Posted on 06/22/2014 10:48:17 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
ormer Vice President Dick Cheney fired back Sunday after Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) criticized his position on Iraq. In an appearance on ABC's "This Week," Cheney argued Paul, who is widely seen as a potential presidential candidate in 2016, is an "isolationist" who doesn't understand the "absolutely essential" need for America to be involved in the Middle East.
"Now, Rand Paul and — by my standards, as I look at his — his philosophy, is basically an isolationist. That didn't work in the 1930s, it sure as heck won't work in the aftermath of 9/11, when 19 guys armed with airline tickets and box cutters came all the way from Afghanistan and killed 3,000 of our citizens," Cheney said, according to a rush transcript of the show.
Paul addressed Cheney's position on Iraq in an interview with NBC that aired on "Meet The Press" Sunday. In that interview, Paul critiqued a Wall Street Journal op-ed written by Cheney and his daughter, Liz, that was critical of President Barack Obama's foreign policy and handling of the crisis in Iraq. The Cheneys said Obama's "rhetoric" about ending the Iraq War had "come crashing into reality" after troop withdrawals were followed by jihadists from the group Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) taking territory in the country. Paul argued Cheney and others who supported the Iraq War were primarily to blame for many of the current issues in the Middle East.
"What’s going on now — I don’t blame on President Obama. Has he really got the solution? Maybe there is no solution. But I do blame the Iraq War on the chaos that is in the Middle East," Paul said. "I also blame those who are for the Iraq War for emboldening Iran.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
“but now he’s a big one for sending other people’s kids to fight needless wars.”
Please specify which wars were needless.
Afghanistan? Where AQ was housed, based and trained while planning 9 11?
Iraq? Where every intel and evidence showed WMD in Iraq, in conjunction with violation of inspection regimes, made it negligence to not go into Iraq.
“A sick little FReeper hack mocked what Rangel did 60 years ago. That shouldn’t happen here.”
Maybe not. And neither should a good conservative be called a “chickenhawk”, which is a Liberal Dem anti-American talking point.
Repeatedly telling people what words or concepts you think are politically correct to post is a Liberal Dem anti-American talking point.
Do you have something against the truth?
Just calling out a Libaraltarian for being a liberal, which is what they are.
You seem to be befuzzled by me pointing out liberal tactics. Interesting, but expected.
With great humility I thank you for thinking enough of my work to repost it.
Proof that one “oh crap” can wipe out a whole lot of “attaboys”.
It aptly sums up, far better than I, that past military service, no matter how honorable, doesn't undo what one has become in present times. Your examples of Benedict Arnold and Timothy McVeigh can be applied to any number of anti-American leftists who once donned the uniform.
Somewhat tritely, it really boils down to "...that was then, this is now...". One may have been heroic in wartime decades ago but if, over time, one has embraced liberalism, a military record does not undo any current traitorous activities.
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.