CleverBomb
On Space Out
Only Rep. Ron Paul could have stopped the drones.
To expand on my reply to BRL in the Pics and Jokes thread:
Obviously, I'm not endorsing Rep. Ron Paul's policies, and anyone familiar with my writings here should know that. That said, assuming the doubly counter-factual scenario wherein he both won the GOP nomination* and won the presidential election**, he could have ended the secret drone strike policy without risking personally catastrophic political consequences -- and doing so would have been consistent with his publicly stated positions. So, yes, he could have and almost certainly would have.
On the other hand, in doing so he would be risking the political future of the Republican Party and Libertarianism as a viable philosophy on a national level.
If a significant foreign terrorist attack on Americans occurred during his term, the House*** wouldn't seriously question the official story, let alone consider impeachment. The Senate*** would almost certainly pry into things, modeling their investigation on the House's Benghazi probe -- but since they cannot initiate impeachment proceedings, the President would be safe on that front.
However, if there was any conceivable way in which a clandestine drone strike might have prevented the attack, the fact would be leaked, and receive saturation-level media attention. And that would render Republicans and Libertarians mostly unelectable for at least a decade and a half over their "weakness on terrorism" and "failed foreign policy." It would make Deli's wildest fantasies of the damage he imagines Benghazi might do to President Obama seem trivial.
However, there would be a way out of it -- and only one way. That would be to immediately declare an all-out existential war on some country that could be connected, however vaguely, to the perpetrators****. Of course, this would result in vast civilian casualties among people who had no connection whatsoever to the terrorist attack, but at least most of them would be killed by gunfire, artillery, and bombs from manned aircraft instead of by missiles fired by drones. So it's got that going for it.
On the other hand, maybe there wouldn't be a significant terrorist incident during a President Ron Paul administration. But for that to be the case, we would have to have already "won" the "war on terror." And if so, it was won on President Obama's watch -- which would indicate that his foreign and defense policies succeeded.
* Prior to the Romney campaign's rules shenanigans ahead of the GOP convention, there was a plausible (if unlikely) path to a Paul nomination.
** I don't think Rep. Paul could have overcome both the Obama campaign juggernaut and the hostility of corporate media, but I'm sure others disagree. For the sake of argument, I'll assume it was possible.
*** Under any circumstances where Rep. Paul is elected as a Republican, the GOP would have retained control of the House of Representatives. I'm going to assume that the Democrats would have retained control of the Senate, but by only one or two seats instead of the real-world results.
**** cf. the Afghanistan and second Iraq wars.
To expand on my reply to BRL in the Pics and Jokes thread:
Obviously, I'm not endorsing Rep. Ron Paul's policies, and anyone familiar with my writings here should know that. That said, assuming the doubly counter-factual scenario wherein he both won the GOP nomination* and won the presidential election**, he could have ended the secret drone strike policy without risking personally catastrophic political consequences -- and doing so would have been consistent with his publicly stated positions. So, yes, he could have and almost certainly would have.
On the other hand, in doing so he would be risking the political future of the Republican Party and Libertarianism as a viable philosophy on a national level.
If a significant foreign terrorist attack on Americans occurred during his term, the House*** wouldn't seriously question the official story, let alone consider impeachment. The Senate*** would almost certainly pry into things, modeling their investigation on the House's Benghazi probe -- but since they cannot initiate impeachment proceedings, the President would be safe on that front.
However, if there was any conceivable way in which a clandestine drone strike might have prevented the attack, the fact would be leaked, and receive saturation-level media attention. And that would render Republicans and Libertarians mostly unelectable for at least a decade and a half over their "weakness on terrorism" and "failed foreign policy." It would make Deli's wildest fantasies of the damage he imagines Benghazi might do to President Obama seem trivial.
However, there would be a way out of it -- and only one way. That would be to immediately declare an all-out existential war on some country that could be connected, however vaguely, to the perpetrators****. Of course, this would result in vast civilian casualties among people who had no connection whatsoever to the terrorist attack, but at least most of them would be killed by gunfire, artillery, and bombs from manned aircraft instead of by missiles fired by drones. So it's got that going for it.
On the other hand, maybe there wouldn't be a significant terrorist incident during a President Ron Paul administration. But for that to be the case, we would have to have already "won" the "war on terror." And if so, it was won on President Obama's watch -- which would indicate that his foreign and defense policies succeeded.
* Prior to the Romney campaign's rules shenanigans ahead of the GOP convention, there was a plausible (if unlikely) path to a Paul nomination.
** I don't think Rep. Paul could have overcome both the Obama campaign juggernaut and the hostility of corporate media, but I'm sure others disagree. For the sake of argument, I'll assume it was possible.
*** Under any circumstances where Rep. Paul is elected as a Republican, the GOP would have retained control of the House of Representatives. I'm going to assume that the Democrats would have retained control of the Senate, but by only one or two seats instead of the real-world results.
**** cf. the Afghanistan and second Iraq wars.
