Rand Paul says the threat of war is “greatly diminished” now that Bolton is gone

I’ve never been a fan of Rand Paul when it comes to his isolationist view of foreign policy and his comments about Bolton just reinforce that:

What a schmucky thing to say, painting Bolton is nothing more than a war-monger.

People like Rand Paul will always be dishonest when it comes to people like Bolton, who see the world as it is instead of through the lens of ‘wishful’ thinking.

For example, at some point N. Korea’s Kim Jong Un is going to get a bug in his britches and he’s going to fire a nuke into S. Korea or Japan. And when that happens, we’ll wish that we had fought N. Korea on our terms instead of on their terms, as Bolton has argued. Diplomacy is clearly not working to reverse Kim’s nuclear ambitions and at some point kicking that can down the road is going to have consequences. If Trump wins in 2020 he’ll have to deal with the reality of N. Korea and not allow his ego to get in the way, and that means to stop listening to people like Rand Paul.

Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

48 thoughts on “Rand Paul says the threat of war is “greatly diminished” now that Bolton is gone

  1. Aww looky, Trump has a friend in the Senate. Now Trump will be free to have meetings with the Taliban like he did with NK……and beclown himself further on national security without opposition. I like it! Just don’t get us killed.

    1. I hope you’re wrong, but Lord knows.

      It’s true that the schmuck (trump) thinks he can win Kim Jong Phatboy over with flattery. 🙁

  2. Shut up, idiot.

    I may not listen to Mark Levin anymore, but his name for you schmucks (Code Pink Republicans) couldn’t suit someone as loathsome as you BETTER.

    You’re so stupid and full of yourself you don’t even realize that with John Bolton PRESENT, the threat of War was REDUCED. Our enemies FEARED Bolton’s style of Diplomacy, you fool.

    The TRUTH is the threat of War and Terrorism is now GREATER. 🙁

  3. Which sucks.

    I liked the threat of war. We’re never going to get to planetary armageddon if we keep this up.

    Screw it. I’m going to go cause some global warming. Take care of this myself.

    *stalks off, muttering*

    Now where’d I leave all those tires and gasoline…

  4. Is Rand saying Trump is closer to world peace now? Will that be Trump’s next tweet? We’re no safer than yesterday Rand. Maybe we’re worse off.

  5. Rand Paul has good beliefs and bad beliefs.

    His belief that you can hang out with murderous thugs and sing “I’d like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony” is the WORST of his beliefs.

    1. 17 of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 were Saudi. Yet we hit Afghanistan and Iraq, but our #1 oil provider is Saudi Arabia. One of the worst human rights violators in the world, and 90% responsible for 9/11.

      If you want to talk about singing songs with murderous thugs, you need to start with Bolton. Not Rand.

  6. There’s a lot of ground between Rand Paul’s foreign policy philosophy, and Lindsey Graham’s foreign policy philosophy, and Bolton and Trump should have met somewhere in the middle, because American troops deserve better leadership.

  7. Just like his dad! Rand Paul is a snake…and an opportunist. John Bolton knows a hell of a lot more than Rand and Trump for that matter…I wish these people would quit with the political games. I also believe Bolton quit and it’s more because Trump is planning on meeting with the other cockroaches in Iran with no pre conditions..Trumps ego thinks he can “negotiate “ and make “deals” with people who hate his guts. He’s being played and probably didn’t like Bolton telling him it’s wrong…

    1. I agree about Bolton and what will likely happen without him. Trump has already been talking about meeting with the Iranian leadership and he wouldn’t do that if he wasn’t trying to angle in some sort of deal (probably just the same old Iran nuke deal re-branded). Also, despite what he says, I don’t think he’s completely dropped the idea of meeting with the Taliban either. He badly wants out on Afghanistan, regardless of the consequences, just like Obama with Iraq. He’ll just wait until the controversy blows over, then make another attempt. He and Pompeo are being played by the Democrats and Obama’s old State Department people who are still there. On top of that, he’s also being played by the Code Pink faction on the right like Tucker Carlson and the Pat Buchanan crowd.

  8. Rand Paul: “We have peace in our time”

    Rand Paul proves the old adage
    The Ron Paul Libertarian Appeasement apple (Rand Paul) doesn’t fall far from the naive and dangerous appeasement tree ..

