Posted on 04/29/2015 11:37:24 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
LAS VEGAS — Ted Cruz wants you to know that he isn’t a Rand Paul on foreign policy – but he isn’t a John McCain either.
The Texas senator and Republican presidential contender outlined his foreign policy worldview Friday in an in-depth interview with The Daily Caller from the lobby of the Mandarin Oriental in Sin City, where he was in town to attend both the Republican Jewish Coalition’s Spring Meeting and a convention of evangelical pastors.
“The touchstone of foreign policy should be the vital national security interest of America,” Cruz said, arguing his foreign policy was neither “full neocon” nor “libertarian isolationist.”
“I believe America should be a clarion voice for freedom. The bully pulpit of the American president has enormous potency,” he added, before praising former President Ronald Reagan for changing the “arc of history” by demanding Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev tear down the Berlin Wall and lambasting President Barack Obama for not sufficiently standing on the side of freedom during Iran’s 2009 Green Revolution.
But, Cruz noted, speaking out for freedom “is qualitatively different from saying U.S. military forces should intervene to force democracy on foreign lands.”
“Historically, America has always been reluctant to engage in military conflict,” he said. “It’s worth noting, in eight years, the largest country Ronald Reagan ever invaded was Grenada.”
Cruz says he is a hawk on some issues, like preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. But on other foreign policy questions, like whether to support the Syrian rebels in their fight against Bashar al-Assad, he is more hesitant because he doesn’t see how it will benefit American interests.
“Assad is a bad actor, no doubt about it. He’s a monster who’s murdered hundreds of thousands of his own citizens, women, and children with chemical weapons, but the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend,” Cruz said. “I opposed President Obama’s proposed military attack against Syria because the administration was not able to articulate how it furthered U.S. national security interest, and the consequence of arming the rebels, among those rebels are radical Islamic terrorists.”
Cruz says “if and when U.S. military force is required,” it should only “proceed under three preconditions.” You might call it the “Cruz Doctrine.”
“First, it should begin with a clearly stated objective at the outset. It should be directly tied to U.S. national security,” he said. “Second, we should use overwhelming force to that objective. We should not have rules of engagement that tie the hands of our soldiers and sailors and airmen and Marines.”
The final point in the Cruz Doctrine is that the U.S. military should not be asked to help birth democratic societies.
“Third, we should get the heck out,” he said. “It is not the job of the U.S. military to engage in nation building to turn foreign countries into democratic utopias.”
Cruz’s foreign policy differs from Rand Paul’s because, among other things, he appears more willing to commit American military might if necessary than the Kentucky senator, such as potentially in Iran. But Cruz sometimes opposes more hawkish senators like John McCain, Lindsey Graham and — arguably — Marco Rubio because he doesn’t believe America should use the military to help spread democracy abroad.
As the Washington Examiner’s Philip Klein recently noted, “Though the differences Paul has with the rest of the party deserve attention, a far more interesting — and important — debate is the one likely to emerge between Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas.”
Russia and China are a more serious threat to us.
They want RINO flavored liberalism for the most part. Some want the real deal. People so basic in their thinking as to DQ someone on the Sen/Gov thing are thinking at the level of a child. It’s like they think this is a prom and the King should be the Football team captain, bot the AV club guy.
That’s like saying Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy are more dangerous than Imperial Japan circa 1940. We can and do have more than one enemy at a time.
No I meant Snooks desire to get us irradiated through ignoring Iran.
Crush islam!
nevermind...I got you now. I brainlocked.
“Overwhelming force”’is an expression that has all but disappeared from the Executive Office lexicon since Obie’s election.
There is a substantive difference between Cruz and Palin. Cruz has an education, with which he has continued to acquire and apply knowledge to policy proposals. Palin had the opportunity to acquire on and did not. She ended up echoing standard conservative pabulum but without the substance to back it up.
Except we've been doing exactly that for a long, long time. Indian Wars, Reconstruction, Philippines, Caribbean, Japan, Germany, Vietnam (sort of), Balkans (sort of), Iraq, Afghanistan--peacekeeping, counterinsurgency, and nation-building have been a part of our mission for many years.
And so people cannot wait to prove me correct about throwing Palin under the bus to this day. Facts be damned.
People have raped children for even longer. Doesn’t make it right or acceptable either.
What an intelligent response. I never saw the link between a long-standing mission of the U.S. Military and child-raping, but now I do.
Actually it is an intelligent response. Neither are acceptable correct?
We’ve got a fight ahead of us, for sure.
Fact: She increased Wassilla's tax load investing public funds in a sports complex that could have been built by 24-hour fitness or some other private business.
Fact: As governor, she instituted a byzantine system of higher taxes and regulations on oil and gas companies milking them for public giveaways to the point that the industry started leaving the State.
Fact: When the going got tough dealing with frivolous lawsuits, she quit.
Fact: She has endorsed a considerable number of RINOs over conservatives in Republican primary races in which she had little to no knowledge.
After the Republican convention in which she was nominated as VP candidate, I was as thrilled as anyone with that speech. Over time, and as I listened to her and watched her decisions, I have since learned better than to trust her judgment.
She threw herself under the bus. Deal with it.
Cruz Doctrine:
1) Only kill ‘em for National interest
2) But if you going to kill ‘em, kill the shit out of ‘em
3) Leave ‘em bleeding, wishin’ they had heeded #1
I like it!
Not post the rest of the info behind your ‘facts’.
PDS is incurable.
Edit...NOW post
The post below yours pretty much proves it.
I was wondering where you were, Norm. Good to see you.
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.