As Nick Gillespie noted earlier today, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is
being pretty sharp in at least defending proper
constitutional prerogatives when it comes to decisions about
when U.S. military might ought to be extended overseas.
But today he said something to Breitbart News that highly
distresses those who thought his vision of when U.S. military might
ought to be used would be similar to his father Ron
Paul’s: only in actual defense of the United States.
Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul took what very well could be
considered his most pro-Israel stance yet, saying in an interview
that an attack on Israel should
be treated as an attack on the United States.
Asked whether the United States would stand with Israel and
provide it foreign aid if the Jewish state were attacked by its
enemies, Paul went a step further.
“Well absolutely we stand with Israel,” he said in an interview
with Breitbart News, “but what I think we should do is announce to
the world – and I think it is pretty well known — that any attack
on Israel will be treated as an attack on the United States.”
From Daily Paul, a sampling of some of the
discomfited reactions of Paulites who thought Rand might follow
his father’s (and George
Washington’s) mistrust of entangling alliances and the dangers
of war they create.
Good for him. He’s isolating himself from the Big-L Libertarian nutcases, who are an irrelevant minority anyway.
Have I mentioned that I’m supporting Rand Paul for President in 2016?