Ted Cruz on Syria: US military doesn’t exist to be a policeman for the world

[libertarian101]

This is great news because Rand and Cruz coalition is major force.
Cruz addressed the situation in Syria on Hannity by asserting that the U.S. should only act in its national security interests.
The moral outrage expressed by Secretary of State John Kerry, Cruz suggested, was not enough to launch a military attack against Syria.
“The United States Armed Forces doesn’t exist to be a policeman for the world and I certainly hope the reaction isn’t lobbing some cruise missiles in to disagree with Assad’s murderous actions,” he said.
Cruz also asserted that Obama and Kerry should go the U.S. Congress to make the case for military action.
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/2013/08/27/sen-cruz-us-needs-focus-protecting-national-security
Ted Cruz: Syria, Obamacare ‘tied’
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/ted-cruz-syria-obamacare-96009.html?hp=t3_3

[Christian Liberty]

But Cruz has already advocated for intervention. So what's he doing now?

[GunnyFreedom]

But Cruz has already advocated for intervention. So what's he doing now?

IIRC when that thread was posted a bunch of people were saying Cruz was being taken out of context. Could be his position has matured some. Could be a little of both.

[Christian Liberty]

IIRC when that thread was posted a bunch of people were saying Cruz was being taken out of context. Could be his position has matured some. Could be a little of both.

Could he be lying/not really on our side? Because that's honestly what I think.

[twomp]

Ted Cruz was trained by the Bush family. Need I say more? Before Bush 2 was elected, he was against nation building etc... Then he became president. Before Obama (Bush 3) was elected, he was anti-war, anti-drug war etc etc... Then he became president. See a pattern?

[TaftFan]

Ted Cruz was trained by the Bush family. Need I say more? Before Bush 2 was elected, he was against nation building etc... Then he became president. Before Obama (Bush 3) was elected, he was anti-war, anti-drug war etc etc... Then he became president. See a pattern?

Ok, I have found he is associated with a George P. Bush PAC. Now how is this being trained by the Bush family?

[fr33]

Ok, I have found he is associated with a George P. Bush PAC. Now how is this being trained by the Bush family?

He and his wife both did work for Dubya. Basic google searches will uncover it for you.

[twomp]

Ok, I have found he is associated with a George P. Bush PAC. Now how is this being trained by the Bush family?

Did you look on his Wiki page?


In 1998, Cruz served as private counsel for Congressman John Boehner during Boehner's lawsuit against Congressman Jim McDermott for releasing a tape recording of a Boehner telephone conversation.

Cruz joined the Bush-Cheney campaign in 1999 as a domestic policy adviser, advising President George W. Bush on a wide range of policy and legal matters, including civil justice, criminal justice, constitutional law, immigration, and government reform

Cruz assisted in assembling the Bush legal team, devise strategy, and draft pleadings in the Florida and U.S. Supreme Courts during the 2000 Florida presidential recounts, winning twice in the U.S. Supreme Court.

After President Bush took office, Cruz served as an associate deputy attorney general in the U.S. Justice Department and as the director of policy planning at the U.S. Federal Trade Commission.



I didn't even bother looking into his wife but I hear Bush's bankster buddies have a nice setup for her at Goldman Sachs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Cruz

[Anti-Neocon]

In before someone absurdly states "look, see, Cruz is better than Rand on Syria!"

[AuH20]

Ted Cruz was trained by the Bush family. Need I say more? Before Bush 2 was elected, he was against nation building etc... Then he became president. Before Obama (Bush 3) was elected, he was anti-war, anti-drug war etc etc... Then he became president. See a pattern?

Pat Buchanan worked for Richard Nixon. Nuff said. Secondly, everybody would work for a presidential admin (including me) if you can get the work. It's a great resume builder. Critics are inventing attacks against Cruz when his record is very good thus far. Here's a hint. Attack him on actual bad votes instead of some shadowy tree of associations. I'm probably 8 degrees separated from George W. Bush and I hate the man.

