Posted on 01/03/2020 2:50:37 PM PST by RandFan
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., called into "Your World with Neil Cavuto" Friday to discuss the deadly airstrike that killed Iranian general Qassem Soleimani in Iraq, saying he fears an "escalation" between the U.S. and Iran.
"I think without a declaration of war, without Congress and the American people behind it, what you get is a messy mission. You get a mission of escalating intermittent violence," Paul told Cavuto. "The president said he didn't want perpetual war in the Middle East. But he's adding more and more troops. If you don't want perpetual war, you don't keep sending more targets over there."
Paul believes it is more likely that "Iran, their militias and their proxies will attack the U.S." following the death of Soleimani.
President Trump accused the Iranian general of planning “imminent and sinister attacks” Friday in his first televised remarks since the airstrike that killed the general at Baghdad's international airport.
"We took action last night to stop a war,” Trump said during brief remarks at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. “We did not take action to start a war.”
Paul argued that that the airstrike signals the "death of diplomacy" with Iran and that they will feel the need to retaliate.
"It's hard to imagine that the Iranians are going to shrink now and say, 'Oh, you killed our leading general, who's been a leader in our country for 20 years, and we're going to do nothing,'" Paul said. "I also think with the death of Soleimani, you have the death of diplomacy. I don't think there's any chance that Iran will speak to us again on diplomacy."
Cavuto asked Paul what his "biggest fear" was about the situation.
"I think, that there will be an escalation, that there will be a war with Iran," Paul responded.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Rand Paul is Ron Paul 2.0 (to coin a Don Feder phrase). Maybe he’ll go on Iranian Press tv to apologize for the airstrike. I wouldn’t be surprised if his congressman father did.
“Sen. Rand Paul on Fox News: ‘Diplomacy is dead now in the Middle East’”
A bit late to the party, Rand.
You know Rand - you’re a BIG BOY now, you no longer have to take orders from Daddy.
Addendum to post #48: Bin Laden had already bombed the World Trade Center when Clinton declined the authorization to take him out.
Run, Rand, run. Get to your safe space.
Military action is the end of diplomacy, the far end. Threats of military actions are the bread and butter of good diplomacy and alliances like NATO are rock solid part of them.
RP needs to study more.
DK
Nutz. For one thing, Iran doesn’t have the capacity, nobody even in the ME likes Iran, and its allies (China and Russia) are quietly abandoning it because they realize that they have a tiger by the tail, since both of these countries have problems with Islamists, probably mostly funded by Iran. So we’re taking care of a problem for them, although they may put on a pro-forma protest face.
The problem with Rand Paul is that he doesn’t realize that there is simply no possibility of isolationism anymore. Like it or not, since the advent of the IPhone, only 10 years ago, it’s a whole different universe and no state can ever be isolated anymore.
I am so tired of these lame people. Diplomacy ended when they attacked the embassy. Had Obama/Hillary done the same during the Benghazi affair, I suspect this event might not have happened.
I don’t think anyone can deny that Trump has done more to get our boys home than Bush or Obama. Trump knew getting involved was wrong from the beginning and has stated that since 2003. Doing a Vietnam cut and run is not the answer. I believe by showing this resolve he will do more to stabilize the situation so he can get us the hell out. Cleaning up for Bush, the neocons, Clinton, Obama and even me (I supported Bush’s intervention) is difficult business.
Diplomacy was brain dead and on life support with no signs of brain activity.
Iraq remains a military and political disaster, and Iran wanted to take advantage of the current instability to push us out. I think they miscalculated. If they were smart, they would sit back and wait, as time is on their side. On the other hand, the sanctions continue to destroy their economy and cause unrest in Iran, so the failed embassy attack was likely a calculated risk to undermine Trump's reelection and get rid of the sanctions. The successful defense of the US Embassy, and the brilliant counter attack against the very man who planned that attack (and likely the Benghazi attack), has only increased Trump's chances.
Diplomacy is how you make deals with friends. Diplomacy is how you stop shooting at enemies who have learned that it’s a bad idea to shoot at you. Diplomacy is not for dealing with people who want to kill you and believe that they have that capability - that’s what drone strikes are for.
Of course it is. If it is a wrong plan, you don't keep doing it. That was why trump was elected. Don't keep doing stupid stuff. Right now, 'we' are dying for sand people.
I can like Rand Paul until he goes hard stupid which he eventually always does.
The President’s strike is going to DEESCALATE confrontations in the Middle East? Why?
Because who has the nerve to move against an overwhelmingly superior force that will jam a missile down your throat or drone you into wet minced dogfood?
Remember this strike was retaliatory. Trump always punches back, never punches first.
If any poet general in the region dares move against Americans, they now know there will be consequences. Some will think to try but they know it won’t be easy.
So Paul, get your head out of your dark orifice and ask yourself if doing nothing militarily would have accomplished a deescalation? Of course, not. Doing nothing but talk would have signaled to terrorists that it’s open season on Americans and Westerners in general.
Idiot.
Next time consider keeping out of sight rather than join with the likes of Cavuto in a fool’s fest.
Rand Paul is one of the few “Constitutional Conservatives” around these days. He gets all sorts of hate here on FR each time, it seems, he wishes us to adhere to the Constitution, especially when it comes to “WAR”.
I don’t fault him on his position. The last “Constitutionally Declared war was in 1941, WWII. As a combat vet, it doesn’t escape me that WWII is the last war we achieved victory.
I don’t mind going to War with Iran, only if and when the nation coalesces behind a Declaration sent by Congress to the President in which it is the ultimate goal to annihilate the Iranian military and their terrorist organizations.
If we are not going “all in” in the Constitutional manner we should go “all out”. The business of “measured responses” will never succeed, imho.
I also believe “we” don’t have the national will to do what will ultimately be needed to be done. And that is the total destruction of Iran and the driving of the Islamists back into the caves of the 7th Century.
It always has been like this. Let a bully alone, individual or a country, you get more of the same. You can bet Soleimani was planning more anti-American actions and this one is a real killer.
I like Rand Paul, and I appreciate his concern.
We need more like him in Senate and Congress. He isnt disagreeing with this like the others who are just disagreeing with President Trump, because that is all that they will do.
I think he is unrealistic here. We are already in a quagmire there, between failed diplomacy of Carter and sparatic but ineffective shows of strength.
Oh, bullsh*t. Senator Paul is simply saying we need to follow the Constitution. "Follow the Constitution" has consistently been Paul's steadfast answer to every position.
People here don't want to hear it but this doesn't make him any less correct.
To accuse Rand Paul of cheerleading for American deaths is disgraceful and contemptible.
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.