Rand Paul Declares War on ISIS—and Allows Boots on the Ground

Daily Beast ^ | 11/24/2014 | Olivia Nuzzi

[stephenjohnbanker]

Pillow fight!

Its ON, people!

[impimp]

But doesn’t the article say Rand wants boots over there? That is how they will be captured.

[Lorianne]

Yes, and my point is against Paul ... we should not have “boots on the ground”. To what end?

[Darksheare]

The Battle Fairies will interrogate captured enemy with purse slaps and tears.

[sloop]

savages can be controlled

saddam kept them in line

[stremba]

I’m not sure why the author of this article has a problem with a declaration of war by Congress. While I am not necessarily in favor of such a declaration in this case, the power to declare war is a power granted to Congress by the Constitution. It is true that past war declarations have all been made by Congress at the request of the Presidency. However, it is not really any less legitimate for Congress to declare war without having been asked to do so. Of course, prosecution of a war that is declared by Congress against the wishes of the President might well be poorly done.

[SunkenCiv]

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]

[impimp]

Well we both agree then - no boots.

[depressed in 06]

We need to be clear that we have the will to bomb them with drones for 1000 years.

At least, water-boarding will be the least of their problems.

[Hugin]

Perhaps most surprisingly, Paul’s resolution will allow for limited use of boots on the ground “as necessary for the protection or rescue of members of the United States Armed Forces or United States citizens from imminent danger [posed by ISIS]… for limited operations against high value targets,” and “as necessary for advisory and intelligence gathering operations.”

Sounds pretty specific, limited and reasonable to me. Not that I agree with Paul that the president needs a DOW to do any of those things, but at least he is being consistent with his past position that it does require in.

[sloop]

the ghetto fool in the whitehouse needs to ASK congress 0 i disagree with rand paultard in that it gives the fool political cover to do whatever he wants

evidently, drone bombs are free though - because when it comes to matters of life and death, money trumps all

for some here

[SoConPubbie]

• Sec. of State Kerry: U.S. Not Responsible for Chaos in Iraq, Libya
• NANCY PELOSI: IRAQ IS NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY
• Paul Blames Iraq Crisis on Bush Administration
• Rand Paul Defends Obama Against Dick Cheney

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]

• Paul: We probably can't get rid of 'Obamacare'
• Paul: We probably can't get rid of 'Obamacare' - [Sep. 21, 2013 9:56 PM EDT ]
• Paul: 'Difficult to turn the clock back' on O-Care
• Rand Paul: GOP 'probably can't defeat' Obamacare
• Rand Paul on abortion: "We're not changing any of the laws until the country is persuaded otherwise"
• Sen. Paul: 'We're Not Changing Any' Abortion 'Laws Until the Country is Persuaded Otherwise'

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: I think Republicans may have over-emphasized voter fraud
• Rand Paul: Republicans Need to Soften on Social Issues

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 Wants Bigger GOP: 'You Go to a Republican Event and It's All White People'
• (Rand) Paul: GOP Needs to 'Look Like the Rest of America' to Win Again (again)
• Rand Paul slams Cliven Bundy's racist rant
• Rand Paul: Bundy's racist remarks are 'offensive'
• Rand Paul: I'm Open to Voting for Immigration Bill
• Paul: Still hope for immigration reform this year

Rand Paul's immigration speech

...The Republican Party must embrace more legal immigration.

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.

[Posted on 03/19/2013 7:04:07 AM PDT by Perdogg]

---

Rand Paul calls on conservatives to embrace immigration reform

Latinos, 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]