Comment: Rand would neither...

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Ron would never... (see in situ)

Rand would neither...

...have championed our presence in foreign nations, nor our stationing thousands of Americans abroad to deter attacks. He's spoken out specifically against that over and over again.

I don't see reference to such in Rand's quotes here either.

So how can you say that Rand's words could have been spoken by Ron? They overlap on diplomatic talks and that's about it.

Rand is providing diplomatic rhetoric here in its entirety. The ONLY thing Rand has said here that Ron might not word as such is at the very end, Rand's use of the contemporary terminology of "leave the option on the table", but in the specific context in which it is said, I find it no different in spirit with what Ron might say.

Ron was also strongly against sanctions - yet I see Rand espousing here that MORE sanctions should be levied. Acts of economic war.

I don't read reference to sanctions in the quotes you pulled, but of course you and I certainly both are already familiar with what Ron refers to as the "one percent" policy difference between father and son, use of sanctions on Iran and jurisdiction of trials for Guantanamo prisoners. Personally I'd cut that in half as I saw Rand conceding unwinnable foreign policy positions to focus on domestic issues as freshman Senator. I think they are similar in that they both would like no sanctions. I think they remain different in that Ron is more consistently philosophical, Rand more consistently practical in the moment. Rand has that potentially dangerous ability to politically rationalize compromised positions [more tempting and potentially beneficial (or tragic) for a Senator than a Congressman]. Frankly, the sanctions are more about the US and less about Iran. A sane mind in the Senate might believe that conceding to sanctions might be the most available means to prevent the US war hawks from moving forward with direct military aggression.

Ron Paul's foreign policy view was one of the main reasons I started to track him and support him, and Rand is nowhere close. If you think Ron could have said any of this, you haven't been listening very closely.

I've paid close attention to Ron since 1988. I too was an active member of the Libertarian Party back then and campaigned [and voted] for Ron. I have continued to agree with him more than any other politician I've ever known. I continue to agree with Ron today as he says that he and Rand are nearly identical on issues but a bit different in tactic and rhetoric.