-1 vote

Troubling piece on Rand Paul and Israel...

5 years, 5 months and 5 days ago I joined Daily Paul because I had finally found a candidate that reflected my views on foreign policy... Dr. Ron Paul... I haven't posted in a while, but, read DailyPaul daily and I'm constantly looking at the viability of Rand Paul in 2016. I found this article troubling on AntiWar.com by Justin Raimando.

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2013/01/17/is-rand-paul-a...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Rand Paul is a

Rand Paul is a non-interventionist just like his father. Gaymondo wants us to intervene into the Gaza strip.

Thomas Jefferson 1796, 1800, 1804; James Madison 1808, 1812; Ron Paul 1988, 2008, 2012; Rand Paul 2016.

Why are you posting a new

Why are you posting a new version of the exact same topic?

I Don't Think...

... Either of them should of posted this article.

We need to get an early start on 2016: Support Rand PAC 2016

www.randpac2016.com

https://twitter.com/randpac2016

Actually

the thread he linked to was posted several hours before this one.

A signature used to be here!

Whelp

this thread wins anyway. Let the free markets choose. : )

true

Out with the old, in with the new(er)...

A signature used to be here!

Just a thought -

I try to stay away from the Rand Paul arguments because I keep thinking the following:

What was it that the higher ups in the GOP told Ron Paul to change? His stance on foreign policy (aid-Israel, wars).

Could it be that Rand agrees with his father, but just thinks that the ONLY way to be taken seriously and be given a REAL chance into consideration by TPTB for a possible White House run is to agree, or at least not want to do a complete 360 on foreign policy?

Politics is a game - a dirty one. What if that's what Rand is doing - infiltrating? What if he's doing the same exact thing that some of our stealth delegates did during the primaries in order to become (Romney)delegates?

What if he plays the game, tells the GOP what they want to hear for these next 4 years, and once elected, gives them the finger? Maybe, just maybe it's a means to an end.

Just a theory.

And no I don't believe in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy, but I do believe that anything is possible, and though he's no Ron Paul, Dr. Paul did raise him and still maintains a close relationship with his son. If Rand was really THAT misguided, I think SOME kind of disappointment would show on Dr. Paul's face.

Remember; WE may be ready (awake), but is the rest of America ready? I think Rand is targeting those that are half awake - those that said "I like Ron Paul, but not his foreign policy". I think they'll eventually come around and by then, Dr. Paul's foreign policy will be more acceptable.

I have a great respect

for Justin Raimondo, but sometimes he gets a little sensationalist. Like this recent article where he accuses all Israeli opposition to African immigration as resulting from racism, rather than simply being concerned about illegal immigration. http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2013/01/06/israels-anti-b...

This is much the same. Rand Paul, like his father, has a non-interventionist approach to foreign policy. He faithfully practices that, and Raimondo accuses him of being a "Christian Zionist".

Rand Paul wants to end aide to Israel. Who other than Chuck Hagel and his father vocally state that? Raimondo criticizes his gradualist approach.

He goes to Israel with a Christian group that is not wild about gay marriage. That is nothing compared to what Hagel said about the ambassador to Luxembourg and Raimondo loves him.

It's like he felt the need to dig up some criticisms of Rand.

BMWJIM's picture

!

?

1976-1982 USMC, Having my hands in the soil keeps me from soiling my hands on useless politicians.

I have been troubled by Rand's statements...

on many foreign-policy related questions. But I'd ask, why does Raimondo have so much credibility? He just writes articles!

Now, I hate any perceived pandering to the Israeli/neocon lobby, whatsoever. And the anti-civilian sanctions vs Iran are disgusting. Nevertheless, Rand Paul is a constant voice for moderation in t he Senate. As a Christian, I too, would like to spend time in the Holy Land if I had the time/money- so its not fair to berate the Senator for that alone.

Raimondo, like Kokesh and some others, have been chomping at the bit to demonize Rand Paul since he was elected into the Senate. I would suggest that the Senator doesnt expect to get their votes in 2012, he wants YOURS

Visit https://soundcloud.com/politics-of-freedom for all recent Ron Paul interviews, speeches, debates, forums, panels, press conferences, news coverage, and Texas Straight Talk updates!

"Terrorism is the war of the poor, while war is the terrorism of

SteveMT's picture

One of your points I would take issue with.

Have they "have been chomping at the bit to demonize Rand Paul since he was elected into the Senate" or since his endorsement of Romney? I don't know for sure, but the latter reason would make more sense. The Campaign ended abruptly and ugly, then this endorsement quickly happened. Is this the reason for their animosity?

Maybe Raimondo

should have written an article criticizing the endorsement of Romney? Instead, he edited quotes to make Rand look like a gay hating "Christian Zionist" who wants to give US aide to Israel. None of these criticisms are true.