    30 Dec, 2011
    American Thinker
    Don Feder
    To Get Ron Paul’s Insanity, You Have To Understand Libertarianism – an ism every bit as delusional as Marxism

    I don’t think firing John Bolton was not the right move. Bolton was a Reagan hawk, and you need hawks, as well as doves, to have a good balance in any admin foreign policy decision making process, otherwise you end up with a weak and fatal Neville Chamberlain appeasement admin.

    But it’s Pres Trump’s decision, he’s the commander in chief.

    I pray Pres Trump doesn’t fall prey to naive appeasement diplomacy that weakens America, which was unfortunately exhibited with the thought of even contemplating serious high level Camp David Talks with the Taliban.

  9. and Rand Paul is no expert on global diplomacy and foreign affairs. I would taken Boltons opinions over Rand Paul’s opinions any day.

  10. Show me, where appeasement has ever worked for the appeaser.

    Winston Churchill: An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  11. Even if Trump doesn’t want to play hard-ball you need to have that view among the advisors. You have to have someone point out the downfalls of appeasement or of doing nothing. The last thing we need is someone like Paul that believes someone like Hitler isn’t worth going to war over.

    1. Ha, Rand Paul wouldn’t strike back at any other country who literally attacked America. He would try to negotiate a trade deal. Hey. if we buy something from you you will love us, right? Isn’t that the Libertarians argument? If we trade with each other, you won’t attack us right?

    1. Rand will never leave the Senate as long as he can promote his sick idiotic libertarian policies. Thankfully Justin Amash, who promised his constituients he would be the next Ron Paul if they elected him already abandoned that ship.

    1. Yes because Rand learned from his daddy that America should never ever get “entangled” in any other’s countries affairs, ever. Even if there are countries, like Iran, that want to wipe us off the map, just sell them some stuff, and buy some stuff from them, and everything’s good. Rand Paul is a Libertarian through and through. Any social/cultural issues, that have ripped this country apart from seam to seam, Rand and Ron have been for. Just stop spending money you idiots.

    2. And isn’t that what we are basically dealing with right now? Trump seems to have drunk the Rand and Daddy Ron Paul koolaid.

    1. He learned nothing from history, specifically the enormous failure of Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement.

  12. Rand Paul is like the little girl in the poem my grandmother taught me. Two of the lines were:

    When she was good, she was very very good
    But when she was bad she was horrid.

    Right now Rand is being horrid.

  13. I don’t know if I could find a way to be less interested in anything Rand Paul has to say. He’s right up there with what Justin Amash has to say, or his daddy Ron Paul.

  14. Rand Paul is ok on domestic issues, but awful on foreign policy and military-related issues. The ball is completely in Iran’s (and North Korea’s) court if they want to go to war, not ours.

  15. Yeah, ‘cuz I would bet that you didn’t even try to defend yourself while you were getting your arse kicked by your neighbor. / facetious

  16. Rand Paul = dumb.

    Sorry, just dumb.

    Rand, you are living in a fantasy land and your foreign policy sounds like Obama’s surrendering to dictators all over the world.

    1. Interesting.

      How many years do we need to be at war in Afghanistan? We’re fast approaching 20. We’ve been bombing Iraq since damned near the day Reagan moved out of the White House. How long before we think, “Hey, maybe bombing Arabs isn’t working?”

  17. Sorry, but it’s warmongers like Bolton that have kept us in a perpetual state of war for far too long. Good riddance!

    1. No ….. the evil regimes around the world have kept us in a state of war for far too long.
      Pretending evil does not exist does not make it go away.

  18. I want to know what is conservative about running around the world trying to impose the United States will on people?

  19. People like Rand Paul will always be dishonest when it comes to people like Bolton, who see the world as it is instead of through the lens of ‘wishful’ thinking.

    Bolton was the architect of the Iraq invasion. Bolton was the guy (along with Grover Norquist and Karl Rove) who steered George W Bush away from retaliating against Saudi Arabia for 9/11 and hitting Afghanistan instead. And Bolton has been driving the apparently unknown proxy war the US is currently fighting in Yemen. All bad ideas.

    The idea that peace and trade with all nations is 1) isolationist and 2) wrong is just disgusting.

    Our greatest calling on this earth is to spread the word of Jesus. Bombs don’t do that. Blowing up our enemies (as defined by the likes of Bolton) doesn’t spread Christ or bring salvation. It’s unchristian behavior. It is decidedly Antichrist. War is not loving your neighbor. War is not turning the other cheek. War is not walking a mile in their shoes.

Comments are closed.