[jtstellar]

please don't make me feel like i'm reading dailypaul jesus christ..

c'mon comments, don't make us all dumber by reading them. and how can your misreading of someone the first go around be the argument basis of his 'morphing position' or 'later change of mind'? this is brain numbingly stupid

[twomp]

Pat Buchanan worked for Richard Nixon. Nuff said. Secondly, everybody would work for a presidential admin (including me) if you can get the work. It's a great resume builder. Critics are inventing attacks against Cruz when his record his stellar thus far. Here's a hint. Attack him on actual bad votes instead of some shadowy tree of associations. I'm probably 8 degrees separated from George W. Bush and I hate the man.

Obama voted against the Iraq War. In 2005, Obama voted AGAINST the extension of the Patriot Act. See where "good votes" and bad associations got us.

[AuH20]

Obama voted against the Iraq War. In 2005, Obama voted AGAINST the extension of the Patriot Act. See where "good votes" and bad associations got us.

Cruz has been in office less than a year. Let's see him finish at least a half of his term before you nail him to the cross. Actions and deeds > who you worked for. We have lunatics who want to primary him. Lunatics will a capital 'L.'

[Christian Liberty]

In before someone absurdly states "look, see, Cruz is better than Rand on Syria!"

"Absurdly" would be putting it lightly:p

Pat Buchanan worked for Richard Nixon. Nuff said. Secondly, everybody would work for a presidential admin (including me) if you can get the work. It's a great resume builder. Critics are inventing attacks against Cruz when his record is very good thus far. Here's a hint. Attack him on actual bad votes instead of some shadowy tree of associations. I'm probably 8 degrees separated from George W. Bush and I hate the man.

I have a problem with Cruz's hawkish rhetoric, including the statement in my sig.

[ManOfSteel]

This is the exact same thing he's been saying all along - that the chemical weapons in Syria, if allowed to remain there, pose a threat to the national security of the United States. He didn't mention in this interview that he favors taking steps to destroy or remove them, but he didn't deny it either. It's fine to disagree with his policy preference, but let's not act like he's being inconsistent or dishonest - he's not. He doesn't think bombing Syria to show our disapproval is a good idea, hence the "policeman" quote, but he does want us to intervene militarily for the sake of preventing chemical weapons from falling into the hands of terrorists.

[AuH20]

Moving the dial little by little:

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/08/28/ted-cruz-and-rand-paul-may-be-the-future-of-gop-foreign-policy

[twomp]

Cruz has been in office less than a year. Let's see him finish at least a half of his term before you nail him to the cross. Actions and deeds > who you worked for. We have lunatics who want to primary him. Lunatics will a capital 'L.'

That's fair. Where did I say to primary him? His statements on foreign intervention and his past associations make him suspect simply because history has shown that. Both our previous presidents have said great things but they did a 180 when they came into power. I'm sorry that this upsets your cheer leading of Ted Cruz but it still needs to be brought up.

[AuH20]

That's fair. Where did I say to primary him? His statements on foreign intervention and his past associations make him suspect simply because history has shown that. Both our previous presidents have said great things but they did a 180 when they came into power. I'm sorry that this upsets your cheer leading of Ted Cruz but it still needs to be brought up.

I didn't imply you but I've seen the suggestion. Secondly, I'm not cheerleading anyone. His voting record thus far stands by itself.

[twomp]

I didn't imply you but I've seen the suggestion. Secondly, I'm not cheerleading anyone. His voting record thus far stands by itself.

Fair enough. Can't argue that. His voting record has been pretty good so far.

[AuH20]

Fair enough. Can't argue that. His voting record has been pretty good so far.

If he goes to the dark side, then he will be bashed and his associations will be questioned.

[twomp]

If he goes to the dark side, then he will be bashed and his associations will be questioned.

That would be reasonable if it weren't for the fact that we as a country have been fooled twice already. If the media continues it's push of Ted Cruz, it might just happen for a 3rd time and we won't get to see his dark side before it's too late.

[radiofriendly]

This is wonderful news. And, yes, let's not become the DailyPaul here...

[twomp]

please don't make me feel like i'm reading dailypaul jesus christ..

c'mon comments, don't make us all dumber by reading them. and how can your misreading of someone the first go around be the argument basis of his 'morphing position' or 'later change of mind'? this is brain numbingly stupid

I don't visit the daily paul but I don't see how that has anything to do with this. If you wanted to visit a forum where there are only praises of Ted Cruz and nothing else, maybe you should visit another site. From what I can see around here, NO ONE is above reproach, not even Ron Paul himself.

