[Brilliant]

Well you definitely have to respect an independent mind like Paul. Unfortunately, the time to oppose the war was when we went into it. To his credit, Paul voted against it. Now that we are there, though, I think the cut and run makes little sense.

[massgopguy]

Paul was against the Iraqi Liberation Act of 1998 which called for no military intervention. I wonder if he was in on the Oil for Food scam?

[Moose4]

Well you definitely have to respect an independent mind like Paul. Unfortunately, the time to oppose the war was when we went into it. To his credit, Paul voted against it. Now that we are there, though, I think the cut and run makes little sense.

Bears repeating, and I agree with it 100%. I agree with a lot of Paul's domestic stands. And while I still think we did the right thing in principle by overthrowing Saddam, I can understand and respect his opposition to it. But the fact is that we are over there, like it or not. Cutting and running is not an option. The debate should be over different options to give us a victory there, not how soon we should declare defeat (which is what Paul and some of his fellow paleocons of the Buchananite wing would have us do).

}:-)4

[LibLieSlayer]

We are killing al qaeda in big numbers in Iraq... If Iraq is the wrong place to kill them and Iraq is where we have the bulk of our al qaeda killing warriors and equipment, why is Iraq the wrong place??? If not Iraq, where should we fight them? Why?

LLS