is the answer to the Neocon mantra, "If we don't bomb them over there, they WILL come here to harm us".
This is what ALL the neocons rely on for their scare tactic to support their warmonger policy.
We have to effectively counter it.
I think Dr. Paul hit some of the right answer about the CIA definition of "blowback" and how it was right. But Hannity just skimmed past that and continued with his neocon genocidal rant.
There needs to be some kind of "stopper" comment makes them stop using that comment. It's used just like the liberals use the race-card. It's a "catch-all" statement designed to fend off any criticism with an imagined threat to produce fear in people.
I can only think that a firm disagreement with that, and a counter of something like "No. They will come here to harm us if we keep going there and bombing them, and making more enemies". Something like that is needed. We can't allow their false premise to be accepted.
I think Dr. Paul did well, but was rather uncommanding in his response. I think firmer disagreement with people like Hannity is important, so that focus can come onto the neocon lies. The lies must be challenged more strongly and directly.