Multiple polls suggest that the majority of Americans are leery, if not opposed, to endless interventions around the world. Intervention, it would seem, has an unimpressive track record. The practice of arming rebels has historically led to more instability, death, and a lingering lack of resolution. After all, the Taliban and Al Qaeda were born out of such failed strategies.
Does Rand Paul’s foreign policy bode well for the Republican party? In a word, yes.
If for no other reason, Americans have become increasingly wise to the financial drain of waging interminable wars—and it is no secret that the money jar is empty. Moreover, to ultimately be “successful” in waging war, the people’s support is needed.
The perception that America is imposing its will on foreign nations needs to be clarified: the American government, not its people, holds that position. The current administration, as a continuation of the industrial military complex, is protecting its own self-interest, not the best interest of its citizens. The ugly problem here, among others, is America’s dependence on foreign oil and the need to maintain stability in those oil rich regions. Rand Paul’s position on foreign policy is critical at a time when citizens from across the political spectrum are losing faith in their government’s ability to reflect their best interest. After all, the government’s function is to serve The People, not facilitate the profits of Halliburton.
In a recent article on The Wall Street Journal, Gerald F. Seib explores Senator Paul’s departure from traditional Republican ideology stating:
“Here’s where the conundrum comes in: At a time when many Republicans are trying to portray President Barack Obama as someone who has undermined America’s global leadership position with his cautious engagement in hot spots around the world, Mr. Paul advocates an approach that is, if anything, even more cautious.”
Indeed, caution—along with honesty and conviction—is precisely what is sorely missing in the current administration.
Just as the bewilderment and anger began to set in regarding the VA scandal (an incredible injustice towards those who have served our country), President Obama graced West Point with a defensive speech that further undermined his credibility as Commander in Chief, pushed the fairy tale of global equality, and ultimately garnered less applause than an evening with Carrot Top. He did, after all, suggest to graduating cadets that they really, probably, won’t be needed. More bewilderment. More grandiosity.
In 2008, Obama suggested his speechwriting was better than his own speechwriters. Does he still feel that way? Probably. Americans, however, are tired of silky whispers of things that never come, or things that shouldn’t come—but do. As Mary Poppins would say “No Pie Crust Promises. Easily Made, Easily Broken.” America is desperately craving leadership. Perhaps Obama’s foreign policy best illustrates his rudderless ways. Rand Paul’s leadership, including his position on foreign policy, might just be the thing to buoy the Republican party.
Written by Adam Michael Hamilton
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!