History is “the cogent argument” against his idiotic solutions for a world of evil tyrants dedicated to defeat of the only force - America - standing between them and their evil goals. Advocating that we should abandon allies in areas of the world these tyrant seek to control is such an idiotic solution. Claiming that talking with these tyrants will dissuade them of those evil goals is another idiotic solution.
You’ve overstated and oversimplified Dr. Paul’s position on the issues. To claim “history” as a cogent argument is an oversimplification as well. The United States is currently engaged in diplomacy. Always has been. Dr. Paul is not an advocate of altogether abandoning the same.
Of all the candidates vying for the Presidency today, Dr. Paul is by far the most reflective of fiscal and social conservative policy. Best of all, he knows better than to treat our Constitution and all it entails as a flimsy “living, breathing document.”
I am undecided who to vote for as of now, but I can tell you there have been few if any good arguments against Dr. Paul’s positions. Only name calling, overreaction, and oversimplification of his ideas.