Posted on 02/27/2014 7:06:39 AM PST by Colonel Kangaroo
Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, a presidential hopeful and leading non-interventionist voice in the Republican Party, believes the United States should seek "respectful" relations with Russia and avoid antagonizing President Vladimir Putin over the ongoing political turmoil in Ukraine, where a Kremlin-backed government collapsed last week.
"Some on our side are so stuck in the Cold War era that they want to tweak Russia all the time and I don't think that is a good idea," Paul said on Tuesday, in an interview with The Washington Post.
Paul's comments underscore the latest foreign-policy fissure in the GOP, where the party's libertarian wing and Republican hawks have clashed over whether Putin is a threat and the future of U.S.-Russia relations.
In recent weeks, some Republicans, such as Sen. John McCain of Arizona, have encouraged President Obama to eventually welcome Ukraine into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I don’t think we should tweak Putin either,but at the same time we shouldn’t roll over and play dead.He should know that we will not allow the tanks to roll in like the Soviet’s did into Hungary and Czechoslovakia.
→ FSA fighter throws a grenade down a tank barrel
that Ukraine's insurrection leaders might want to study.
And Rand Paul can cram it up his a** sideways.
Well, I’ll say the. The only thing America could do with Russia at this point is get its ass roflstomped by Putin.
So go ahead and pick a fight Obama.
Show him how much of a man you are.
Lol...
He’s right-Obama is not Reagan, and our military is being cut to the bone-we are not in a position to police the world, especially when the person with his finger on the nuke button has been given the finger and handed his ass by Putin, and so is a laughingstock in the larger world-we’d be better off spending the outrage and energy voting out the wusses who got us into this predicament and got Obama elected-twice, starting with our own votes in November...
Because they're empty threats. Putin could invade tomorrow and there is nothing the U.S. or the rest of the world can do about it.
Interesting point. Washington was a British Army veteran, commander of American forces, President of the new republic, and, renouncing all his offices, returned to his farm even earning the grudging admiration of George III.
So, Washington was pretty much done with empires & imperialism. He saw America as blessed with all the natural resources for peace and prosperity, with no need for expansionist ambitions.
But even in his waning years, Washington must have been aware of the debate between Hamilton’s Federalists and the Antifederalists led by Jefferson. One of their differences concerned foreign entanglements; the former favored strict neutrality in the imminent Anglo-French war and the latter advocated allying with Napoleonic France as a counter to the British Empire (which would come roaring back to our shores anyway).
This debate IMO is academic in the Islamofascist era. We fight them here, we fight them over there, but the civilizational war will go on as long as fourteen centuries of Muslim imperialism are staring down at us through nuclear eyes.
Senate Majority Leader would be a better role for Rand Paul, maybe even US ambassador to the UN, but President , NO. Maybe down the road but not this decade of “transformation&change”.
Cruz is better suited to the Oval Office at this point. Sarah or Jindal can be VeeP.
Just my humble opinions at this stage of the horse races.
Subject to change as developments occur both here and abroad. :-}
Agreed on all points. A good distribution of conservative talent.
Thank you. Said perfectly.
Amen.
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.