If tomorrow Ron Paul comes out and says the same thing Ted Cruz said and wants our government to go into Syria and "take out the chemical weapons." He would receive the same criticism that Ted Cruz receives. This is Ron Paul forums after all, dissent is welcome here.

[JCDenton0451]

I still don't trust Cruz. But I feel like he really stole Rand's line here.

[Brett85]

Obama voted against the Iraq War. In 2005, Obama voted AGAINST the extension of the Patriot Act. See where "good votes" and bad associations got us.


Obama wasn't in the Senate when the Iraq War authorization was voted on.

[rich34]

But Cruz has already advocated for intervention. So what's he doing now?

Right, speaking outta both sides of his arse....

[thoughtomator]

The #1 chemical weapon national security problem for the United States is called Monsanto. Also the #1 biological weapon problem too.

[mosquitobite]

That would be reasonable if it weren't for the fact that we as a country have been fooled twice already. If the media continues it's push of Ted Cruz, it might just happen for a 3rd time and we won't get to see his dark side before it's too late.

Will agree with this statement.

[compromise]

Cruz has been in office less than a year. Let's see him finish at least a half of his term before you nail him to the cross. Actions and deeds > who you worked for. We have lunatics who want to primary him. Lunatics will a capital 'L.'

I prefer to call them Fanatics, with a capital 'F'.

Although I prefer Rand, Ted Cruz is one of the greatest Senators in the history of the United States and would make an excellent President.

[Warlord]

I prefer to call them Fanatics, with a capital 'F'.

Although I prefer Rand, Ted Cruz is one of the greatest Senators in the history of the United States and would make an excellent President.

No he's not and no he wouldn't.

[Warlord]

Ted Cruz was trained by the Bush family. Need I say more? Before Bush 2 was elected, he was against nation building etc... Then he became president. Before Obama (Bush 3) was elected, he was anti-war, anti-drug war etc etc... Then he became president. See a pattern?

This is his more of his game.

[compromise]

No he's not and no he wouldn't.

He's more conservative than Goldwater on many issues.

[Christian Liberty]

I prefer to call them Fanatics, with a capital 'F'.


Quit the personal attacks.


No he's not and no he wouldn't.

Pretty much all that needs to be said.

[FSP-Rebel]

Moving the dial little by little:

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/08/28/ted-cruz-and-rand-paul-may-be-the-future-of-gop-foreign-policy
https://twitter.com/8Atlas2/status/373118598262161409

[RabbitMan]

Throwing my 2 cents in about being happy for Cruz for expanding the Liberty Coalition in foreign policy, but not being very impressed with him otherwise.

I really abhor personal attacks, but these are polticians and their game is selling their personality. He comes off like a used car salesman. I've heard so much about his intelligence, but on a rather unfriendly Meet the Press where the topic was Healthcare he came off...well...not very, with an uncomfortable smugness about him. I get this strange feeling that he will hit the same chords as Herman Cain, which is rather dangerous in my mind, as we need these people on board on OUR side and Cruz is popping up everywhere lately and not saying a whole to advance the narrative we started.

[jtstellar]

Cruz has been in office less than a year. Let's see him finish at least a half of his term before you nail him to the cross. Actions and deeds > who you worked for. We have lunatics who want to primary him. Lunatics will a capital 'L.'
I prefer to call them Fanatics, with a capital 'F'.

Quit the personal attacks.


http://gifs.gifbin.com/012010/1264091579_kirk_rofl.gif

[twomp]

Obama wasn't in the Senate when the Iraq War authorization was voted on.

Correct but he did vote the right way when it came time to fund for the expansion of the war. If Ted Cruz voted for it, you would approve would you not?


Barack Obama was not a member of the US Senate at the time. Thus he did not vote on the invasion. But as a member of the state senate in Illinois, he expressed his vocal opposition, calling it a foolish decision by President Bush; and when he joined the U.S. senate in 2004, he voted against the surge and against additional funding for expanding the war.