This Is Almost Funny...

... do you guys understand this??? What this article is saying is that we should not just stand by and remain neutral but rather that we need get involved to make sure that the Palestinians have a fair-shake in all the "injustice" that is going on.

Non-interventionism is non-interventionism. All Rand Paul said was that we need to remain neutral and not tell Israel what and what not they should do (sounds familiar???).

And as to the foreign aid... it only makes sense that we should start cutting the aid to folks who are burning our countries flag. (Maybe it doesn't and me and Rand Paul are the crazy ones. Or maybe NOT!)

We need to get an early start on 2016: Support Rand PAC 2016

www.randpac2016.com

https://twitter.com/randpac2016

SteveMT's picture

Burning flags is much better than control of our foreign policy.

The flag-burning nations don't have a bunch of dual-nationals embedded in the highest echelons of power of this country including the media. They control and manipulate what we see, hear, think, and ultimately form our opinions about. Ending foreign aid unilaterally to the flag-burning countries first will only stir up more trouble if this aid is not cut uniformly for everyone obtaining it, IMO.

Okay fine then.

So we should remain neutral on the products bought by food stamp recipients. Booze, cigarettes, cocaine, and heroine should be none of our business. Non-interventionism is non-interventionism. BUT! - if the recipient's children post anti-welfare comments on the Net, why then, no food stamps for you! Very rational indeed.

reply

First, I find it a bit odd how you put injustice in quotation marks when referring to the Palestinians.

You're correct that the US should remain neutral in all possible situations, but that's not what's going on here, is it? People often justify not cutting aid to Israel 'at first' because they're supposedly our allies. Let me ask you; just what have the Israelis ever done for us? Not *to* us, *for* us?

If we were to truly to remain neutral on the matter, then cut aid to ALL countries involved. Otherwise, it's clearly picking sides.

Also, have you ever stopped and wondered just WHY those other countries burn our flag (and the Israeli flag)? Because we burn their homes. Because we burn their loved ones. Because we burn their land.

But hey, let's complain about them burning a piece of cloth.

A signature used to be here!

Ok...

... why I put injustice in quotation marks is because it is so loosely thrown around by both sides of the argument.

As to Israel it is the lack of what they have done for us that makes them in a sense more of an ally.

As to your point on "WHY those countries burn our flag", that is just it. We are at war with them. We attack them, they attack us... so why should we give them foreign aid. (let me be clear I am totally opposed to the wars, but it is what it is)

We need to get an early start on 2016: Support Rand PAC 2016

www.randpac2016.com

https://twitter.com/randpac2016

reply

why I put injustice in quotation marks is because it is so loosely thrown around by both sides of the argument.

Okay, fair enough. I admit I figured you had a bias, since most of us do one way or the other.

As to Israel it is the lack of what they have done for us that makes them in a sense more of an ally.

In what sense? Could you explain for me, because I don't see it that way at all.

What about the things they do *to* us, such as refusing to sign any treaties with us, or the fact that they spy on us more than any other nation (even the CIA admits this). What about the USS Liberty? What about Benny's "America...she is easily moved" comments? What about the members of Congress with dual citizenship? What about a former Prime Minister admitting that they throw around the term "Anti-Semite" to silence critics of Israel in the US? What about AIPAC?

Make no mistake, Israel is *not* our ally.

As to your point on "WHY those countries burn our flag", that is just it. We are at war with them. We attack them, they attack us... so why should we give them foreign aid. (let me be clear I am totally opposed to the wars, but it is what it is)

No, we're actually not at war with them, since war was never declared. It's like saying the Native Americans hated the colonists because they were at war with us. No, they were defending themselves! We were stealing their land, just as we're doing to the Arabs now.

I didn't down vote you, but I really think you should look into this issue a bit deeper.

A signature used to be here!

Just Because Me And You See...

... things differently does not mean I need to "look into this a little deeper".

Israel has their own interests at heart as does any other Nation. Yes, they spy on us as I am darn well sure we spy on them. But in the sense of fighting in wars, (whether unconstitutional or not) (again I DO NOT endorse them) they would more then likely be on our side then lets say Egypt or Iran. So they may not be an ally but it would be more worthwhile to cut aid to countries that vocally endorse harm to us then a Nation who is at the best tolerant of us.

Very well then, I will say that we are in a undeclared, unconstitutional, morally wrong, "fight" with these Nations.
But... whether they are "defending themselves" or fighting back, do you want Rand Paul to say, "since this is an unjustified war I think we should help the enemies fight us and fund them with weapons against our troops while we cut aid to Israel first because they are not wishing our evil government any harm"????.

