Rand Paul: Hawks In My Party Are To Blame For ISIS [VIDEO]
Posted on 05/27/2015 12:18:19 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
It didn’t take long for a return salvo to be fired over Rand Paul’s contention this morning that Republican hawks “created” ISIS. Bobby Jindal blasted Paul as “unsuited to be Commander in Chief,” accusing him of “taking the “weakest Democratic position” while Americans are fighting ISIS. Jindal slammed Paul as a superficial, “cocktail party” thinker, and that the real origin of ISIS is the metastasizing cancer of radical Islam:
“This is a perfect example of why Senator Paul is unsuited to be Commander-in-Chief,” Jindal said in a statement. “We have men and women in the military who are in the field trying to fight ISIS right now, and Senator Paul is taking the weakest, most liberal Democrat position.”
“It’s one thing for Senator Paul to take an outlandish position as a Senator at Washington cocktail parties, but being Commander-in-Chief is an entirely different job,” he continued. “We should all be clear that evil and Radical Islam are at fault for the rise of ISIS, and people like President Obama and Hillary Clinton exacerbate it.” …
“American weakness, not American strength, emboldens our enemies,” he said. “Senator Paul’s illogical argument clouds a situation that should provide pure moral clarity. Islam has a problem. ISIS is its current manifestation. And the next President’s job is to have the discipline and strength to wipe ISIS off the face of the earth. It has become impossible to imagine a President Paul defeating radical Islam and it’s time for the rest of us to say it.”
I wonder how Jindal really feels about Rand Paul.
Without going to Jindal’s lengths here, Paul’s argument is historically and politically deficient. The group now known as ISIS began in in Afghanistan in 1999 as Jama’at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, with encouragement and some resources from Osama bin Laden, long before the US invaded. Zarqawi took the organization to Iraq after the US invaded Afghanistan, but its mission was overthrowing the Jordanian monarchy and establishing a radical Islamic state there. When the US invaded Iraq, JTJ shifted its focus to the insurgency and became known as one of the most brutal and bloodthirsty groups in it, but at least initially they were more interested in fighting Shi’ite militias than the US.
Zarqawi publicly affiliated with al-Qaeda and changed JTJ’s name to al-Qaeda in Iraq, and sometimes publicly clashed with AQ over its brutality, before the US finally killed Zarqawi in a targeted bomb strike. The group had declared itself an Islamic State in western Iraq by then, but the Anbar Awakening and the alliance of Sunni tribes pushed them to the brink of destruction. Only much later did they return under a slightly different name — the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, or ISIS — and only after the US had pulled completely out of Iraq, thanks to the Obama administration.
None of this is classified material. All of it was well known during the war, and was especially noteworthy during the lengthy effort by the US to find Zarqawi. The US, and “Republican hawks,” had nothing to do with “creating” ISIS, AQI, or JTJ. In fact, the efforts of Republican hawks to press the “surge” strategy to its conclusion resulted in the greatest success against AQI/ISIS and had the Sunni tribes almost entirely arrayed against it, no thanks to the non-interventionists who wanted a full withdrawal in 2007. It was the pullout in 2011 that allowed a cascading series of failures that breathed life into ISIS again.
There may be good reason to regret the 2003 decision to invade and occupy Iraq. But to claim that the US, or “Republican hawks” created ISIS or even contributed to its returned strength is breathtakingly ignorant, both of ISIS and the history of the past 15 years. It also belies a mindset more interested in scoring points off of old arguments than in dealing with the reality of the situation we face now. Jindal’s correct that this blithe, blame-America approach is the kind of rhetoric that should disqualify Paul from serious contention for the Republican nomination, and makes us reminisce about his father for all the wrong reasons.
Definitely a case of stating the obvious.
I read a zero hedge blogpost re the findings in the Hillary e-mail releases. They talk about the US-TURKEY-QATAR/Gulf States ALLIANCE to topple Assad in Syria so Qatar can get their natural gas pipeline built. This objective comes with a price of course....
That's news to me. Never heard anyone else state that.
where or where are the paulistas? C’mon out!!! LOL
I respectfully disagree with Gov. Jindal. Obama has lowered the bar to the extent that anybody can become president imo.
What’s Jindals benchmark?
Congressman Piyush voted for the war on Iraq. He has poor judgment and doesn’t like to be reminded of it.
RE: Congressman Piyush voted for the war on Iraq
Jindal was elected for Congress in 2004 and took office in 2005. How could he have voted for the Iraq war when it started in 2003?
Ah, you got me there. He certainly defended the war as if he voted for it, and of course I’m sure he voted for its continued authorization and funding.
