[SJackson]

No, it doesn't fit the world today, ie, that we are at war. IMHO, Reagan would disagree with how the current war is being fought, but not by sticking his head up his ass like Paul, instead, I wouldn't be surprised if he dropped a nuke on Baghdad. If Reagan went into Grenada, you know he sure as hell would have taken out Iraq, Afghanistan, and any other terrorist supporting country.

Policy comparisons between Paul and Reagan are ludicrous. The most important distinction thoug, Reagan recognized we were fighting a virulent, ideologically motivated enemy, the Evil Empire. Paul does not recognize the nature of the enemy, in fact denies that Islam plays any role in terrorism, and attributes the violence to what is essentially American colonialism. From Reagan's perspective, yes, we're at war. From Paul's, there's no coherent enemy, we're dealing with the actions of individuals motivated by our transgressions. More a criminal issue than a world conflict.

[trisham]

The most important distinction thoug, Reagan recognized we were fighting a virulent, ideologically motivated enemy, the Evil Empire. Paul does not recognize the nature of the enemy, in fact denies that Islam plays any role in terrorism, and attributes the violence to what is essentially American colonialism. From Reagan's perspective, yes, we're at war. From Paul's, there's no coherent enemy, we're dealing with the actions of individuals motivated by our transgressions. More a criminal issue than a world conflict.

*********

Well said.