by Brad Nelson 9/4/14
Thomas Lifson at American Thinker has a blog post about some statements Rand Paul made regarding ISIS. Here is the relevant Rand Paul quote:
“If I were president, I would call a joint session of Congress. I would lay out the reasoning of why ISIS is a threat to our national security and seek congressional authorization to destroy ISIS militarily.”
Lifson notes that Rand Paul’s foreign affairs advisor [everyone should have one of those…Mr. Kung is mine] explained Paul’s position thusly:
Paul, Burt says, “understands that the United States is a global power and that there are occasions where the United States has to use military force. I think this is all based on an approach to foreign policy that thinks in terms of American interests,” he says. “The thing that makes ISIS a particularly serious challenge is that we do have interests” in the Middle East.
And it’s not that I don’t agree with Paul (although I’d better check with my foreign policy advisor first). It’s that all this libertarian BS about “non-intervention” is just that…BS. There’s a real world out there, libertarians, and perhaps Rand Paul is figuring that out…or he’s just putting together what he thinks are winning policy positions for the upcoming presidential election, choosing them as you would an over-stuffed meal at a buffet, some of them barely fitting onto the plate, ready to cascade onto the floor off the mashed potato pile. Time will tell.
But the problem with any “intervention” is that it will not likely intervene in any useful way. Burdened by the belief that there is some other faction of Islam, just over the next hill, that is a “religion of peace” and thus that we should support, we’ll never come to grips with the fact that Islam is primarily the problem here. “Intervening” without the goal of eradicating Islam as a political influence is just re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. And because almost no one is willing to view it that way, it’s very problematic in regards to sending American soldiers into harm’s way where their hands will be tied, as they are now whenever they are involved with the “religion of peace.”
Either we take on more hard-line Roman tactics of obliteration or we have no business being there and pretending our good intentions (and multicultural delusions) have the power to transform a backward tribal culture into something modern. (And even then, given what passes for “modern” these days, if I were a Muslim, it isn’t something I would want either.)
And Lifson worries me a bit when he says, While I am leaning increasingly in libertarian direction myself….
Don’t do it, Tom. Run — run as fast as you can away from that goofy philosophy.
Brad is editor and chief disorganizer of StubbornThings.
About Author Author Archive Email Follow
Have a blog post you want to share? Click here. • (3442 views)