Rand Paul On Shutdown: "Even Though It Appeared I Was Participating In It, It Was A Dumb Idea"I said throughout the whole battle that shutting down the government was a dumb idea. Even though it did appear as if I was participating in it, I said it was a dumb idea. And the reason I voted for it, though, is that it's a conundrum. Here's the conundrum. We have a $17 trillion debt and people at home tell me you can't give the president a blank check. We just can't keep raising the debt ceiling without conditions. So unconditionally raising the debt ceiling, nobody at home wants me to vote for that and I can't vote for that. But the conundrum is if I don't we do approach these deadlines. So there is an impasse. In 2011, though, we had this impasse and the president did negotiate. We got the sequester. If we were to extend the sequester from discretionary spending to all the entitlements we would actually fix our problem within a few years.[Posted on 11/19/2013 12:16:51 PM by Third Person]
Rand Paul: Time for GOP to soften war stance...by softening its edge on some volatile social issues and altering its image as the party always seemingly "eager to go to war... We do need to expand the party and grow the party and that does mean that we don't always all agree on every issue" ... the party needs to become more welcoming to individuals who disagree with basic Republican doctrine on emotional social issues such as gay marriage... "We're going to have to be a little hands off on some of these issues ... and get people into the party," Paul said.[Posted on 01/31/2013 5:08:50 PM PST by xzins]
Rand Paul's immigration speech...The Republican Party must embrace more legal immigration.[Posted on 03/19/2013 7:04:07 AM PDT by Perdogg]
Unfortunately, like many of the major debates in Washington, immigration has become a stalemate-where both sides are imprisoned by their own rhetoric or attachment to sacred cows that prevent the possibility of a balanced solution.
Immigration Reform will not occur until Conservative Republicans, like myself, become part of the solution. I am here today to begin that conversation.
Let's start that conversation by acknowledging we aren't going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants.
If you wish to work, if you wish to live and work in America, then we will find a place for you...
This is where prudence, compassion and thrift all point us toward the same goal: bringing these workers out of the shadows and into being taxpaying members of society.
Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers.12 million more people assimilating into society. 12 million more people being productive contributors.
Rand Paul calls on conservatives to embrace immigration reformLatinos, should be a natural constituency for the party, Paul argued, but "Republicans have pushed them away with harsh rhetoric over immigration." ...he would create a bipartisan panel to determine how many visas should be granted for workers already in the United States and those who might follow... [and the buried lead] "Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers...[Posted on 04/21/2013 1:52:42 PM PDT by SoConPubbie]
[but he's not in favor of amnesty, snicker, definition of is is]
Rand Slams Congress for Funding Egypt's Generals: 'How Does Your Conscience Feel Now?'Sen. Rand Paul is hammering his fellow senators for keeping billions in financial aid flowing to Egypt's military -- even as Cairo's security forces massacre anti-government activists. [by "anti-government activists" is meant church-burning Christian-murdering jihadists][Posted on 08/15/2013 5:44:10 PM PDT by Hoodat]
The group now known as ISIS began in in Afghanistan in 1999 as Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, with encouragement and some resources from Osama bin Laden, long before the US invaded. Zarqawi took the organization to Iraq after the US invaded Afghanistan, but its mission was overthrowing the Jordanian monarchy and establishing a radical Islamic state there. When the US invaded Iraq, JTJ shifted its focus to the insurgency and became known as one of the most brutal and bloodthirsty groups in it, but at least initially they were more interested in fighting Shi'ite militias than the US. Zarqawi publicly affiliated with al-Qaeda and changed JTJ's name to al-Qaeda in Iraq, and sometimes publicly clashed with AQ over its brutality, before the US finally killed Zarqawi in a targeted bomb strike. The group had declared itself an Islamic State in western Iraq by then, but the Anbar Awakening and the alliance of Sunni tribes pushed them to the brink of destruction. Only much later did they return under a slightly different name -- the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, or ISIS -- and only after the US had pulled completely out of Iraq, thanks to the Obama administration.
Sure he is, but he’d still be preferable to our current “Great Leader”.
So would a piece of used toilet paper.
if you want to blame someone for the rise of Isis point the finger at Jimmy Carter
RE: if you want to blame someone for the rise of Isis point the finger at Jimmy Carter
I am no fan of carter, but How so?
To be president doesn’t take a lot of brains. It takes manhood and the willingness to do what needs to be done.
If Carter had more forcefully supported the Shah of Iran, Khomeini and the resulting wave if Islamo-supported terrorism, probably would never have gotten off the ground.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
![Rand Paul: Hawks In My Party Are To Blame For ISIS [VIDEO]](http://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Rand-Paul-e1432731542714.jpg)