I don’t think there is much of a disagreement here.
Agreed. I dont really have any doubt that either of these guys would defend us in the event of a clear and present danger, or in the event of direct attacks on our homeland or citizens at home or abroad. That is the first and most important test for a POTUS, and I have confidence in both of their abilities to pass it, unlike current Presidents I could name.
What the question seems to be here is how far from that standard to justify intervention. Mr. Paul seems to have a more conservative (in the literal definition of the word) stance on that than Mr. Cruz, although Mr. Cruz’s stance is not outrageous.
In the current state of our economy, I would tend to side with Mr. Paul’s definition simply because our economic house is not in order to support anything beyond that. Get that in shape, and then we can expand our influence...but right now, we just aren’t in that kind of shape.
But with that being said, I’d support either of these fine gentlemen, should they be the nominee.