The Non-NeoCon Philosophy

Senator Rand Paul addresses the controversy surrounding Trump’s decision to pull out of Syria —

This is passing strange: an MSM mouthpiece seems to be making the case for keeping our military deployed in futile battles far from home. What happened to the long-held leftist “no-blood-for-oil” arguments and their mockery of the neo-Conservatives’ philosophy regarding the maintenance of American troops across the globe?

3 thoughts on “The Non-NeoCon Philosophy

  1. It’s a flip=flop of which the media drones are unconscious. Anyway, I could listen to Rand Paul all day. He’s logical.

    • Except… He isn’t.

      He walks right up to the edge of the debate, and then holds punches.

      I like Rand Paul, however, I do not care for his half-[fundamented] approach.

      He needs to call Islam out for being the trash that it is.

      And he needs to talk about the rampant hate, inbreeding, mental illness, and violence that is absolutely prevalent in their societies. So we need to [intemperate recommendations redacted].

      To hell with the Middle East, and All Islamic Nations.

      I want more troops in the Middle East. I want 18 year old men and women to see with their own eyes what those places are.

      I want strong men and women leading them.

      I want them doing foot patrols in mountains and I want them walking laps around Baghdad till their feet bleed and they cry for home.

      There is only one way to see the Middle East. And that is kited up, with rifles, and a platoon of trained soldiers.

Comments are closed.