But Paul does seem to oppose the drone strikes. Indeed, anyone who heard all or most of his several hours of talk on the subject heard a great deal that shows he thinks the “perpetual war” against the Islamists is the real problem.
The unfortunate fact is that Americans will have to continue fighting al-Qaeda. This is not because our leaders lust for war or are enraptured with drone technology, but because our enemies believe they are engaged in war that will go on for generations until we succumb. Winning that struggle will require patience and endurance as well as the will to seek out these enemies wherever they may be plotting. Targeted killings of these terrorists are necessary and effective. But Paul’s core critique of the administration is not about a theoretical drone attack in the United States but about this very tactic.
FOR LEGAL DOPE!
FOR LEGAL HOOKERS!
FOR ENDING WAR AGAINST ISLAMISTS IN THIS PERPETUAL WAR THAT WE DIDN’T START!
FOR RONULANISM!
>> FOR LEGAL DOPE!
>> FOR LEGAL HOOKERS!
This is often the argument used against libertarians which should really be directed at the Libertarian Party and the liberals that own it.
Rand Paul’s version of libertarianism, as in small govt, doesn’t necessitate the depravity encapsulated in “Legal Dope and Hookers” as far as I’m concerned.
We all should understand the difference between statism and libertarianism along with the impact these enforcement factors have on morality.