[juleswin]

Someone took a peek at the national polls. Bad, bad senator, you should know this without cheating :)

[ronaldo23]

Ted Cruz worked for Bush, but he's always bragging in his speeches about how he went against and sued the Bush Administration on some issue while working under him. Can't remember what it was.

[Brett85]

Correct but he did vote the right way when it came time to fund for the expansion of the war. If Ted Cruz voted for it, you would approve would you not?

I certainly don't know what you mean by that. I don't approve of what we did in Iraq. I also don't think that President Obama voted to defund the war in Iraq. I don't think he had the guts to do that.

[enhanced_deficit]

But Cruz has already advocated for intervention. So what's he doing now?

Is he flip flopping ? Here is calling for US military intervention in Syria just weeks ago soon after his meeting with Israeli groups:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=rx83YwkLAp0#t=39


“We know Assad has used these weapons, and there is good reason to suspect the al Qaida-affiliated rebels would use them as well if they could get their hands on them. This poses an intolerable threat not only to our friends in the region, but also to the United States. We need to be developing a clear, practical plan to go in, locate the weapons, secure or destroy them, and then get out. The United States should be firmly in the lead to make sure the job is done right.”- Rafael Cruz



HOUSTON, TX — U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) released the following statement regarding Syria:

Today, the legislative bodies of two of our closest allies are engaged in emergency meetings on the prospect of military engagement in Syria. In Great Britain, Prime Minister David Cameron has called the House of Commons home from vacation to deliberate over the use of force in Syria. In Israel, the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee is reviewing potential responses should Israel be attacked in the fallout over action in Syria.

In Washington, DC, crickets are chirping.
It may be that there is a compelling case to be made that intervention in Syria is necessary to defend U.S. interests.

http://therightscoop.com/ted-cruz-crickets-are-chirping-in-washington-while-israel-and-great-britain-are-debating-syria/

[Brett85]

He didn't flip flop. His position was just misconstrued and misintrepreted by a lot of people here.

[ManOfSteel]

He didn't flip flop. His position was just misconstrued and misintrepreted by a lot of people here.

Actually, I feel like people are misconstruing his position NOW. Nothing he's said recently (including the "US military doesn't exist to be a policeman for the world" line) has indicated that he doesn't believe it would be worthwhile/in the national security interests of the United States to invade Syria, locate any chemical weapons that may exist there, and secure or destroy them. In fact, based on his wording/phrasing in the interview, I'm now very confident that he does in fact believe this.

I'm a big Ted Cruz fan/defender in general, but fooling ourselves into believing that he's in lockstep with Rand on foreign policy would be unwise. It's beneficial to have them linked in this way for the time being, but when Cruz runs for President, he's going to use a lot of rhetoric that we like hearing, and it'll be important to remember that he's no Rand Paul. This will be considered a good thing by many, but libertarians/paleocons shouldn't be tricked into shifting allegiances lightly. Rand is qualitatively different from Cruz on a number of issues, chief among these being foreign policy, civil liberties, the drug war, and gay marriage.

Basically, if you believe in a "robust" and "muscular" foreign policy, are unconcerned about the NSA's program of spying on American civilians who have not been accused of committing a crime, think people should go to prison for decades because they got caught smoking weed, and want the federal government to force the states to use one definition of marriage over another, then Ted Cruz is your guy. If you think we should have a thoughtful and restrained foreign policy, believe the Fourth Amendment means what it says, are concerned by the idea of teenagers having their lives ruined because of youthful mistakes, and would prefer that marriage be handle at the state level, then support Rand Paul.

[enhanced_deficit]

He didn't flip flop. His position was just misconstrued and misintrepreted by a lot of people here.

So his position is same today as it was few weeks ago.. that US and allies need to GO IN Syria with US in leadership role?


“We know Assad has used these weapons, and there is good reason to suspect the al Qaida-affiliated rebels would use them as well if they could get their hands on them. This poses an intolerable threat not only to our friends in the region, but also to the United States. We need to be developing a clear, practical plan to go in, locate the weapons, secure or destroy them, and then get out. The United States should be firmly in the lead to make sure the job is done right.”- Rafael Cruz

[ManOfSteel]

So his position is same today as it was few weeks ago.. that US and allies need to GO IN Syria with US in leadership role?

