jones stuff by any means.
....” traitors to the Republic”...
I think you’re going way to far calling people traitors or implying so just because they understand why Russia is making the moves they are...and EU/Us/Nato making theirs..... Many here are viewing both sides of the issue and not taking a side at all, rather they are seeing geo-political war being fought for control of Ukraine..and it’s not the Ukrainian people determining the outcome. Their protest was high-jacked early on...and wasn’t the first nation this has happened to as we all know.
We recognize clearly who Putin is and what Russia politics are about....but you cannot blame a player on this chessboard for protecting what he thinks is his area of influence when he knows who is really sitting across the table from him and their agenda.
I don’t like how this is playing out and as always the people of Ukraine will hurt more before this is actually over. Even so it is a war being fought ultimately over if or not the USA puts missiles in Ukraine or not....the condition of Ulkraine joining Nato.
.....”California has the right to join Mexico”....
Wouldn’t be even close to the same situation GL....but I get your point.
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.