Rules of engagement.

 

 

Thanks. :thumb:

You and other Rand supporters have been criticizing other likely candidates for making very similar comments. Now that he has belatedly reached the correct position on this issue, you cannot bring yourself to criticize him for it.

 

I am glad that Rand Paul at least seems to be learning what a serious threat the Islamo-fascists are to this country. The threat will not disappear if the U.S. military simply retreats to our own borders. ISIS and similar groups would simply view our exit from the Middle East as a sign of weakness and bring the fight to this country. If Rand Paul understands that now, I am happy for him. He is obviously a much quicker study than Obama is.

 

As always you have missed worded Rand Paul's words. He has asked for limit on executive action on foreign attack and minimal foreign aid .

 

But what Rand is saying now 100% supports his positions before. I honestly have no clue who you support but your candidate lives in make believe land.

Two dead American journalists and Rand Paul is prepared to go to war to destroy ISIS. He should have realized that ISIS was a national security threat at least six months ago without the evidence of two more beheadings. All that has changed is that American public opinion has begun to shift in favor of military action because of recent events. ISIS was and will remain a severe threat to our national security as long as the U.S. allows them to exist.

 

As for not having a navy or air force, what terror organization has ever had a full compliment of military forces? Al Qaeda certainly did not.

 

Also, in case the members of the Rand Paul for president staff have not heard, ISIS's allies in Libya recently became the proud owners of at least 11 commercial jets. That is all the air force that any modern terrorist organization needs to wreak havoc on the civilized world's economy.

 

If ISIS loads a few of those jets with uranium and hundreds of the women and children that it holds hostage and then launches them toward New York, Washington, London, Vatican Ciity, and Paris on 9/11, what are the chances that one or two would make it over large population centers without being shot down?

 

Obama has reportedly been receiving daily security briefings about the danger that ISIS poses to this country for a year or more, and strong military action is well past due.

 

Rand Paul, as an American Senator, should have been criticizing Obama's position on ISIS and calling for military action before the winds of the political polls shifted.

 

BTW, if he decides to run for president, I will be supporting Ted Cruz. I expect that Rand Paul will also be supporting Cruz because I just do not believe that Paul will be a viable candidate because of the foreign policy mess that Obama and Hillary have created.

Edited September 3, 201412 yr by Mitch Rapp

So folks have no problems with American journalists voluntarily putting themselves in harm's way? Then when they are brutally murdered we're supposed to send a calvary over there to kill the perpetrators? Seems pretty stupid to me. I like my life so I make conscious decisions to not put myself into dangerous situations.

So folks have no problems with American journalists voluntarily putting themselves in harm's way? Then when they are brutally murdered we're supposed to send a calvary over there to kill the perpetrators? Seems pretty stupid to me. I like my life so I make conscious decisions to not put myself into dangerous situations.

 

I was just thinking, "Hell, OJ didn't even get probation for the same thing."