FSP-Rebel
02-12-2013, 01:43 PM
http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/citizen-warrior/2013/feb/12/neoconservatives-rand-paul-foreign-policy/
Paul highlighted Israeli intelligence officials’ warnings that military strikes may be premature, or even cause Iran to accelerate their nuclear program. War, then, should be a last resort, not the first option.
The Senator’s speech was fairly well-received as most Americans feel the Iraq War was a mistake and 70% want immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan. Most believe future conflicts should be absolutely necessary, not built on false intelligence for resource acquisition or spreading “democracy”. Paul challenged Washington to make commitments to national defense, not policing the world.
Career academics from pro-war, pro-intervention militarist outlets blanched at Paul’s advocacy for a constitutionally prudent, fiscally reasonable foreign policy. Writing for the National Review, Frederick Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute chastised Paul’s approach with alarmist threats and condescension.
"America’s foreign policy today is hardly one of militaristic, imperialistic determination to intervene. Apart from the evil “neocons” — virtually none of whom, it should be noted, have advocated attacking Iran, invading Syria or Yemen, or launching other adventures that Senator Paul seems so to fear — it is hard to understand against whom the senator is arguing."
This claim is false. Led by praised think-tank intellectuals, the GOP's neoconservative, militarist wing consistently influences America’s pro-war foreign policy. Bi-partisan support for conflict without question has infected both parties; this lock-step approval for boorish aggression reached its apex during George W. Bush's administration.
Forgetting the tragedies of Vietnam, militarists consistently scream for this generation’s fifth war in the East. Even as American soldiers were surging in Iraq, Senator John McCain (R-AZ) sang of “bombing Iran”, a pet war he’s unwaveringly championed. Joined by Joe Lieberman (I-CT), Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC), and prominent war hawk intellectuals, they constantly call for sending American soldiers into Iran, Syria and Libya.
The U.S. military learned from Iraq that most radicals join terrorist organizations not for religious reasons, but for financial motivations or revenge. Eventually ending brutal sanctions and opening the door to possible diplomacy and trade over the next decade would do more to quell the rise of radicalism than missiles, which perpetuates terroristic violence.
More at link, this lady is a real journalist.
Paul highlighted Israeli intelligence officials’ warnings that military strikes may be premature, or even cause Iran to accelerate their nuclear program. War, then, should be a last resort, not the first option.
The Senator’s speech was fairly well-received as most Americans feel the Iraq War was a mistake and 70% want immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan. Most believe future conflicts should be absolutely necessary, not built on false intelligence for resource acquisition or spreading “democracy”. Paul challenged Washington to make commitments to national defense, not policing the world.
Career academics from pro-war, pro-intervention militarist outlets blanched at Paul’s advocacy for a constitutionally prudent, fiscally reasonable foreign policy. Writing for the National Review, Frederick Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute chastised Paul’s approach with alarmist threats and condescension.
"America’s foreign policy today is hardly one of militaristic, imperialistic determination to intervene. Apart from the evil “neocons” — virtually none of whom, it should be noted, have advocated attacking Iran, invading Syria or Yemen, or launching other adventures that Senator Paul seems so to fear — it is hard to understand against whom the senator is arguing."
This claim is false. Led by praised think-tank intellectuals, the GOP's neoconservative, militarist wing consistently influences America’s pro-war foreign policy. Bi-partisan support for conflict without question has infected both parties; this lock-step approval for boorish aggression reached its apex during George W. Bush's administration.
Forgetting the tragedies of Vietnam, militarists consistently scream for this generation’s fifth war in the East. Even as American soldiers were surging in Iraq, Senator John McCain (R-AZ) sang of “bombing Iran”, a pet war he’s unwaveringly championed. Joined by Joe Lieberman (I-CT), Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC), and prominent war hawk intellectuals, they constantly call for sending American soldiers into Iran, Syria and Libya.
The U.S. military learned from Iraq that most radicals join terrorist organizations not for religious reasons, but for financial motivations or revenge. Eventually ending brutal sanctions and opening the door to possible diplomacy and trade over the next decade would do more to quell the rise of radicalism than missiles, which perpetuates terroristic violence.
More at link, this lady is a real journalist.