Suppose they had a war and Rand PaulRand PaulTrump's new digital strategist quickly leaves campaign Trump: Rivals who don't back me shouldn't be allowed to run for office Trump hires Rand Paul's former digital director: report MORE didn’t come. It could see the day in the rising tensions in China. In reality, the Tea Party is finished, having bifurcated long ago between "Peace Gold Love" — the unoficial slogan of iconoclastic libertarian Dad and titan of new conservative thinking, Ron Paul — and an advanced reenactment of the Wallace/LeMay party of dangerous right-wing extremists. Son Rand, a Republican senator from Kentucky, may now be last man standing as Sen. Mike LeeMike LeeThe Trail 2016: Meet and greet and grief Trump to meet with Senate GOP next week First trans Senate candidate: My gender won’t be an issue MORE (R-Utah) moves to the middle and Sen. Ted CruzTed CruzThe Trail 2016: Meet and greet and grief Trump to meet with Senate GOP next week Trump camp eyeing Mike Pence for VP: report MORE (R-Texas) moves to extreme extensions of old, very old thinking. What now as China rises to challenge its neighbors and America?
First press accounts correctly present the situation of China challenging Japan in contrast to our other everyday wars in the Middle East,, including those in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are wars of choice they say, with a straight face and are acceptable as “international norms.” They are cultural and political avocations, while the challenge presented by China brings us to Japan's defense by treaty. You get the difference. In the Middle East, we don’t have to do it. We do it because we like it. In the Pacific we have to.
So the situation thus resembles ObamaCare and its price. We will not be paying for it. Our grandchildren will be paying for ours.
But these unborn will be the disenfranchised because there will be no money left for them and probably no country too. And to charge them generations before they are born with a duty they are required to pay in blood and to die for (by treaty) without their say presents a legitimate, moral and natural revolutionary situation.
Ron Paul stood nearly alone in his opposition to the misconceived invasion of Iraq, advocating instead states rights, sound money policy and constitutional government. He had a few odd bedfellows; a few distinguished Democrats, some with vast military and State Department experience, railed with him. But as it turns out, some of the most sophisticated Democratic dissent from the State Department and the military back then was not on moral or common-sense grounds. It was because the war on Iraq was a war of choice brought by political forces and lobbyists, and was not in the Pentagon’s playbook. War in the Pacific was, is and long has been.
Now Rand Paul goes alone if he chooses to oppose. He might call in Dad for help. And Dennis Kucinich.