We need to get an early start on 2016: Support Rand PAC 2016

www.randpac2016.com

https://twitter.com/randpac2016

Oh, how quickly we forget!

Do you want Rand Paul to say, "since this is an unjustified war I think we should help the enemies fight us and fund them with weapons against our troops while we cut aid to Israel first because they are not wishing our evil government any harm"????.

Yes, that's exactly what i had in mind. /eyeroll

What should he say? How about this:

My friends, you don’t need to do nation building in Israel. We’re already built. You don’t need to export democracy to Israel. We’ve already got it. You don’t need to send American troops to defend Israel. We defend ourselves."

~ Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu,
May 2011 before the U.S. Congress

How would that be to the neocons for a reminder? Oh, how quickly we forget!

Again, what about AIPAC? Our foreign policy is a huge part of what is destroying this nation, and Israel is at the very center of our foreign policy. How many politicians have stated "I stand with Israel". Now how many have said "I will stand with America"?

If that's not Rand's angle then so be it, but I can't get behind it. Between this and the Iranian sanctions, I'm having a hard time swallowing the Rand Pill. Maybe he isn't interested in attempting a 180 on FP, which is understandable, but it's a step backward from my POV.

If others are okay with it or see it as "playing chess" or whatever then I don't really care.

A signature used to be here!

You Quote Netanyahu...

... and you don't realize that this is exactly what Rand Paul is saying. "Leave Israel alone" is what Rand Paul has been saying and frankly is exactly what Netanyahu said.

However in that quote he says nothing about foreign aid. And yet Rand Paul is still saying we need to cut their foreign aid, even though Israel may in a sense control our foreign policy.

We need to get an early start on 2016: Support Rand PAC 2016

www.randpac2016.com

https://twitter.com/randpac2016

I challenge Israel's Defenders to find one untruth in this vid!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_d33-Lk5Zbw : War by Deception, by Ryan Dawson. The best film on 911 or the Iraq War.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVtIPCIvsdc: shorter version, focused on Israel's involvement

The evidence for Israel's involvement in 9/11 is overwhelming. I dare you to watch this documentary and find ONE thing that is factually incorrect. Ryan Dawson uses official documents and news reports to uncover the real perpetrators of 9/11.

I Will Quote Directly From The Article...

...

"‘It is not up to the U.S. to dictate’ to mayors and West Bank officials where housing goes', Paul added."

"The answers need to come from the participants who live on the ground in these areas. I think it’s just presumptuous and arrogant of us to think, well, we’re going to go down to a roadmap of Jerusalem and decide where the neighborhoods can be expanded?"

"... and told his (Rand Paul's) audiences they needn’t "go on bended knee" to the U.S."

I encourage everyone to read this article. It is literally the most slanted article I have ever read. It is as if the author is trying everything he can do to discredit Rand Paul... like talking about controversial statements that people from the organization said years ago that Rand Paul never even hinted at endorsing.

We need to get an early start on 2016: Support Rand PAC 2016

www.randpac2016.com

https://twitter.com/randpac2016

.

the libs here HATE you!

GOOD!

;)

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

You naysers of Rand critics are still fooling yourself.

Rand is still trying to curry favor with the Republican establishment. His amendments to legislation are going no where. His compromises will eventually undermine the liberty movement in a "death by 1,000 cuts."

You stick with Rand and just see what it gets you. Maybe I will come visit you in the FEMA camp.

.

He may undermine the liberty movement but the thousands of local tea parties, conservatives and constitutionalists with the Ron Paul movement will be alive and well.

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

Do you ever make a comment of substance?

Or do you just run around sewing seeds of division?
In case you were absent that day. Romney could not win without US. If you split us in half, that increases Rand's chances in your fuzzy little brain?

Love or fear? Chose again with every breath.

.

Ive split NO ONE in half, GJ libs did.
ya know the pro choicers, greenies and anti 2nd amendment folks.

as many as the GJ libs leave the ron paul mvmt for the liberty movement,
neoconservatives and regular conservatives are joining and changing their tude. They are learning what gvt should be and they are learning from rand paul.

face it.
you only agree with RP to a certain extent but when it comes to conservatism and constitutional values- you see an entirely different picture.
I know it and so do you.
What we have here is
conservative 202
and
lib 202.
that is the division you feel.

Libs never understood conservatism, that is why you dont get my comments- but many do.
Just because you cant wrap your head around Ron Paul and his true values and vision of gvt, dont speak for others and say my comments have no substance.
as many down votes as I get, up votes are equal.
That is why my comments sit at or near zero votes because this site is split in half.
libs 202 vs conservatives 202.

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

Did not see anything in this that was that bad.

Am I missing something?

Lord Acton, Lord Chief Justice of England, 1875 - "The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the People v. The Banks."