Do you disagree with Paul on anything else besides the war?
Do you disagree with Paul on economics, including reducing government spending and power to their Constitutionally-prescribed limits?
You would do well to remember that, without a functioning private economy, and without the ability to continue issuing government debt, there will be no defense, period, against terrorists, or drug lords, or the armed forces of foreign powers.
And, that's one of Paul's strong points: reducing government spending and keeping government within the bounds of the Constitution. It's a pity that you fail to give him credit in that area.