Posted on 03/31/2014 8:24:21 AM PDT by thetallguy24
At the Washington Post, Jennifer Rubin this weekend highlighted a video of Rand Paul speaking in 2012 about sanctions on Iran. In it, Paul disparages the notion of use of force, and for some reason claims the United States was partly to blame for World War II!
“There are times when sanctions have made it worse. I mean, there are times .. leading up to World War II we cut off trade with Japan. That probably caused Japan to react angrily. We also had a blockade on Germany after World War I, which may have encouraged them … some of their anger.”
Rubin spoke with David David Adesnik of the American Enterprise Institute about Paul’s remarks:
After viewing the video, he tells Right Turn, “Blaming the U.S. for Pearl Harbor is a long-standing isolationist habit that reflects tremendous historical illiteracy. Sen. Paul is very poorly informed if he thinks U.S. sanctions ‘probably caused Japan to react angrily.’” He explains, “The U.S. cut off oil supplies to Japan in August 1941, long after Japan had launched its atrocity-laden war against China in 1937. The evidence is conclusive that Japan was determined to dominate all of East Asia. Believing that the U.S. would not stand by passively if it overran Thailand, Singapore, Malaya and the East Indies, Japan launched its surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.”
With regard to the Senator’s comments about Germany, Adesnik declared them “so eccentric that it’s hard to be sure what he’s even talking about.” He goes on to point out the obvious, which is that we should be proud of our actions in Europe before and during the war, regardless of whether or not they antagonized the Nazis.
Senator Paul at the time of the video and in remarks since, referred to a nuclear Iran as “not a good idea”, which is true, in much the same way that sticking one’s hand in a wood chipper is a “not a good idea”.
Equally as troubling is his explanation of the rationale for sanctions being “doing something is better than doing nothing.” A colleague objects to Paul’s “straw man” and remarks “is this how we think about national security now?” Good question. Another good question is whether or not the first consideration in pursuing American interests and security is whether or not an enemy or “rogue” nation may become annoyed with us.
Rubin says that “these comments, his bizarre take on historical events and his current opposition to sanctions (in accord with President Obama) raise troubling issues regarding his true beliefs and the degree to which his father’s radical libertarian ideas have rubbed off on him.”
Indeed the issues are raised. And going into 2016, Obamaesque waffling on treading lightly or Ron Paul-like isolationism are not attributes anyone in this party should be looking for in a candidate. Answers to those issues, therefore, should be top priority for Senator Paul.
*Updated with partial transcription of relevant portion for those without audio. 10:43 AM.
The bulk of the entire US fleet was outdated. The BBs based at Pearl included the “Big Five” (Tennessee and Colorado Classes, altho Colorado was on the West Coast for overhaul on 12/7/41) whichbwere the best US BBs then in service (the North Carolinas were in limited service on the East Coast as design flaws were corrected). On the East Coast were also the three New Mexicos (predecessors to the Tennessees) and the three ancient “coal burners” (Arkansas and the two New Yorks, which bore the “coal burner” moniker tho having been converted to oil years earlier)
Of the carriers, the big and fast Lexingtons were based at Pearl (Saratoga, like Colorado, being on the West Coast for overhaul) as was Enterprise. The unsuitable Ranger and barely suitable Wasp were there as well, along with Yorktown.
While basing the fleet at Pearl was definitely a provocation and possibly designed as bait, the flaw in US mentality leading into the attack was a complete underestimation of what the Japanese were capable of. Put simply the US didn’t expect that the Japanese fleet would attempt to attack from the North following a winter crossing (footage can be found of the Kido Butai carriers bouncing around like toy boats in a tub during their run in) Or that the US wouldn’t have enough warning to mount a proper defense. Or that the Japanese could overcome a host of tactical disadvantages (like using aerial torpedoes in the shallow water of Pearl.)
“ANYONE remember the flying tigers”
Yes, I remember the Flying Tigers and also December 7,1941!
To a degree he is correct. Roosevelt wanted in the war very very badly.
I have a lot of respect for your opinions. I would have no problem voting for him over RINOS like Jeb and Christie. My major issues are illegal aliens, obamacare and our military. I know that Rand Paul would repeal obamacare. Not sure where he stands on the other two....
My plea is urging those of us on the Right to keep our eye on the ball. Nobody is going to be everything anyone or everyone wants. But we can unite around a common cause and best candidate if we’re clear on the CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER: the $4 trillion dollar government which threatens to our way of life and freedoms.
Thanks thetallguy24.
Rand Paul is just clueless on immigration. Which is a bit better than people who know better like Goodlatte or Coffman or Rubio or Jeb or Christie or Walker or Ryan. These people know more about the issue and decide to side with the Chamber. Rubio and Christie have seen first hand the cost and violence of illegals.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/nyregion/30newark.html?_r=0
On immigration the immediate is congress voting against a permanent amnesty between now and 2017. I don’t think Rand Paul’s goofy policy on immigration will really convince people to vote for amnesty.
It would be funny if the establishment somehow blocked amnesty because they thought they could bash Rand Paul on the issue in the primaries.
The only possible candidates who really are against amnesty are Pat McCrory and Allen West.
A lot of people like Scott Walker but he is as stupid as Rand on immigration. He says he thinks anyone should be able to legally immigrate. What’s the limit? 2,3 or 4 million per year.
It is funny because in 2010 and 2011 he did some good things on immigration the Dems will use against him.
“And before he was elected in 2011, Paul called the federal DREAM Act, which would have permanently stopped deportations for undocumented youths brought to the country as children, the “Washington elitists’ roundabout way of giving amnesty to illegal immigrant students and undermining the rule of law.” In 2010, Paul supported Arizona’s harsh anti-immigration law, advocating for local law enforcement officials to check for legal status, one way that could land undocumented immigrants in the hands of federal immigration officials. In 2011, Paul co-sponsored legislation with Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) that would end the constitutional right to birthright citizenship.”
The blockade in regard to oil and scrape metal may have impacted the timing, but not the adversary. In the 1920’s the factions formed for determinations to “strike north” meaning attack the Soviet Union or “strike south” meaning attack the colonial possessions of the French, Dutch and British. Either pattern of conquest would give them access to the resources they wanted. However, by the mid 1930’s the issue had been resolved in favor of the “strike south” faction that Hirohito supported. You can read a good discussion of the subject in Japan’s Imperial Conspiracy by David Bergamini and Hirohito by Edward Behr.
This imperial militarist society never contemplated the possibility they could achieve prosperity by peaceful commercial means as Japan if fact did during the 1970’s.
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.