Paul Opposes Military Involvement in Libya

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) said Thursday that he “opposes any U.S. military intervention in Libya as the Obama administration has begun pushing for greater United Nations involvement in the conflict,” the Washington Post reports.

“I have great sympathy for people that are involved in that war there,” Paul said in response to a question on Libya at a news conference on the federal budget. “We’re involved in two wars right now, and I don’t think we really need to be involved in a third war. I do think the questions of war are the most important decisions we make as a country and as representatives, and that needs to be something that is considered and voted on in the Senate and the House. I tell people I won’t vote to go to war unless I’m ready to go or send my kids.”

Paul added that in addition to financial questions about American involvement in Libya, there are other concerns, including the lack of more information about the opposition forces in the country.

“Can somebody anywhere tell me with a surety that the people fighting against Gaddafi are not in favor of radical Islamic government or radical Sharia-type government?” Paul asked. “I don’t know that. I’m not sure anybody knows that. I’m not sure anybody even knows who the leaders are. It’s not that I don’t sympathize with them wanting to overcome a tyrant. I just don’t know if I know enough that I’m willing to go and say that I’m absolutely fighting for freedom by going over there or sending our kids over there.”


1 Comment

Filed under Libya

One response to “Paul Opposes Military Involvement in Libya

  1. Faris Abou-Saleh

    I can understand non-involvement if the US cannot afford it… but it seems strange to worry about the appearance of a radical Islamic government in Libya.

    It is possible that democracy will not take root, and Gaddafi’s regime will be replaced by another. But the world is full of such regimes, and surely it is a step towards freedom, or at least justice, for such regimes to be weeded out.

    On the other hand, it seems unlikely that a popular movement can give rise to a radical Islamic government. By definition, most people aren’t radical. In the UK we haven’t banned extremist parties like the BNP, even though they are widely reviled; and I am sure America has extremist factions, religious or otherwise, which are rightly sidelined from mainstream politics.

    People aren’t stupid; let the Libyans decide. It’s the price of free speech. Isn’t that how democracy should work?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s