Yes, this is still what he believes, but for obvious reasons he has decided to employ language and rhetoric that implies it is not. What about this is confusing to you?

[Warlord]

Yes Cruz was calling for an invasion. He's an interventionist but on domestic policy he sounds like Rand because he's going to steal/compete for the same kind of voters. He's a Maverick PAC infiltrator with a Goldman Saches wife. Think they'd end the Fed or change much? ha

[LibertyEagle]

Since he's my Senator, I called his office. They said that he does agree that the President must get congressional approval before taking any action.

[enhanced_deficit]

Yes, this is still what he believes, but for obvious reasons he has decided to employ language and rhetoric that implies it is not. What about this is confusing to you?

Nothing about this is confusing to me, within few minutes of looking up his views it became obvious that Rafael Cruz was a next generation camouflaged neocon.
He appears to be trying to ride the anti-neocon wave kind of like neocons plant Obama rode the anti-war wave in 2007.

[69360]

Nice thread. More guilt by association by the if you don't agree with my impossibly nuanced view 100% I hate you crowd. Carry on.

[enhanced_deficit]

Since he's my Senator, I called his office. They said that he does agree that the President must get congressional approval before taking any action.

Congress supported US invasion of Iraq (based on lies and bogus WMD claims), just as Rafael Ted Cruz supports US invasion of Syria.

[gnuschler]

I prefer to call them Fanatics, with a capital 'F'.

Although I prefer Rand, Ted Cruz is one of the greatest Senators in the history of the United States and would make an excellent President.

You are wasting your time. Rational people who want to see Ron Paul's vision for America realized know that we need to build a coalition of liberty supporters. Ted Cruz has stood with Rand Paul on virtually EVERYTHING. Those who call themselves Ron Paul supporters and wake up every morning looking for reasons to tear into the likes of Ted Cruz are not really part of the coalition. Engaging such Fanatics is a distraction from our efforts and a waste of time.

[AuH20]

You are wasting your time. Rational people who want to see Ron Paul's vision for America realized know that we need to build a coalition of liberty supporters. Ted Cruz has stood with Rand Paul on virtually EVERYTHING. Those who call themselves Ron Paul supporters and wake up every morning looking for reasons to tear into the likes of Ted Cruz are not really part of the coalition. Engaging such Fanatics is a distraction from our efforts and a waste of time.

Ted Cruz gets more hate threads than Graham or McCain. LOL

[gnuschler]

He's a Maverick PAC infiltrator with a Goldman Saches wife. Think they'd end the Fed or change much? ha

Wow ... just Wow! I've worked for three investment banks, including Jefferies. I guess I also have no interest in returning to a gold standard!

I am new here, and I had hoped to find intelligent discussions on strategic initiatives for pursuing the liberty agenda. Unfortunately, it looks like this board is filled adolescents.

[69360]

You are wasting your time. Rational people who want to see Ron Paul's vision for America realized know that we need to build a coalition of liberty supporters. Ted Cruz has stood with Rand Paul on virtually EVERYTHING. Those who call themselves Ron Paul supporters and wake up every morning looking for reasons to tear into the likes of Ted Cruz are not really part of the coalition. Engaging such Fanatics is a distraction from our efforts and a waste of time.

Good post from somebody new. +rep

[Warlord]

Wow ... just Wow! I've worked for three investment banks, including Jefferies. I guess I also have no interest in returning to a gold standard!

I am new here, and I had hoped to find intelligent discussions on strategic initiatives for pursuing the liberty agenda. Unfortunately, it looks like this board is filled adolescents.

Maybe you should start ************s then?

[Warlord]

Cruz is no friend of liberty. Check his wife and her connections plus Maverick PAC he started with George P. Bush. If he runs for president he's taking votes from Rand

[ManOfSteel]

Nothing about this is confusing to me, within few minutes of looking up his views it became obvious that Rafael Cruz was a next generation camouflaged neocon.
He appears to be trying to ride the anti-neocon wave kind of like neocons plant Obama rode the anti-war wave in 2007.

