In a perfect world, maybe, but the events taking place in the Ukraine and Iran, to name a few, heavily suggest the impossibility of an exclusive America. That is no new concept, though, and Paul knows this. He proved so when explaining why he now supports the use of sanctions in Iran and why some countries should not be allowed to hold that power, even if America promotes a more hands-off strategy moving forward.
“The big debate over Iran, and it is a very emotional debate, is the debate on if Iran should get nuclear weapons,” Paul said. “I think it could destabilize them, at least. Then the question is, how do you try to respond and prevent them from having nuclear weapons?”
Paul put the options plainly.
“You can do nothing, you can do a little bit, which I think would be sanctions, or you can have an all-out war where you invade,” Paul said. “I did finally come to the conclusion that doing something was better than doing nothing.”
Bingo. There it is. The one we have been waiting for. This is the highly sought-out Rand Paul answer to the foreign affairs question surrounding his political name. With it, Nazi-isolationism goes out the window, but not without a firm understanding of what direct actions against a foreign nation entail for us.
“I still do argue very strenuously… that we have to be very careful about having a preemptive war in Iran in the sense of you might end up with intense consequences,” Paul said.
So, what can we take away from this Rand Paul character? Simply this: War is the most important diplomatic decision we can make. Therefore, tread carefully, even with hypothetical situations.
JD Hancock via Flickr Creative Commons)
Finally someone on Capital
Hill is willing to speak out and
stand firm for our personal
freedoms, our God-given
rights and all man's equality.
Here you can keep up with the
latest insights and events in
Paul World, helping our hero
restore the Constitution...
and take our country back!