Rand Paul: ‘I Am Not an Isolationist’

Time ^ | 9/4/14 | Rand Paul

[Hugin]

And while my predisposition is to less intervention, I do support intervention when our vital interests are threatened.

If I had been in President Obama’s shoes, I would have acted more decisively and strongly against ISIS. I would have called Congress back into session—even during recess.

This is what President Obama should have done. He should have been prepared with a strategic vision, a plan for victory and extricating ourselves. He should have asked for authorization for military action and would have, no doubt, received it.

Once we have decided that we have an enemy that requires destruction, we must have a comprehensive strategy—a realistic policy applying military power and skillful diplomacy to protect our national interests.

The immediate challenge is to define the national interest to determine the form of intervention we might pursue. I was repeatedly asked if I supported airstrikes. I do—if it makes sense as part of a larger strategy.

[Hugin]

There have been articles about Paul's editorial, but I don't find it posted yet. I don't always agree with Paul, but I find nothing to disagree with in this article.

[sickoflibs]

If I had to choose him over McCain and Grahamnesty it would be easy.

Just six months ago they were calling for US arming ISIS to fight al-Assad.

[preacher]

Later

[Servant of the Cross]

Rand please. If you feel compelled to protest you’re not, you are.

[MrEdd]

I wouldn’t any of those three under any circumstances.

[GOPsterinMA]

Agreed.

[rightwingintelligentsia]

Rand sounds like he wants to have it both ways. He would like his father’s loyal (sometimes rabid) fan base to associate him with his father and his positions, but he’d rather everyone else didn’t.

[Vendome]

No?

Well, you are demonstrably a klown and Homey don’t play dat game!

[ansel12]

He just reversed himself, he is so much like Romney, that we are building up a similar Rand versus Rand, collection of positions.

[Theoria]

Oh, looks like someone has found a obvious point. The entirety of the WOT has been orchestrated without a closed border.

'We must also secure our own borders and immigration policy from ISIS infiltration. Our border is porous, and the administration, rather than acting to protect it, instead ponders unconstitutional executive action, legalizing millions of illegal immigrants.

Our immigration system, especially the administration of student visas, requires a full-scale examination. Recently, it was estimated that as many as 6,000 possibly dangerous foreign students are unaccounted for. This is inexcusable over a decade after we were attacked on 9/11 by hijackers including one Saudi student who overstayed his student visa.'

[DoughtyOne]

Excuse me Rand, please link us to your public calls to send troops to oppose ISIS/ISIL. I’d love to read up on all your public statements on the subject.

Has there been even one? Has he advocated for a military response.

I could be wrong, but my current take is that there hasn’t been a single instance of it until now. And it seems to me the only reason he supports it now, is because he know it isn’t going to happen.

If he thought it were going to happen, he’d be back on the vital interest band wagon, claiming this didn’t qualify.

[Hugin]

What, specifically, did he reverse himself on here?

[DoughtyOne]

How can he say this after his prior comments on illegal immigrants? Is this Rand Paul, or is it the writings of someone else he is channeling?

[leapfrog0202]

He’s flip flopping and seeing which way the wind blows before he runs in 2016.

[Theoria]

Rand once supported getting rid of birth right citizenship. At that point, I felt he might become something.

Well, he become a politician. That is what we have these days.

[SoConPubbie]

'We must also secure our own borders and immigration policy from ISIS infiltration. Our border is porous, and the administration, rather than acting to protect it, instead ponders unconstitutional executive action, legalizing millions of illegal immigrants.

Our immigration system, especially the administration of student visas, requires a full-scale examination. Recently, it was estimated that as many as 6,000 possibly dangerous foreign students are unaccounted for. This is inexcusable over a decade after we were attacked on 9/11 by hijackers including one Saudi student who overstayed his student visa.'

Yea, but as Ansel12 pointed out up-thread, Rand wants to have it both ways.

First he comes out with his own Amnesty plan where he grants amnesty to 2 million illegal invaders each and every year based on the flawed idea that the Congress can objectively "certify" that the border is secure (Without a fence mind you) and now he tries and spout control the border nonsense.

He can't have it both ways.

[Hugin]

Specifically, what is he flip-flopping on here?

[Theoria]

Of course not. He is a Republican, a member of one of the parties of Amnesty. He simply found a talking point at will bring it up.

As I have noted before, RP, is good at attacking. That is why he will be a viable attack dog against Hillary, as he is doing now.

[manc]

Paul is anything which can get him votes, hell he pretends to be a conservative and he should be running on the liberaltarian ticket

[ansel12]

From libertarian weakness, to conservative.