Comparisons to Obama are extremely apt. He really is in numerous ways the Republican Obama.

[ManOfSteel]

Nice thread. More guilt by association by the if you don't agree with my impossibly nuanced view 100% I hate you crowd. Carry on.

lol wut

Do you think Ted Cruz believes the US military ought to secure or destroy Assad's chemical weapons? Simple yes or no question.

[ManOfSteel]

Congress supported US invasion of Iraq (based on lies and bogus WMD claims), just as Rafael Ted Cruz supports US invasion of Syria.

100% this. It's good that he's mouthing the right rhetoric wrt Presidential war powers, but since the same is true of Sean Hannity, this really isn't as big a victory as some people seem to think it is. Cruz would almost certainly be supporting a President Romney if he were taking the exact same actions Obama is taking, and if he's somehow elected in 2016, he almost certainly won't ask for Congressional permission if he wants to intervene and isn't sure he'd win the vote.

To reiterate: Ted Cruz is an awesome Senator and much better than virtually every other member of that body, but he is no Rand Paul. Continue supporting him when he says/does the right thing, but don't for a minute think about shifting loyalties if you care about and support Ron Paul's stance on foreign policy and civil liberties.

[ManOfSteel]

Cruz is no friend of liberty. Check his wife and her connections plus Maverick PAC he started with George P. Bush. If he runs for president he's taking votes from Rand

Cruz is absolutely a friend of liberty; he's simply not a libertarian, nor does he agree with Ron/Rand Paul on every issue. These statements are not in conflict with one another.

Ted Cruz has neither a duty nor a responsibility to help Rand Paul become President; that's likely what he'll end up doing eventually, but he is first and foremost out for himself, and there is nothing wrong with that. Ted Cruz wants Ted Cruz to become President, and the way to do that is by running for it, even if a side effect is to diminish Rand's chances. I trust Cruz to drop out and endorse Rand if/when the time is right; if 2016 isn't his year, he'll want to give it another go in the future, and that will be difficult if he alienates too many Rand Paul supporters.

[Tywysog Cymru]

If Ted Cruz wants to change his position on foreign policy, we should encourage him, sometimes people's positions change in light of closer examination of the issues.

[ManOfSteel]

If Ted Cruz wants to change his position on foreign policy, we should encourage him, sometimes people's positions change in light of closer examination of the issues.

We should encourage him to continue voting correctly, sure. We should not be fooled into thinking that these votes reflect his thinking or that he is becoming a non-interventionist at heart. He's simply saying the politically popular thing in order to garner support for a 2016 run.

Ted Cruz as a Senator = A+
Ted Cruz for Presidnet = F-

Spread the word far and wide. You love Ted Cruz and support him 100%, but he SHOULD NOT RUN FOR PRESIDENT.

[Bastiat's The Law]

Ted Cruz gets more hate threads than Graham or McCain. LOL

Makes you wonder. :rolleyes:

[ManOfSteel]

Ted Cruz gets more hate threads than Graham or McCain. LOL


Makes you wonder. :rolleyes:

This happens because many people perceive him to be a dishonest snake-in-the-grass, or a potential traitor. At least Graham and McCain are honest and open about the beliefs, or so the thinking goes - Ted Cruz feels the same way they do, but he's tricking people into believing otherwise.

To be clear, I don't think Cruz is cut from the same cloth as Graham and McCain, but neither is he a stalwart opponent of foreign adventurism or a strident defender of civil liberties in the same way that Rand Paul is. It's perfectly reasonable and understandable for people who hear others lump Cruz and Rand together to be skeptical/cautious. I agree that many of them take it too far though.

[enhanced_deficit]

Ted Cruz as a Senator = A+
Ted Cruz for Presidnet = F-



You seem to know the guy well. On a side note, is he a Zionist like most supporters of Pastor Hagee ?

http://www.jta.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Sen-Cruz-Monday-Night.jpg




At recent war fever rally organized by controversial Zionist Pastor John Hagee, Cruz saluted Hagee and prayed "God Bless Pastor Hagee for his tremendous leadership and primciple".

Video: CUFI's Pastor John Hagee Praying for more War in the name of Jesus

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udBM22ZhxBI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udBM22ZhxBI