http://www.christianpost.com/news/is-ran...cy-137160/

Obama's foreign policy isn't very liberal in the first place.

Depends how you define "liberal".

Liberal foreign policies don't include tripling troop levels in Afghanistan and leading to more American deaths there in his first 2 years in office than Bush had in 8 years.

As far as I can tell, Rand Paul is a realist and Obama is a liberal-neoconservative. Liberal-conservative in American politics does not correlate to foreign policy. The idea of nation building and spreading democracy for a safer world is liberalism. The idea that states are unitary and rational and act in their own best interest is realist. When many American conservatives left realism after the cold war for liberalism, the modern neoconservative movement was born.

(04-08-2015 03:59 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  Obama's foreign policy isn't very liberal in the first place.

(04-08-2015 04:01 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  Depends how you define "liberal".

Even rank and file GOP members are now coming around on foreign policy. Who would have thought Rudy Giuliani's applause line in the 2006 Presidential Primary Debate -- and Ron Paul's refusal to back down from his point -- would be the high water mark for aggressive foreign policy on the right?

Obama's foreign policy is simply to: 1) insult our friends, 2) comfort our enemies, and 3) knock the U.S. down a couple rungs on the ladder so we're like France.

I don't know how to compare Rand to that.

Treat your friends better than you treat your enemies.
Never fight a war you don't intend to win.

Those would be my guidelines, and I'm pretty sure Rand agrees with me. As does Ron.

(04-08-2015 09:17 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Treat your friends better than you treat your enemies.
Never fight a war you don't intend to win.

Those would be my guidelines, and I'm pretty sure Rand agrees with me. As does Ron.

Yep. The only issue I have with Rand's foreign policy is he projects weakness. I mostly agree with his views, but he needs to find a better way to project them or our enemies will take advantage perceiving no threat. Never take options off the table, even if you never intend to go with them.

(04-09-2015 07:23 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(04-08-2015 09:17 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Treat your friends better than you treat your enemies.
Never fight a war you don't intend to win.

Those would be my guidelines, and I'm pretty sure Rand agrees with me. As does Ron.

Yep. The only issue I have with Rand's foreign policy is he projects weakness. I mostly agree with his views, but he needs to find a better way to project them or our enemies will take advantage perceiving no threat. Never take options off the table, even if you never intend to go with them.

It's not weak to say that you don't want to occupy other countries.

(04-08-2015 04:01 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  Depends how you define "liberal".

Depends on how you define "depends".

Obama's foreign policy

(04-09-2015 07:51 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(04-08-2015 04:01 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  Depends how you define "liberal".

Depends on how you define "depends".

Obama's foreign policy

(04-08-2015 03:58 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  http://www.christianpost.com/news/is-ran...cy-137160/

Well he did once say that Iran is not a threat.