Ron Paul on Rand Paul's ISIS Views
Steve Nelson at US News & Report writes:
Ron Paul and Rand Paul agree on a lot, but they don’t agree on what the U.S. should do about the Islamic State group in Iraq and Syria.
Ron Paul, the former Republican congressman from Texas, tells U.S. News he would “definitely not” vote to give President Barack Obama authority to wage war against the jihadi militants.
Fighting the group, he says, "will just hurt us and it will end when we go bankrupt.”
Rand Paul, the Kentucky senator and possible 2016 Republican presidential candidate, held a non-interventionist stance for much of the Syrian Civil War, but told Fox News Monday he would vote to bless Obama's use of force after the group beheaded two American journalists...
“If we weren't there nobody would be getting killed,” Ron Paul says. “If ISIS still existed without us being there, maybe [Syrian President Bashar] Assad and maybe Iran would take care of them.”
"They hate each other and we hate ‘em all - except for the Free Syrian Army, those moderates who made $50,000 handing over the journalist to ISIS - if that isn't an insane foreign policy I don't know what the definition of insanity is," he says, referring to reports that U.S.-backed rebels helped jihadis capture journalist Steven Sotloff, who was recently beheaded...
“He speaks for himself,” Ron Paul says of his son. “I don’t speak for him. He's his own person and he has his views.”