New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Rand Paul's PRE-taped response - LOL

oh, I see, your problem is you can't read English.
Paul said the opposite of what you thought.

we can’t do nothing, but
I supported the decision to go to war with Afghanistan after our nation was attacked on 9/11. Colin Powell wrote in his autobiography: “War should be the politics of last resort. And when we go to war, we should have a purpose that our people understand and support.” I believe that he had it right. America should only go to war to win.

War should occur only when America is attacked, when it is threatened or when American interests are attacked or threatened. I don’t think the situation in Syria passes that test. Even the State Department argues that “there’s no military solution here that’s good for the Syrian people, and that the best path forward is a political solution.”

The U.S. should not fight a war to save face. I will not vote to send young men and women to sacrifice life and limb for stalemate. I will not vote to send our nation’s best and brightest to fight for anything less than victory. If American interests are at stake, then our goal should not be stalemate.

If American interests are at stake, then it is incumbent upon those advocating for military action to convince Congress and the American people of that threat. Too often, the debate begins and ends with an assertion that our national interest is at stake without any evidence of that assertion. The burden of proof lies with those who wish to engage in war.


Read more: http://ideas.time.com/2013/09/04/sen-rand-paul-why-im-voting-no-on-syria/#ixzz2emc8SRMe

As per usual, your post is crap.
 
Let Russia increase and spread its rule in the MiddleEast, that is what Rand Paul and these current Right Wingers are advocating.... (dummasses)
 
Back
Top